Jaime Araujo’s surname is a familiar one to Napa collectors. Her parents Daphne and Bart purchased the famed Eisele Vineyard in Calistoga in 1990 and established their eponymous winery on the site shortly after. Jaime was enrolled in university at the time and wouldn’t join her parents in Napa for many years, instead spending over two decades studying and working in Europe, including a stint at Moët Hennessey. She arrived in Napa in 2012 to work alongside her parents as a business consultant, but the job was short-lived, when the winery and Eisele Vineyard was sold to Artémis Domaines (the parent company of Ch. Latour) in 2013.   While her parents went on to establish Accendo Cellars, with Jaime and her brother as partners, the itch to build a business of her own only grew stronger. “I always wanted to run a business as a force for good,” she recalls. She got her chance during the first vintage at Accendo in 2013, when she turned a Cabernet Sauvignon lot that didn’t quite fit in with any of the Accendo cuveés into her first 300 cases of Trois Noix wine. (The name – French for “three nuts” – is a cheeky reference to her two children, as well as her brother’s daughter, all quite young at the time.)   Despite her family’s legacy, and perhaps the temptation to enter the market at the top end, as many newcomers do, Jaime was intent to create wines that were approachable and embodied sustainability ideals. This included a pricing strategy that skewed heavily towards affordable options, ranging from $30-50 per bottle and the most expensive Cabernet Sauvignon topping out at $150. “I’m not in this to make billions,” she laughs. “It’s so important that Napa is accessible to as many people as possible. You have to be welcoming and make wines that appeal to everyone.”    Even before Jaime was developing her brand, Steve Matthiasson had been quietly establishing a reputation as one of Napa’s most respected organic winegrowing experts. After studying horticulture as a graduate student at the University of California Davis, he launched his wine career in 1995 as a viticultural consultant, going on to settle in Napa with his wife Jill Klein Matthiasson in 2002 and building an impressive client roster. Since 2007, Steve has worked closely with the Araujo family, first for Eisele vineyard – where he continues to consult – as well as at Accendo. Other current and past clients include Dalla Valle, Spottswoode and Chappellet.   The process of becoming a winemaker in addition to viticulturalist, however, has been a slow and steady process. Matthiasson says he learned about wine almost by osmosis over the years, sitting in on client tastings and by keen observation. In 2003, Steve and Jill produced just 120 cases under their name, but by 2017, they reached a major milestone with the purchase of a small winemaking facility and neighbouring vineyard in the Oak Knoll AVA – a massive accomplishment for two outsiders with little initial capital. Last year, their production reached 12,000 cases, stretched across 25 unique cuveés. Today, Steve farms most of the vineyards he makes wine from, including a small vineyard at his home, where he has planted rows of northern Italian varieties, including Refosco, Ribolla Gialla and Schioppettino.   Inside the compact Matthiasson winery, cosy by Napa standards, foudres line the walls and nearly every inch is occupied with equipment, case goods and barrels. In the corner, a stack of large glass jars filled with liquids of varying colours sits – the aromatics steeping in alcohol for vermouth, Steve explains, which he and his wife make along with olive oil and jam, as accompaniments to the unique lineup of wines Matthiasson produces, ranging from single-vineyard Cabernets to more esoteric fruit and wine co-ferments. While many collectors still may not have heard of Matthiasson, Steve says he is proud to be sought after by sommeliers and others in the wine trade: “We like to say we’re the musicians’ musician.”   Both Jaime and Steve believe strongly that their businesses must be both environmentally and socially responsible. “It’s so important to stand up for what you believe in,” Jaime emphasises. Today, Trois Noix boasts a range of sustainability initiatives, including B Corp status, a high-level sustainability certification which only two other wineries in Napa currently possess. Though not specific to wine or agriculture, B Corp certification is awarded after a rigorous assessment to prove a dedication to positive community impact alongside profit.   In the same vein, all of the vineyards Steve farms for Matthiasson are organic, which is the certification that is the most meaningful to him – and represents a full circle of sorts from his early days studying agriculture, when winemaking was not yet on the horizon. “Organic farming has become not just accepted but embraced since I’ve been here,” Steve says, saying that it’s becoming the norm rather than the exception, especially so for the most well-known cult Napa wineries. “And it’s not just for PR,” he adds, saying many don’t broadcast their farming practices. “They truly believe it makes better wine.” Steve believes the standard of farming has improved dramatically since he arrived in Napa and so has the quality of the resulting fruit. “As the years have gone by, our ability to do the right thing has increased,” he says.  The resulting wines that both Trois Noix and Matthiasson produce are crafted in a fresh style, with an emphasis on primary fruit and terroir-specific cuvées, as opposed to dominant oak or heavy extraction that have been the trend for fine wine in Napa. Araujo says she is trying to craft wines that are reminiscent of Napa 50 years ago, by using a light hand. “We started getting bigger and bolder in Napa, and that’s fine, but we can do this, too, and do it well.” Araujo describes her goal each vintage as crafting wines in a “sweet spot”, built to enjoy immediately but also with the structure and acidity to age for several years at a minimum.    At Matthiasson, pick dates are watched closely, and occur on the early side for Napa, so that alcohols remain low and acidity is naturally brisk. Other than a small amount of sulphur, no other additions are made. “We utilise traditional winemaking methods,” Steve says – quick to note, though, with a laugh, that there is a difference between “natural and natty”, explaining that his goal is to make fresh, clean wines from the healthiest fruit possible. Unlike other Napa wineries that employ optical sorters and tables lined with harvest workers examining every berry, Mathiasson does not sort the fruit prior to fermentation, trusting instead in the farming and meticulous picking over multiple passes.   “We’ve always been an agricultural community, and no one wanted to talk about that for a long time,” Jaime tells me. She believes the future of Napa will be a focus on not just high quality but also history, community and a reputation for doing the right thing. These will not be talking points for her brand only, however, as last year she was elected Board Chair of the Napa Valley Vintners. A nonprofit trade association founded in 1944, NVV acts as a voice for the wine business in Napa Valley, promoting, supporting and advocating for its over 500 members. “I’m a bridge between old and new because of my family and my experience,” Jaime says, explaining that she hopes to bring a fresh perspective on the future of Napa, one that emphasises a range of styles and price points, but most of all, is able to welcome a wider range of people than ever before, by showing the varied people and places of the region. Matthiasson voices a similar ethos. “The wine business has so much artifice, but we want to let people in.”  Matthiasson and Trois Noix collaborated on a special lot for Premiere Napa Valley last year – a lot that we purchased and will soon be releasing. Please contact your Account Manager to register interest. 

In a region where wine is often a byword for luxury, two producers are dedicated to reminding drinkers of Napa’s humble roots. Rachael Ryan – Senior Buyer for our US arm, Vinfolio – talks to Jaime Araujo and Steve Matthiasson about their philosophy, farming and approach to making wine 

Two Napa wine producers are championing economic, environmental and social sustainability: we talk to Trois Noix’s Jaime Araujo and Steve Matthiasson 

Farming for the future: Trois Noix and Matthiasson 

The four-wheel drive pulls up and we pile out – Marco Pallanti’s two Jack Russells (Bach and Masetto) leading the charge as they tumble down and into the vineyard in front of us. The vines stretch down a steep slope, three triangular slithers slanting severely to a point, forming a natural amphitheatre, and Siena’s iconic tower just visible on the horizon, 20km to the south. CEO Lorenza Sebasti, her and Pallanti’s son Arturo, our Buying Director Corentin Margier and I are standing in Castello di Ama’s Montebuoni vineyard, which gives its name to their Riserva bottling. It’s the final stop in our tour of the various sites that make up the property’s 75 hectares of vines.  Just tasting Castello di Ama’s wines tells you that this is a special place, but of course there is no substitute for getting your feet on the ground, walking the vines and seeing the site yourself. Since four Roman families re-discovered this hilltop site in the 1970s, it has been lovingly restored, with significant investment in the vineyards and winery – and the original 55-hectare estate has grown to 115 hectares today (with 75 hectares of vines and 40 of olive groves), not to mention the extensive art collection that dots the property.  The vineyards are spread across four valleys, with each site within a 1.5-kilometre radius of the winery in Gaiole-in-Chianti. For winemaker Pallanti, this proximity is one of the keys to quality, not only allowing them to really understand each site, but also ensuring there is minimal time between picking fruit and getting it into the winery. For each parcel, they aim to have the fruit in the tank in under two hours. The property all sits between 420 and 530 metres above sea-level, on the higher side for the region and another defining element for Castello di Ama, lending their wines great freshness and finesse.  The northern flank of the estate is the 16.1-hectare La Casuccia, dominated by stony clay soils and surrounded by stone walls. Here the “rich, fat soil” (as described by Arturo Pallanti) is home to largely Sangiovese, with one historical parcel of Merlot. The tenderloin of the property, it produces opulent and expressive wines, and a single-vineyard Gran Selezione is made in only top vintages (as for Bellavista).  Moving south you come to San Lorenzo which forms the foundation of the eponymous Gran Selezione, a wine made every vintage. While the vintages from 1982 to 1990 were made exclusively with fruit from this vineyard, it has evolved to become a blend of plots – including fruit from Bellavista and La Casuccia in particular in the years they aren’t made. The soils here are chalky yet with plenty of clay-rich schist – a site that doesn’t have the extremes of Montebuoni, Bellavista or La Casuccia, but brings together some of the best characters of them all in its 16.5 hectares.  Sandwiched between San Lorenzo and Bellavista lies L’Apparita, the special three-hectare plot of Merlot that is behind Tuscany’s first – and one of its most iconic – Merlot wines. Clay, chalk and the altitude (500 metres) create a wine that has both power and freshness. The neighbouring Bellavista produces some of Castello di Ama’s most powerful, yet fine and floral, wines – and is home to their oldest vines. South/southwest-facing, its 22.5 hectares of vines (around 80% Sangiovese, with the remainder Malvasia Nera) bask in the sunshine, sitting in stony, clay-chalk soils. In top vintages, they produce a single-site Gran Selezione from Bellavista (first made in 1978) – an impressive and age-worthy wine.  The final piece of the puzzle is Montebuoni – where we’re standing. Pallanti and Sebasti purchased this 14.7-hectare slice of vineyard in 1997, naming it after the village opposite. Arturo tells us how as a child he once tried to ride his bike up the slope – a mistake he never made again. The gradient here is so drastic that even driving down it in a pick-up frays the nerves, working from the chalky scree that feels destined to leave the wheels skidding, down to the more clay-rich foot of the vineyard. The vines here are divided between Sangiovese (around half the site), with Merlot, Cabernet Franc and Malvasia Nera – and the wines reflect the site’s angular slopes, pointed and driven with a backbone of bright acidity.  It’s been over 40 years since Pallanti arrived at the estate, and over 30 since Sebasti took over as CEO. Together they have nurtured this remarkable property, weaving together the threads of these special vineyards to craft wines that set the benchmark for the region. Neither are set to retire any time soon, but now Arturo has returned to join the family business – adding to the complex patchwork that defines this soulful estate.  Explore all Castello di Ama listings or read more Editorial 

We have long championed the wines of Castello di Ama – an estate that crafts some of Chianti, and Tuscany’s, best wines. We visited the property to dive into their special terroir; here we walk you through their patchwork of vineyards       

Walking you through top Chianti Classico wine estate Castello di Ama’s terroir – visiting La Casuccia, San Lorenzo, L’Apparita, Bellavista and Montebuoni

Exploring Castello di Ama’s vineyards

Piecing together the puzzle at Castello di Ama

Few wine estates have the history or pedigree of Ch. Lafite Rothschild. Grapes  have been grown on the estate’s hallowed ground in Pauillac since 1707 and the property has been in the same family (the Rothschilds) for over 150 years. It is the First Growth that became the most desired and collectable, loved for its elegance. Lafite, more than any other estate, had a huge influence in drawing Asian customers to Bordeaux – who, with their immense buying power, have been instrumental in transforming the region over the last 25 years. With such a reputation, the expectations of tasting benchmark Lafite vintages back to 1960 at the Rothschilds’ 19th-century Buckinghamshire estate, Waddesdon Manor, couldn’t be higher. The vintages on show were hand-selected by Domaines Barons de Rothschild’s International Director Jean-Sébastien Philippe who has an encyclopaedic knowledge of every vintage back to the 1920s. Philippe wanted to show how Lafite has an extraordinary capacity to age and an incredible ability to retain freshness, even 50 years or more into its maturity. The main event would pitch the more modern vintages of 2010 and 2005 against the 1990, 1982 and the elusive 1960 – all epic vintages for Lafite. Every wine was sourced directly from Lafite’s cellars and all were served from either magnum or double magnum. Philippe believes magnums are without question the ideal size for maturing wine and, by pouring from larger formats, it meant all the guests got to experience each vintage from the same bottle and therefore avoided any potential bottle variation across the table. Alongside these legendary vintages of Lafite, Philippe also wanted to showcase mature vintages of the neighbouring Ch. Duhart-Milon, also owned by Domaines Barons de Rothschild. With the same winemaking team at both Lafite and Duhart-Milon, it was fascinating to taste both the 1990 and 2005 Duhart-Milon against the same vintage from Lafite. The vines at Duhart abut Lafite’s own vineyards and are known for their quality, if not quite the same level as Lafite. It is a little unfair on Duhart-Milon, but tasting them side by side beautifully highlighted the extraordinary depth and sustain you find at Lafite, that the terroir of Duhart just cannot match. Duhart-Milon has been rewarded with plenty of investment from the Barons de Rothschild group in recent years, both in the vineyards and with a newly built winery. The 2022 is arguably their best vintage to date and the 2020 was also outstanding and surpassed any vintage prior. The estate since 2018 really has been on an impressive trajectory. For Philippe, Duhart is the epitome of Pauillac terroir – Cabernet-driven, with great linear structure and a distinct graphite minerality. While the 2005 and 1990 were not from the property’s heyday, they have matured beautifully. There was a touch of brettanomyces (a yeast that gives savoury, barnyard or even fabric plaster notes) on the 1990 which the guests were all in agreement was no bad thing, joking that everyone loves a touch of brett in mature Bordeaux. But the wines were fresh, vibrant, classic in style and impressively structured. Against the Lafite, they were no competition. Each vintage of Lafite fanned out so much more on the mid-palate, the dense, layered tannins are so plush and refined, while the freshness on the finish leaves the palate salivating. There was a debate at the table whether to start with older vintages and finish with younger ones or the other way round. It became clear with all the wines poured, why it’s so important to taste younger vintages first. In isolation, the 2010 was outstanding. The tannins were still firmly clenched but the depth and the Lafite elegance was all there. It was brooding but still beautiful. Philippe is convinced it is one of the greatest Lafites ever to be made and with maturity will compete with the 1959, 1953 and 1982. Tasting the 2005 alongside the 2010 shows how much more the latter wine has to give, with the 2005 that little bit less tightly clenched on the palate. The 2005s are famously tight and only now starting to unfurl, but while 2005 Lafite has fantastic depth and extraordinary length you just know it still has so much more to give. This wine has decades ahead of it, but several commented how much the 2005 has opened up in the last year. Philippe believes the 2005 still has at least another five years before this is going to even start to show its full potential. It is a wine whose peacock-tail finish started to get the adrenaline pumping, in perfect preparation for what was arguably the wine of the night – the 1990. Just dipping your nose in the 1990, you realise this is Lafite in top gear. Beautifully exuberant, a perfect blend of primary fruit, tertiary notes, cedar wood and earthy, mineral tones – you could smell it all night. The density found in the 2010 and 2005 was present too, but the tannins have relaxed and the wine fully unfurls on the palate bringing extraordinary depth. And it is here where the freshness hits you. This 33-year-old wine has such vibrancy, an energy that just lifts the wine and gives it a wonderful ethereal quality – not a description I would normally equate with Pauillac. The finesse is breath-taking. Having tasted the 1990 almost 15 years ago, it was fascinating to return to it and see it has only improved in that time. At 33 years old, this wine is at its peak. The 1982, the most eagerly awaited vintage of the line-up, could perhaps not live up to expectation despite its arresting nature. It is a terrific wine and, again, the freshness in what was a hot vintage is hard to believe. Philippe noted that the ’82 – despite its mythic status – is not a perfect wine, but is a testament to Lafite’s ability to excel in hot vintages. Philippe believes this is because the terroir at Lafite means the vines naturally close down in hot vintages, reducing sugar production in the grapes. It also gives a contrasting menthol freshness to the wine, which means it remains moderate in alcohol and yet does not taste phenolic or underripe. What is perhaps more extraordinary is that the ’82 was in fact a bumper vintage, with Lafite cropping at 80hl/ha. That is double the production at Lafite today (in a good year), which goes some way in realising the qualitative measures that have been taken at the property over this time. Despite the high production levels, the ’82 is stunning. This bottle didn’t quite have the vitality of the 1990, so it’s worth cracking on with any bottles you are lucky enough to have in your cellar. The final vintage was the elusive 1960. With a table of avid Lafite fans, no one present had tasted or knew much about the 1960. For Philippe it is arguably better than the legendary 1961. It features in a rare consecutive trio of exceptional vintages in the estate’s history. Philippe explained the phenomenon has only happened three times in the history of the estate: with 1959, 1960 and 1961; 1988, 1989 and 1990; and 2018, 2019 and 2020. In the oldest trio, Philippe actually thinks the ‘59 is perhaps the greatest vintage ever at Lafite, followed by the 1960 and then the 1961. My tasting notes for the 1960 started with “surprising freshness”, but perhaps I should have known better by this stage that Lafite’s ageability is not really in question. The wine was in exceptional condition and poured from magnum. It had fantastic structure, classic mature Cabernet linearity but with a plushness to the mid-palate that is typically Lafite, but still a surprise at such maturity. The wine was full of tertiary notes, dried fruits, savoury spice and cedar wood. It was so vibrant, so energetic, it seems that the 1960 is likely to see out its centenary in style. What a wine! To taste so many mature vintages of Ch. Lafite Rothschild is a rare and special treat – offering unforgettable insight into a Bordeaux legend. Now, where can I find that 1959…? Browse all Ch. Lafite Rothschld listings, find out more about our events or read more about Bordeaux

Ch. Lafite Rothschild is rightfully revered. The Pauillac First Growth crafts some of the most refined wines in Bordeaux. At a recent dinner, we had the chance to explore the fingerprint of this special estate and its extraordinary ability to age

Exploring Pauillac First Growth Chateau Lafite Rothschild through the lens of an extraordinary vertical at Waddesdon Manor

Chateau Lafite Rothschild through the ages

Ch. Lafite Rothschild through the ages

Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon is a legend of the industry. When he took the helm at Louis Roederer in 1999, he became Champagne’s youngest Chef de Cave, aged just 33. In a rare move for the time, he fought to ensure he was in charge of both the vineyards and winery – knowing that the former would define the wines he produced. Since then he’s continued to push boundaries in the name of quality.  The house is one of the last to remain family-owned and – even more rarely for a Grande Marque – it owns an impressive 242 hectares of vines, providing enough fruit for around 70% of its production. Lécaillon transformed the way Roederer farmed, pushing first for an organic, then biodynamic approach – with half the vineyards now certified organic and half worked biodynamically, and no herbicides used at all. The results speak for themselves – with the house’s prestige cuvée Cristal arguably the finest and most sought-after in the region.  And the man himself is as effervescent as the wines he crafts. Lécaillon is clearly still enchanted by the world of wine –absorbed by its complexities and totally excited by it. Talking to him at a recent tasting, he explains his aim simply: “We are going beyond the bubbles.”  For him, Champagne has traded on its fizz for too long. The wines were once sweet and served with dessert, they then became dry and were used as an aperitif, before becoming inextricably tied to celebrations – a curse that has limited the way Champagne is seen, and savoured. The industry has capitalised on its occasionality, but behind those bubbles – Lécaillon insists – is “a real terroir, a real wine”. It is this exact sentiment that is behind the Grower movement – something that Lécaillon clearly identifies with – however the movement also poses a threat to those trying to source fruit. For the little fruit Roederer doesn’t grow themselves (30% of their production), Lécaillon picks specific plots from around the region and tries to encourage growers to use a sustainable approach. The team will visit the vineyards in spring and summer, and choose the picking date with the grower. While today it’s sometimes tricky to persuade growers to change the way they farm, Lécaillon anticipates a generational shift will take place as more sustainability-invested children take over from their parents. Roederer used to buy fruit from Anselme Selosse, but – naturally –the star vigneron now keeps it all for himself. The fear is that the new generation won’t want to sell their fruit – leaving the Grandes Marques only lesser sites, farmed without the same stringency.  Everything Lécaillon has done at Roederer has been about championing site. He arrived at the house in 1989, but set off instantly for the property’s projects in Anderson Valley, California and then Jansz in Tasmania, returning to Champagne in 1994. Between 1996 and 1998, he worked on a soil study of the house’s vineyards, as well as an archive study – tasting wines back to 1876. When he took over in 1999, he separated all the plots – with 45 specific mid-slope chalky sites dedicated exclusively to Cristal, fruit for the Blanc de Blancs coming from their La Côte estate in Avize and the vintage wine based around Pinot Noir from their La Montagne estate in Verzy.  Changing the viticulture was the next step. In the 1970s, ’80s and even ’90s, Champagne’s soils were a literal dumping ground – with Paris’s rubbish used as “fertiliser”. Lécaillon is one of many that has pushed for change in this area. He feels that organic farming produces better fruit with more dry extract and concentration, but also healthier vines that are stronger and more resistant to the vagaries of vintage – and climate change. Half the property’s vines are now farmed biodynamically – including all the plots used for Cristal.  In a bid to further champion their terroir, Lécaillon established the region’s first private nursery in 2015. He wanted to gather different massale selections from the Roederer vineyards – cuttings from pre-clonal vines that he feels have adapted to climate change and will be key to the house’s (and Cristal’s) future. He claims that it’s the biggest private collection of Pinot Noir in France, and they’ve now expanded the nursery to include not just Chardonnay and Meunier, but all seven of the region’s permitted varieties – including the little-planted Arbane, Petit Meslier, Pinot Gris and Pinot Blanc. The Chef de Cave feels that field blends with these varieties could be the future with climate change – adding freshness to the wine. Over the last two decades, Lécaillon’s work in the vineyard has brought further freshness and precision to the wines – and the introduction of Collection was the latest step in that direction, a move to “bring [the wine] closer to the terroir”.  Cristal might be the jewel in the house’s crown, but a non-vintage blend is any house’s calling card – representing the most significant volume produced (75% at Roederer) and the wine that reaches the most people. It is, Lécaillon says, always the hardest to produce, the most complex to blend – and yet also the one that receives the least attention.  Roederer’s Brut Premier was introduced in 1986, but back then Champagne was more marginal, viticulture and winemaking less advanced, and the battle was for ripeness. In vintage years, the fruit was actually ripe; the art of non-vintage blends was correcting the under-ripeness of the other years with reserve wines. Now, with climate change and the evolution of farming, Champagne has riper fruit than ever before, and an increasing number of vintage-quality years. “The battle now is not for ripeness, but for freshness,” Lécaillon explains. Collection 242 was released in September 2021, with many initially mourning the loss of Brut Premier; people, however, have been won round. As has become fashionable (along with the likes of Krug or even Nyetimber), the wine is “multi-vintage” or “MV” rather than “NV” or “non-vintage”. In Lécaillon’s view, “NV” is “corrective”, whereas, “MV is the story of the new Champagne”. Their aim is no longer consistency, but to make the best possible wine in that year.   He points to 2002 as a pivotal year in the journey to Collection. It was a stunning growing season, with every plot producing wine of vintage quality – but to build a consistent non-vintage wine, they had to “destroy” the quality of each. While Lécaillon feels Brut Premier was an “outlier” in the range, Collection is “more Roederer”, “more Champagne” – which, for him, has to have an oyster-shell salinity.  A key part of developing Collection was creating a perpetual reserve. Held in an enormous 10,000hl stainless steel tank, this reserve is a constantly evolving blend of Pinot Noir and Chardonnay. Started in 2012, it contains wine from every harvest since, stored without oxygen, in the depths of their cellar where the temperature is cool and stable. This, Lécaillon feels, brings extra texture, depth and a “vintage dimension” to Collection – without the heaviness that he saw in Brut Premier.  The blend also includes more traditional reserves aged in oak (around 10% of the final blend), all with fruit from the younger vines in plots otherwise dedicated to Cristal (only 20-year-old vines make it into the prestige cuvée). The most important element here is that the toasting of the barrels is very light, what Lécaillon describes as a “white toast”, so that it doesn’t dominate the terroir.  Collection 242 was followed by 243 last year – and they are two extremely different wines, the 243 riper and richer versus 242’s more mineral expression. This – for Lécaillon – is what makes an “MV” approach so much more interesting, for both him and wine-drinkers. It is, he tells me, “a blank page every year”.  With everything from zero-dosage experiments to rootstock trials, Lécaillon is constantly looking for ways to improve – with a relentless zest and enthusiasm. For this vigneron, a blank page isn’t daunting – it’s a chance to express his terroir.  Explore all listings from Champagne Louis Roederer or read more Editorial 

The man who crafts Cristal, Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, is one of Champagne’s most pioneering winemakers. We sat down with the man himself to look back at his journey so far – and discuss why it’s high time people started taking Champagne seriously.

The man who crafts Cristal, Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon, is one of Champagne’s most pioneering winemakers. 

Jean-Baptiste Lecaillon of Louis Roederer

Jean-Baptiste Lécaillon: Champagne “beyond the bubbles”

Inside Burgundy – Jasper Morris MW  Jasper Morris MW’s upbeat report assures the reader not to panic about the treacherous growing season that Burgundy endured in 2021: “The wines taste much better than the weather conditions might have suggested.” While wary of generalisations, he feels the whites (what little was made) were good to very good and readers should have no qualms in following them. While the natural comparison might be to 2016 – another vintage badly affected by frosts which produced two generations of grapes – those that survived the frost and the secondary buds – the 2021s avoid the sweet-and-sour profile of that year. He also particularly highlights the wines of Puligny-Montrachet, which has rediscovered a “beguiling and refined floral bouquet” in the year.   
Quality among the reds, he feels, is less consistent, with the Pinot Noirs from the Côte de Nuits better than those from the Côte de Beaune. He highlights Chambolle-Musigny and Volnay as appellations that “show the elegance and fragrance… that has perhaps been missing for the last few years”. While far from classical, he believes many of the reds are “rather lovely in a style which we have not seen in the last few years”, thanks to the vintage’s cooler conditions.   
He compares the reds to 2014, but less “raw” than some of the wines made in that vintage, while the whites remind him of 2013. He also suggests the vintage for both red and whites has many similarities to 2010 – a vintage that received modest reviews on release, but has, with maturity, turned out to be “rather fine”.   
For him, both colours, although especially the whites “are very clear reflections of their individual sites”, and “show the hierarchical order from generic up to Grand Cru very clearly”. While he doesn’t feel they will “develop into legendary long-lived wines”, nor will they “fall over quickly”. Generally it is a vintage that is “what the French call digeste” – “accessible, easy to drink”, but he urges readers to “take the time to search out the gems which have successfully avoided any pitfalls in their path and will emerge as truly beautiful wines”.  
Read Jasper Morris MW’s full report on Inside Burgundy (subscribers only) 


Vinous – Neal Martin 
Neal Martin offers, as ever, a long report, with his trademark satirical opening. His verdict is that 2021 is “indisputably one of the most fiendishly complex, byzantine seasons I can recall” and the wines are “shockingly good in the context of an appalling growing season that pushed many to the brink, physically and mentally”.  He runs through the growing season in detail, noting the various challenges producers faced and how they responded – something which he highlights varied significantly, making it “a season without consensus”. Despite these difficulties, he finds many of the wines “blooming delicious” – noting that “the causal relationship between the vagaries of a growing season and wine quality is not as strict. Seemingly awful vintages can be studded with vinous gems and walk-in-the-park seasons can disappoint.”  Given the lack of consensus, he emphasises the variability of the year, and the need to drill down into the specifics of how each estate, and vineyard, fared – and he has offered a profile on almost each producer he visited to provide his insight. He points to the fact, for example, that the Grands Crus aren’t necessarily the best wines from each estate – and this is reflected in his scores. As for the style of the wines, he finds that the whites “sometimes convey traits of warmer vintages with traces of tropical fruit that counterpoint the acidity”, and points to Chassagne-Montrachet as a stand-out village – in his view, “the most dynamic appellation in the Côte de Beaune”. The reds he declares “a sharp return to the vivid red fruit of cooler growing seasons” – with most “far removed from the black/blue-fruited 2019s and 2020s”. “There is greater underlying mineralité, tension, and vibrancy on the palate compared to recent vintages. Tannins, at best, are finely chiselled, and the finishes often contain plenty of sapidity.”  
Overall, however, he feels that “the 2021s will offer abundant short to mid-term drinking pleasure” and are “delicious early-drinking fare”, but “only a small number will age long-term”, some wines not having “the substance to last the course”. Despite that, he’s overall positive, although notes that the tiny volumes and rising prices pose challenges: “There are gems to find. It’s just that you might not be able to buy them, and if you can, you might have to remortgage the house.”  
Read Neal Martin’s full report, tasting notes and scores on Vinous  
 Burghound – Allen Meadows 
So far Allen Meadows has published his reports on the Chablis, Mâconnais and Chalonnaise, and reds from the Côte de Nuits. His in-depth report runs through the varying meteorological considerations across the entire length of Burgundy, including for example a catastrophic hailstorm in Pouilly-Fuissé. For the whites from the outer reaches of Burgundy, he says that, “despite all of the growing season trials and tribulations, surprisingly good, sometimes even excellent, whites were made”. There are, in his view, some “cool, pure and wonderfully transparent whites that are intense, overtly saline and well-balanced” – but he emphasises that this is not a consistent vintage and selection is important, with quality varying. He feels “it’s not an easy vintage to pigeonhole” – and compares some wines to 2001 or 2013 for their exoticism, some to 2014 or 2017 for their restraint and freshness. From the Chalonnaise, he particularly highlights the wines from Joblot and François Lumpp for reds that are “lovely: fresh, energetic, reasonably concentrated, transparent and balanced”. When it comes to the Côte de Nuits, “quality is highly, even frustratingly, variable”, but “2021 is the kind of vintage that I absolutely love”. It is, in Meadows’ view, “a burg geek’s vintage par excellence" – with terroir transparency at its heart, with wines that are “strikingly refreshing and tension filled”. Many will make for “delicious drinking early on, yet be capable of amply rewarding mid-term cellaring and in a few cases, they should be as long-lived as most collectors would reasonably want” – with the caveat that some, unfortunately, are not. He highlights how work in the vineyard was key, tactics in the winery varied and picking dates too – noting that generally those who picked later fared better, but (in a running theme for the vintage) that is “far from a hard and fast conclusion”. Although most are medium-bodied, he feels that some producers shied away from extraction – with the result that some wines don’t quite have sufficient mid-palate density. With the quality varying, it’s a year to focus on “producer first, second and third rather than the commune”, although the classification hierarchy is clearly reflected in the quality of the wine. This is, most importantly, a vintage that is the opposite to 2018, ’19 and ’20, and he feels the closest comparison for the reds is 2001, with a similar 10- to 20-year arc of ageing ahead of them.  There are some wines that are underripe or herbaceous, but: “The best wines are classic Burgundies in the best sense of that term. They have something of everything in terms of a tantalizing freshness as they are decidedly very pinot in character followed by a dazzling transparency on the palate. As I noted above, the sense of terroir is at the core of each wine, and when a palpable sense of energy is added, the wines are a joy to drink.” Read Allen Meadows’ full report, notes and scores on the Burghound site Decanter – Charles Curtis MW The headline of Charles Curtis MW’s report is that there are “some excellent wines, if you choose carefully”. The “antithesis of recent years”, he anticipates that those who are selective will “be delighted by the classic style of this vintage”, which has produced “crisp, concentrated” whites and – at their best – reds that are “perfumed, elegant and structured”. He emphasises how important the harvest date was, as well as sorting once the fruit was picked. Although he found significant variability in quality – “with liltingly charming wines alternating with less successful examples” – he is clear that “the best wines are definitely worth buying”. His wines of the vintage are Domaine des Comtes Lafon’s Montrachet and Armand Rousseau’s Chambertin-Clos de Bèze – wines that, sadly, few will be able to get their hands on.  Read Decanter’s full report, notes and scores Jancis Robinson MW Jancis Robinson MW’s site offers extensive coverage of the vintage mainly by Burgundy-based Matthew Hayes and herself, with extensive tasting notes. Jancis’s own report – based on tastings mainly in London and published in early January 2023 – vouched for the quality of the fruit at harvest, and how despite “a gruelling growing season”, with the results that she had so far tasted “delicious”.   Matthew Hayes doesn’t shy away from this being a “difficult” vintage, but “quality has been unexpectedly higher than received wisdom suggested”. Beyond the challenges of the growing season, Hayes highlights how the winemaking was handled differently almost everywhere, although generally people reduced extraction. He’s wary of giving the year “the kiss of death” by declaring the vintage “merely good”, but considers how there’s more to greatness than ageability. For him it is a vintage that “will appeal to real cognoscenti of Burgundian Pinot Noir, to the absolute devotees of fragrance, limpidity and soft, ethereal tannins – that gossamer touch that normally speaking should take decades to evolve”. The wines are earlier-drinking given how open they are – a relief in some senses that you needn’t feel too guilty of “infanticide”.   Read all Burgundy 2021 coverage on jancisrobinson.com Wine Advocate – William Kelley William Kelley’s greatly anticipated report is his longest to date. He feels that the complexities of 2021 and what he sees as a pivotal moment for the region deserved the extra word-count. He runs through the year’s conditions in detail, which we won’t regurgitate, although – contrary to our findings – he suggests the Premiers and Grands Crus were harder hit by the frost. Like us and others, he highlights that strategies in the winery varied significantly and generalisations are almost impossible. He considers what “a great red wine vintage” is in the era of modern Burgundy and climate change – and whether the 2021s’ openness will work against them. They are, he says, “supple, fleshy and perfumed, at their best uniting the concentration of low yields and surprisingly good phenolic maturity with the vibrant, perfumed profiles of a cooler vintage”, “broad, open and charming” and, in his view, “unlikely to shut down”. He compares the wines to 2017 or 2000, and expects they will at least age as long as the latter.  As for the whites, he finds them “classically proportioned, pure and fine-boned, albeit sometimes a little lean out of the gates”. The closest comparison for him is 2013, although without the exoticism sometimes found in that vintage. He highlights that the wines are developing texture and flesh during élevage and will show better from bottle than barrel. Of course, he cautions readers that they will need to “buy wisely”, but highlights that, even tasting over 1,000 wines, there were “very few failures” – with the year’s results far more positive than he expected from the difficult year. Indeed, he even declares them “some of the most charming young Burgundies [he has] tasted from barrel over the last 15 years” – but, he asks, “Are they too tasty to be great?” As for the market, he notes that “the 2021s will be expensive”, but this is tied to not just demand, but land prices in the region, as well as its archaic inheritance laws and significant taxes. The inevitable result of these factors is consolidation, and while once the nobility and Church held the keys to the land, now it’s billionaires and corporations – with the future of small, family-owned domaines in doubt. His final line is one filled with a sense of urgency: “Enjoy it while it lasts”. Read Kelley’s full report, notes and scores on the Wine Advocate 

Read more about Burgundy 2021, including our full report in the vintage 

The leading critics are offering their verdict on Burgundy’s 2021 vintage – a challenging but surprising season. Here we offer a crib-sheet to what they’re saying about the year so far

The leading Burgundy critics’ views on 2021– with a summary of what Neal Martin, Jasper Morris, Allen Meadows and William Kelley’s are saying

Burgundy 2021 – what the critics are saying

Burgundy 2021: the critcs’ verdict

Everyone remembers their first bottle of Soldera, such is its impact on the senses. Speak to anyone lucky enough to have tasted it and watch their eyes glaze over as they are immediately transported back to the moment, the friends they shared it with and no doubt the food it accompanied. It is one of those rare wines that has a way of imprinting itself on the memory. Such is the magic at work in seemingly every bottle of this special Tuscan red that it’s not just the first bottle, but every bottle that you remember. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the founding of this enigmatic estate set in the hills of Montalcino. In its comparatively short existence, the wine has built a considerable reputation, yet after founder Gianfranco Soldera passed away in 2019, the property finds itself at an interesting crossroads. Right up until his death, Gianfranco Soldera had very much been the face of the estate. His personality and strong opinions made him a memorable character – and a man not beyond controversy. He was a leading voice against the Brunello consortium’s handling of the Brunello-gate scandal in 2008 and fiercely believed that Brunello should be 100% Sangiovese. In 2012, his winery was the victim of sabotage, in which large volumes of wine (from vintages between 2007 and 2012) were lost – simply poured down the drain. After the attack, the Brunello consortium offered to help club together and replace the wine, but Soldera rejected the offer and soon left the consortium (although the exact reasons behind his resignation or expulsion are unclear). After this incident, Soldera simply labelled his wine as Toscana IGT (today IGP), to make a point that his wine was and will always be 100% Sangiovese. Despite his polarising nature, ultimately Soldera let his wines do the talking. He was incredibly ambitious from the start, setting out to produce a wine that would compete with the world’s finest – a feat he achieved remarkably quickly, considering he started the vineyard from scratch – replanting the vineyards in their entirety when he arrived at the estate in 1972.  While Gianfranco was the face of Soldera, he did not work alone. The estate has always been a family affair. Both Gianfranco’s son Mauro and daughter Monica, along with her husband Paolo Franco, have worked at the estate for many years. It is Monica’s husband who has since taken charge of the winemaking at Soldera, after working alongside Gianfranco for 16 years.  As we sit down to taste through seven vintages of Soldera that span 21 years, Monica introduces her husband, on what is his first visit to the UK as Soldera’s winemaker. She makes the point that before joining the family business, Franco was in fact a skilled silversmith – requiring a keen sensibility of the hands, eyes and mind. Skills, she believes, are ideal for working at Soldera, and perfectly attuned to her father’s perfectionist mentality. Gianfranco was by all accounts not an easy man to work with. “It’s a difficult job,” Monica laughs. “We are not him, but we try our best.”  Monica also explains that, despite her father’s headstrong approach, he was always open to advice and frequently invited university students to the estate, experimenting with vines on the property, exploring ways to bring out the best in the grapes and vines. Monica believes that science is the key to making wine more naturally. “The more we study, the more natural our processes become,” she says. Working with students has allowed them to fine-tune what they do, keeping the vines healthy in the shifting climate. The 2017 vintage – the penultimate wine made under Gianfranco’s watch – is due to be released later this year. It was a very difficult vintage in Tuscany, with a ferocious heatwave in the summer of 2017. There were concerns that it might be similar to 2003, when their vines were badly affected by the high temperatures. But to their surprise, the vines showed no signs of water stress, the leaves remained green and rich in colour. Soldera felt this was down to the vines’ deep roots and higher trellising, something they introduced after 2003.  Despite the lack of water in 2017, the team was still able to work with a bigger canopy – meaning more leaves to shade the grapes. The intensity of the summer saw them harvest the grapes a whole month earlier than is typical, starting on 26th August. “To lose one month is extraordinary,” says Monica. Production was also down to 11,000 bottles, versus a normal 15,000. Technically they are allowed to produce as many as 50,000, giving an idea of how much they are prepared to sacrifice to maintain their high standards. Tasting the 2017, there is only a hint of the heat that severely marked the vintage for many of Soldera’s neighbours. The wine still has the trademark perfumed aromatics of old rose and the sinewy tannins that flex beautifully on the palate. It is easily one of the most elegant wines produced in Montalcino in 2017. The 2017, however, was always going to struggle to live up to its predecessor, the 2016– a vintage that is amongst the very best in the region. Monica noted just how easy 2016 was in terms of the growing season; everything was just right, right up until harvest. The sheer amplitude of aromas is really quite extraordinary, with strawberry fruit, old rose perfume, fiery earthy, irony, ferric tones and a wild floral note. The energy on the palate is wonderful and thick, tender, with almost elastic-like tannins that make the mouth water. The wine has such vibrancy and a really long finish. The 2015 as a vintage sits somewhere between 2016 and 2017 in style. While it was very warm, the vines were less affected and produced wines of great concentration. The wine does not have the aromatic amplitude of the 2016 and is nuttier in its aromas rather than perfumed, but seemingly the signature of Soldera – those tender tannins, like silk, bring so much energy and emotion to the wine. The 2014 is perhaps a surprise highlight of the flight. It was a difficult vintage, with lots of rain. For Monica, it proved very tough and required lots of sorting and fruit selection. In the end they got just 400kg of fruit from one hectare, making just 8,400 bottles. The dried rose, perfumed scent is matched by earthier, ferric tones. I get tomato leaf – which is often considered negative in tasting notes – but here it adds a wild, lifted, herbal tone that brings more complexity to the wine, complementing the sweeter rose notes and savoury, dried-stone aromas. The breadth on the palate is where the magic really is. It stretches right across the palate and brings such effortless depth too. The tannins are still tight but just starting to ease up, and there is so much freshness too. It really is in a wonderful place. A 10-year gap and the 2004 is the wine of the flight. Despite the bottle age, the scented Pinot Noir-esque perfume is still there in abundance, matched again by an earthy ferric richness. The tannins have eased up as you would expect, developing more mid-palate richness, making the wine incredibly juicy. The tannins are still elastic and bring a huge lift to the palate. It is a mesmerising wine. It was a great vintage in Tuscany, albeit with moderate temperatures for Montalcino, and it has matured beautifully. Some argue that Soldera excels in more moderate vintages – something that shines through in the 2004 and 2014.  The 1999 is another great vintage in Brunello and the next wine in the line-up. Distinct tertiary notes are now showing on the wine, with blue cheese, roasted walnut, dried cherry, sage and light herbal tones mingling together. There is still so much vibrancy to the wine. The tannins are not quite as silky as the younger vintages, but the acid is still so striking. It definitely feels like a wine of its age and, despite the minimal approach at Soldera, the framework suggests extraction levels were higher back then, in keeping with the trends of the time. It is a lovely wine, but not as ethereal as others. Finally, the 1996: at 26 years of age still holds on to those wonderful, scented aromatics as exuberant as ever. Again, matched with more tertiary notes, blue cheese along with dried cherry fruit, lots of dry extract, the tannins as structured and sinewy as ever, but still very fresh. It’s an unforgettable flight of some of Montalcino’s top vintages, but it’s Soldera’s ethereality that emerges – with that heady mesmerising scent and tender tannins consistent across the wines. Soldera might thrive in cooler vintages, but the quality of this wine rarely drops below outstanding. Even without Gianfranco at the helm, it’s clear that – under the watchful eye of Monica Soldera, Paolo Franco, and the rest of the Soldera family, not to mention their research team – the estate has a very exciting future ahead. Huge thanks to Zubair at Raeburn Fine Wines for organising the event. Discover the history of Soldera and all current back vintages available

It’s 50 years since Soldera – the iconic Tuscan estate that crafts some of the region’s finest Sangiovese – was established. To mark the occasion, Gavin Smith caught up with Monica Soldera to taste through back vintages and talk about what lies ahead for the remarkable property

Soldera is the iconic Tuscan estate who crafts some of the region’s finest Sangiovese wines. We caught up with Monica Soldera to taste through back-vintages

Soldera: tasting 50 years of a Tuscan wine icon

Defining Soldera: tasting 50 years of a Tuscan icon

In a report published in 2014 by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation, under current rates of degradation, all the world’s topsoil could disappear within 60 years. With 95% of all food produced relying on these living soils, this pronouncement was a stark and terrifying warning of what lies ahead. Industrial farming and deforestation are the leading causes behind the degradation of soil. Grape growing and large parts of the wine industry remain very much part of that problem. France’s vineyards, as an example, are the country’s biggest consumers of chemical fungicides, insecticides and herbicides. These products can devastate the life in the soil and completely disrupt the biodiversity of a region. Although viticulture represents just 3% of France’s agricultural land, the sector spreads 20% of the country’s fungicides. Many vignerons have tried to reduce chemical inputs, either using them as a last resort or not at all. Some believe non-chemical additions of copper and sulphur typically used to treat fungal diseases (the biggest threat to yields) are more damaging to the environment than systemic chemical interventions. It is a complex picture. But there are vignerons committed to non-chemical approaches – growers who believe they can offer alternative methods that are both sustainable for the future and remain commercially viable. While there are various approaches, they all share the belief that protecting the health of the soil is fundamental to their vineyard’s long-term future, as well producing a farming system that is not only sustainable but regenerative, in that it sequesters more carbon dioxide in the soil than it takes out. Exactly how this is practised remains a contentious debate. Many of these growers are certified organic, many are not – certification itself is another controversial issue. Biodynamic farming is organic farming with a more holistic approach, trying to recreate a natural balancing ecosystem that allows nature to restore and rejuvenate itself, in rhythm with the lunar cycle. Others have gone even further and have allowed their vineyards to grow wild, believing that an undisturbed vineyard is the most sustainable and ecologically healthy. Organic and biodynamic farming practices are essentially a return to conventional farming methods carried out prior to the introduction of chemical farming 70 years ago. The more non-interventionist approach goes one step further, attempting to recreate an environment that pre-dates all commercial farming. It is an approach in which crops and other plant life coexist together, allowing the environment to dictate what grows where. Under the teachings of Masanobu Fukuoka, it was coined “natural farming”. Masanobu Fukuoka was a Japanese microbiologist and agricultural scientist who studied plant pathology. After nearly dying during a bout of pneumonia, he experienced what he described as a profound spiritual experience – leading him to begin to doubt modern agricultural science. He gave up his scientific post and returned to his family’s farm on the southern Japanese island of Shikoku. It was here that he developed his own non-intervention farming techniques, which involved no tilling or ploughing, and no fertilisation of the land. This was to protect the vital microorganic life in the soil, that he believed was essential to creating an ecologically balanced environment. The publication of his seminal book, The One-Straw Revolution, in 1975, went on to influence the permaculture movement (no till, no ploughing) in the west, and even more radical concepts. Alsace-based viticulturist Bruno Schloegel (of Domaine Lissner) is one such radical. He has a nine-hectare estate that, over the last 20 years, he has adapted to what he calls the “savage” approach to viticulture. For him, “savage” is a more accurate translation of Fukuoka’s methods. “I asked my Japanese friends to translate Fukuoka’s Japanese term,” says Schloegel, “and it translates as something between being free and alive. But not just the vines, the whole system of animals, insects, fungus. The key is not to disturb, as this will weaken the system.” For Schloegel it is a better translation than “natural” which today, he believes, no longer means anything. Despite adopting Fukuoka’s ideas, Schloegel was in fact practising the same approach before he was even aware of the Japanese farmer’s book. “I never knew about Fukuoka until a few years ago. I was given his book and it was amazing. Almost every page, we were totally linked.” Both former scientists, Schloegel too became frustrated by the scientific data available. “It is more complex than the techniques we have been taught,” he says. “Even when I was a student, I thought this. I am a scientist as he was. I studied in the ’70s. He studied in the ’60s. But our conclusions are the same. The answer is to not disturb.” Prior to Fukuoka, Schloegel was taken by the work of the eminent English scientist Dennis Noble, a pioneer of systems biology whose publication The Music of Life became a huge influence. Noble uses the analogy of life as many orchestras playing different scales, very small and very big. “Molecules, atoms, landscape, living beings as well as the vine – all are playing together and that is what we call life. We can listen to each scale of this living system, and you will find almost the same music, because it is totally coherent. Each scale is in harmony. It was very inspiring to me,” Schloegel explains. Like Fukuoka, Schloegel has a strong respect for spirituality as well as science and talks about how the human brain deciphers experiences differently. He uses music as an example, describing how listening to music creates an emotional reaction which the scientific part of your brain can’t explain. “Knowing you only have a small knowledge of this complexity, this complexity of nature, makes you humble. But spiritually you get pleasure from living with this complexity and not trying to control it. It’s just like a wave you are surfing on. This is the pleasure side.” As well as adopting a no-plough, no-till approach, unlike biodynamic farming, Schloegel does not sow seeds for cover crops, nor use any organic fertiliser, preparations or other inputs. He believes his vines’ roots not only root deeper, but are more resistant to disease and suffer less from stress. He also saves on the costs of such additions. So what does he do? He prunes the vines each year – very late in March/April just prior to the new buds forming – and he mows between the rows just prior to harvest. He does also use copper and sulphur, when necessary, to tackle disease but believes he can phase this out. Beyond that, the vineyard is left to its own devices. It is hard to keep up with Schloegel sometimes – his concepts are unconventional, but this holistic approach is highly considered. It is completely at odds with the commercial farming approaches and understandably has caused controversy. But he, along with a growing number of viticulturists around the world, is totally committed to the concept that permaculture is essential to the future long-term health of arable land. He believes he can not only produce an economically viable crop (up to 40hl/ha), but he can produce wines with greater complexity and terroir expression. He believes it takes between seven to 12 years of not disturbing the vineyards for them to find their balance. “At this point you are on the crest of the wave – it is very calm,” he says. But this is a long process and requires a lot of faith to commit to. Even Schloegel admits it gets worse before it gets better, as the vineyard adapts. “When you stop the herbicides, the mowing and the ploughing, you get the bad weeds. But these weeds prepare the soil for the next generation of plants,” he says. Poppies, lilies, thistles, wild orchids then start to appear and then fruit and vegetables and a huge variety of plant life and wild flowers begin to grow. His vineyards today have a huge variety of plant and wildlife species coexisting, with cherry, apricot, fig, almond trees and wild vegetables, flowers, fruits, and aromatic herbs all growing between the vines. What then happens seems incredible. Schloegel explains, once in equilibrium you see distinct plants continue to grow in the same place each year, depending on the terroir of that part of the vineyard. There is one part of his vineyard where 30 metres of wild strawberries appear every year, growing alongside the vines. In other parts there are leeks, other parts a particular herb. Schloegel outlines that even within a single vineyard, very little is exactly the same. The composition, altitude, slope, geological make-up are all different and, when left to adapt, one vineyard grows multitudes of plant species at different levels of concentration in different parts of the vineyard, depending on what adapts best to that particular spot. This is what Schloegel believes is real terroir in action: “A terroir is a full, complex living system – and a wine of this terroir is a response. In this totally free, rich, complex place. I know it is possible for natural systems to rebuild from themselves. But it cannot be fostered.” Fukuoka’s farm on the island of Shikoku in southern Japan was a rice and citrus fruit farm and, while he managed to produce commercial yields of both rice and fruits, the transference of his techniques to the vineyard is not quite as straightforward. The concepts are radical and while a few like Schloegel are convinced it’s possible – with his own yields varying from 10-40hl/ha, others remain sceptical. Schloegel’s Alsatian neighbour Olivier Humbrecht MW (of Domaine Zind-Humbrecht) does not believe a non-interventionist approach is a good idea – nor that it is necessary for making wine a sustainable crop for the future. While Humbrecht accepts there may be many good ideas in terms of regenerative methods that heighten biodiversity and increase the health of the soils, he is sceptical of its long-term future. Humbrecht’s fundamental criticism is that Schloegel’s approach is not as undisturbed as he claims.“A vine is a cultivated plant,” says Humbrecht. “You are cultivating something, disrupting something natural and making it not natural. It is not natural to plant vines one metre apart on a slope, in poor rocky soil, in a place where it doesn’t rain much. It’s not natural to force it to produce grapes every year. So you have to compensate this with something.” For him, permanent cover leads to soil compaction – with the shallow roots of these plants and the topsoil damaged when working in the vineyard – which has graver long-term effects than tilling or ploughing. These stresses on the vine, Humbrecht explains, are exactly why we have flavour in our wines. Each of these stresses, whether it be the nutrient stress from poor soils, the water stress from growing on a slope or well-drained soils, or nutrient stress from high density planting – these are all deliberate decisions made by vignerons who, over the last 2,000 years, have discovered the best places to cultivate and stress the plant in order to produce delicious fruit. This fruit is the vine’s attempt to escape, through tempting wildlife to eat it and disperse their seeds somewhere less inhospitable. “France would be a forest if untouched and I’m not sure you would not find one wild vine where we have the top vineyards today,” he says. Humbrecht remembers discovering the vines on his own Grand Cru vineyard Rangen de Thann. These vines had been abandoned since World War One. When he arrived 60 years later, most of them had disappeared. The vines that did survive and adapted were producing tiny, small clusters of grapes. Humbrecht believes non-intervention farming would have similar results. “If you don’t prune a vine for 10 years you will end of with tiny clusters, producing maybe 2-4hl/ha – a typical commercial yield in the region is closer to 80hl/ha. Humbrecht’s biggest concern centres around this approach’s commercial viability. And that is important if these methods are to be adopted more globally. If these vineyards’ crops are too small, the vineyard will fail and more likely be bought up by someone else who could return the vineyard to conventional, chemical farming. While there may be disagreements between Humbrecht’s biodynamic approach and Schloegel’s “savage” approach, the permaculture concept has led others to adapt their practices. Michel Chapoutier has been farming biodynamically for the last 30 years but has more recently adopted permaculture. “How I am managing my soil today is completely the opposite to how I managed them biodynamically 20 years ago,” he tells me. Chapoutier now believes the disturbance of the soil is more damaging than the removal of weeds and therefore has stopped ploughing his vineyards. For Humbrecht, light ploughing and resowing cover crops is a better solution. “There is no technique that is 100% good,” he explains. “You have to weigh up the options. What is better? Let the vine die from the competition of the plants growing in May, or disrupting the microorganisms in the soil by ploughing four inches into the soil (between May and June) – you have to choose. It is always a question of balance.” Another producer who has gone beyond organics and placed the development of biodiversity and regenerative practices at the heart of their operation is Gaja. The early success of Piedmont as a fine wine region in Italy saw areas such as Barbaresco and Barolo become dominated by vineyards. Forests were felled and biodiversity dropped. Gaja has since incorporated more trees, adopted permaculture methods in the vineyard and today produce their own organic fertiliser in their historic vineyards. The team has also recently purchased new land in Alta-Langhe where they are not just planting vines, but trees too, incorporating the trees and the vines together. “There is a growing sensibility towards the importance of biodiversity,” says Gaia Gaja, “therefore we are fine with sacrificing space suited for vineyards in favour of trees, we believe in the long run this decision will benefit the health of the vineyards.” Industrial farming is in ecological and financial crisis. More sustainable approaches have to be adopted if we are to survive the next generation, but, so far, those choices come at a cost. For many farmers struggling to make a living, the conventional, chemical farming approach has become the only way to financially survive, taking each year as it comes. These growers can ill afford to think much beyond that, despite the system’s long-term unsustainability. Many feel trapped and find more sustainable approaches economically unviable without better directed government subsidies that promote regenerative farming practices. Wine is hardly an essential food product, but it is the economic engine for entire communities that rely on it for subsistence. In certain wine regions where there is a reliance on water reserves and chemical inputs, it will have to adapt or die. Minimal intervention viticulture is no doubt a radical option, but truly regenerative viticultural approaches will be necessary in a future where food shortages become more widespread. Chapoutier and Zind-Humbrecht, even Schloegel, albeit blessed with great terroir, are paving the way, proving it is possible to produce wine at good volume, at all price points, with a regenerative approach. It is these pioneers that we must learn from, if we are to have a wine industry at all in 50 years‘ time. Browse the wines of Domaine Zind-Humbrecht or Michel Chapoutier or read more Editorial

Agriculture is in crisis. Wine producers are at the forefront of the challenges facing farmers around the world – but what can they do? We talk to Olivier Humbrecht MW, Bruno Schloegel, Michel Chapoutier and Gaia Gaja about rewilding, regenerative farming and the vine’s long-term viability

Olivier Humbrecht, Michel Chapoutier and more on rewilding, regenerative farming and the vine’s long-term viability in an agricultural crisis.

How viticulture can help the climate crisis

A return to the wild: beyond organics

Saint-Emilion has been hitting the headlines. And not in the way it would like to. In July, just after the region’s châteaux submitted applications for the 2022 classification, two of the region’s four Premier Cru Classé A estates – Chx Cheval Blanc and Ausone – announced that they would be withdrawing from the classification system. This week sees a dispute over the 2012 classification enter the courts – with accusations that the results were fixed. The Médoc’s leading names were ranked in 1855 – with but one change (Ch. Mouton Rothschild's promotion) in 1973. The classification was uncomplicated, with no fussing over terroir, tastings or winemaking talent; it was based purely on price. It’s hard to believe that it remains relevant today – but, while of course there are properties that stand out, it’s more or less accepted, and reflective. Across the river in Saint-Emilion, they wanted something different. Something fairer. A system that flexed with an estate’s waxing and waning. The ambition was – and is – laudable. The reality, well… The classification is overseen by the Institut National des Appellations d’Origine (INAO) – the body responsible for France’s appellation system. The concept was mooted in the 1950s, with the first list published in 1955. The idea was that it would be re-drawn every 10 years – both to be more democratic and provide an incentive for long-term quality. Unlike the Left Bank’s system, it would assess terroir and include a tasting of the wines. The aim was, and is – as a spokesperson for the INAO told me, to help consumers distinguish between the region’s many properties and help “maintain a level of excellence”. The classification is based on a scoring system out of 20, with the breakdown of scores different to qualify for Grand Cru Classé (requiring a minimum 14 points) versus Premier Grand Cru Classé (requiring a minimum 16). In 2012, the possible points for Premier Grand Cru Classé were broken down thus: 30% based on the quality of the wine – with a tasting of 15 vintages; 30% on the estate’s terroir; 35% on the property’s renown (both national and international), promotion and distribution; and the remaining 5% on viticulture, vinification and traceability. Even the first, 1955 list was disputed, changed just three years later, then again two months later, before settling on 63 Grands Crus Classés and 12 of the elite Premiers Grands Crus Classés. The very best of this latter group were named “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” (the rest Premier Grand Cru Classé B) – with just two making the cut, Chx Ausone and Cheval Blanc. Since 1958 the region’s wines have been re-classified regularly – if not quite on the 10-year cycle forecast, in 1969, 1986, 1996, 2006 and then 2012. But there has always been an undercurrent of discontent. In 2006, five properties filed lawsuits and the ruling was declared invalid, with the 1996 classification reinstated. For the 2012 classification, the INAO seemed determined to clean things up. The tastings and site inspections were, for the first time, outsourced by the INAO, with wine professionals from other regions (Burgundy, the Rhône, Champagne, the Loire and Provence) roped in – including Marcel Guigal and Robert Drouhin. A company called Qualisud was to handle the tastings, while Bureau Veritas would take on visiting the estates. These independent authorities would, they thought, make it indisputable. The result was two new Premiers Grands Crus Classés A estates – with Chx Angélus and Pavie; while Larcis Ducasse, La Mondotte, Pavie Macquin, Troplong Mondot and Valandraud all promoted to Premier Grand Cru Classé B, and significant changes to the Grands Crus Classés (with a new total of 64 estates). But of course that wasn’t the end of it. Enter Chx Corbin-Michotte, Croque-Michotte and La Tour du Pin Figeac. The latter two had applied for and hoped to be promoted to Grand Cru Classé, while Corbin-Michotte was demoted in the 2012 rankings. They argue that the decision against them was “incomprehensible”, challenging the criteria for classification and insisting that two individuals – Hubert de Boüard (of Ch. Angélus) and Philippe Castéja (of Ch. TrotteVieille) – had “undue influence” with their roles within the INAO. It’s alleged that de Boüard was “present at all stages of the process elaborating the 2012 classification” (with it implied he influenced the ranking not only of Angélus but seven properties for which he consulted), while Castéja “pulled strings” to guarantee TrotteVieille’s Premier Grand Cru Classé status. The case went to administrative court, however the plaintiffs lost in 2015. They appealed, but lost again in 2019. And now they’re taking it to the criminal courts, with jail time and a fine of up to €500,000 on the cards for the accused. When I asked Frédéric Castéja – Philippe’s son and General Director of Borie Manoux – about the accusations, he told me: “I can only tell you that the Attorney General has dropped all accusations against [my father] and stated that he was not concerned at all with this so-called ‘influence’.” “When it comes to a public ranking, the level of controversy is as high as the stakes,” the INAO told me. It’s unsurprising, perhaps, given the impact the classification can have on an estate’s bottom line. After their promotion in 2012, Chx Pavie and Angélus saw instant price hikes: 2012 Angélus was released at 30% more than the 2011 en primeur, while Pavie went up 58%. That’s big bucks. And beyond the actual wine, it’s the land prices that really rocket. It wasn’t just these three (relatively minor) properties that seemed dissatisfied. Rumour has it that each year, the Médoc’s First Growths, Cheval Blanc, Ausone and Pétrus (“the group of nine”) all meet to taste the latest vintage. After Pavie and Angélus became newly minted First Growths, the group reportedly preferred to restrict the group to the original set. And in 2012 Ch. Ausone quietly removed the classification from its labels – a hint at what was to come. Eric Morain – one of the lawyers representing the three disgruntled estates – has commented that the classification has become “a system that sells the brand and no longer the grape”. La Revue du Vin de France’s 2021 Man of the Year, the attorney is a specialist in the world of wine and has earned a reputation for standing up for the little guys. He was instrumental in establishing the Syndicat de Défense des Vins Naturels (which introduced the Vin Méthode Nature trademark last year – a formal definition for natural wine in France), and has defended several wronged natural wine producers, such as Olivier Cousin and Alexandre Bain. Morain’s latest crusade, however, is against two goliaths – with connections and deep pockets. “The classification was thought out and developed and judged by people who had a direct interest. The rules were not the same for everyone,” Morain said on email to me. De Boüard and Castéja should have recused themselves, he argues. For Chx Corbin-Michotte, Croque-Michotte and La Tour du Pin Figeac (“They aren’t notable, just winegrowers who do their job well,” Morain says), this isn’t about money. They just want someone to admit they were wronged, unfairly excluded from the ranking. “Will they be convicted?” Bordeaux expert Jane Anson pondered, “I would imagine not, but I guess we will all have to wait and see...” For her, the drama is an unnecessary distraction “from the excellence of the wines and the entire classification”. In the meantime, the process for the 2022 classification has been rumbling on, with applications submitted this summer. Some changes have been made, again trying to make the classification – once and for all – watertight. Independent third party Bureau Veritas is now in charge of both tastings and site inspections, and the weighting of the tasting element has been increased for the Premiers Grands Crus Classés (bringing it in line with the weighting for the Grands Crus Classés) – worth 50% of the score (previously 30%) – while the portion for a property’s terroir has been reduced to just 10% (previously 30%). The puzzle is why the criteria remain different for a Premier Grand Cru Classé versus a Grand Cru Classé – something for which I haven’t been able to find an answer. Given estates need to score 17 for the heralded Premier Grand Cru Classé A, 16 for Premier Grand Cru Classé B and 14 for Grand Cru Classé, why make things even more complicated and declare that, for example in 2022, the quality of terroir has more significance for a Grand Cru Classé than a Premier Grand Cru Classé estate (20% versus 10% for the latter)? To make it into the upper echelons of the Premiers Grands Crus Classés, reputation is considered key – and this is a sticking point for many. While reputation, promotion and distribution represents 20% for the Grands Crus Classés, it stands for 35% of a property’s score for Premier Grand Cru Classé status. Including elements such as wine tourism, social media, PR and the accessibility of an estate, it has prompted remarks that the size of a winery’s car park has more relevance than the quality of its soils. The INAO emphasises that the criteria are very similar to those of the original classification in the 1950s. Reputation has always been included, they argue – they are simply adapting this to the modern day. Either way, it’s a minor element, they assure me – with, for example, social media representing just 0.3 points, or 1.5% of the final score, while wine tourism makes up a mere 1%. This hasn’t soothed the worries of the region’s two original Premiers Grands Crus Classés A properties, Ausone and Cheval Blanc. News broke soon after applications for the classification closed on June 30th that the prestigious estates had not submitted anything. When I spoke to both estates ahead of en primeur (April this year), the responses were interesting. Pierre-Olivier Clouet, Technical Director at Ch. Cheval Blanc, noted it was “a touchy question” before he continued. “We believe it’s quite difficult in 2021 to classify the wine like in 1855. This is not the same period this is not the same price per hectare, it is not the same price per bottle… Producing an outstanding wine is difficult on paper,” he said. “We don’t produce wine for the critics, for the classification – we make wine for the wine lover. Premier Grand Cru Classé A, Premier Grand Cru Classé B, Grand Cru Classé… we are Cheval Blanc, that’s it.” When I enquired whether he felt a wine’s distribution should have as much weighting as its terroir, he shrugged and smiled: “The answer is in the question.” Pauline Vauthier of Ch. Ausone was less willing to broach the topic, not wanting to be embroiled in the debate. “What counts is the quality of the product,” she said – making very clear that that is where the estate’s focus lies. “There are many classifications and they’re difficult for the public to understand. Ausone prefers to communicate about the quality of its wine.” She added: “[The 2012 classification] created much controversy, and that will certainly be the case with 2022.” When the news broke in July that both estates were withdrawing (along with sibling estates, La Clotte and Quinault l’Enclos), Pierre Lurton (Director of Ch. Cheval Blanc) and Clouet told Terre de Vins that there wasn’t enough emphasis on “the terroir, the wine, the history”. Edouard Vauthier (Ch. Ausone) explained, “Since 2012, some criteria added are not linked into the wine itself anymore. Some people apply for the classification for economic reasons more than quality and the respect of the terroir.” He highlighted that many of their customers hadn’t even noticed that “Premier Grand Cru Classé A” was no longer on the label. Indeed, why would they? Interestingly, these estates agree with Eric Morain on this. For Morain, the tasting component should represent much more – and as long as it counts for so little, “the classification will mean nothing”. The two behemoths are their own brands – brands that are much stronger than that of Saint-Emilion Premier Grand Cru Classé A. The loser, sadly, is set to be the classification itself, and its top-tier properties – which will no longer benefit from Cheval Blanc and Ausone’s halo effect. Of course, the INAO was keen to emphasise that – whether classified or not – the two estates would always be closely associated with the region, and that there were plenty of other estates that eagerly submitted applications. “Ausone and Cheval Blanc have always been driving forces behind the appellation and I hope will remain so,” Frédéric Castéja told me. “The risk is that at the next occasion other top estates (meaning other First Growths) do the same, then if too many leading estates leave, the classification is meaningless.” Morain – unsurprisingly given his campaign against the classification – is damning about its fate. Ausone and Cheval Blanc’s departure is, for him, “a symptom of a system on its last legs”. So is the 2022 ranking set to be the Saint-Emilion classification’s swansong? Perhaps – the more important question is maybe if it matters. “Saint-Emilion has so many châteaux (by far the most of any of the prestigious appellations) that there is a definite benefit to have some way of distinguishing the best wines,” Jane Anson said. “I fully agree with the principles, in fact think the idea of a renewable classification is very much consumer-driven and provides an incentive to estates to keep investing etc, but I think it has become unworkable.” And that is the problem – the theory is excellent, but how can it be put into practice? While the classification sounds helpful in principle, for most people, I suspect it isn’t. There’s too much confusion with Grand Cru, Grand Cru Classé and Premier Grand Cru Classé A or B. Unlike the Médoc’s straightforward numbering of First to Fifth Growth, it is not – to the uninitiated – immediately clear which is meant to be better than the other. Price and branding of an individual estate will be the more important differentiator. Talking to other producers in the region, few have answers – and few wish to champion the system’s survival. I asked Noëmie Durantou Reilhac – of Denis Durantou estates – whether she’d ever wish to see something similar in Pomerol. The answer was a firm no (“definitely”). “What really saddens me is seeing some plots in Saint-Emilion Grand Cru that are truly devastated,” she tells me. When I ask Nicolas Glumineau at Pichon Comtesse in Pauillac – a producer with a little distance – about his thoughts on it, he’s quick to quip: “That’s why we have an 1855 [classification] that we never move.” More seriously, he thinks the decade cycle is problematic. “I have this feeling that one classification every 10 years is probably too fast, too frequent. Probably 25 years – one generation could be enough.” Of course applying for the classification is voluntary – and not everyone does. Ch. Tertre Rôteboeuf, notably, has never played the game – despite the high quality of its wines. (The property is also renowned for handling its own distribution, outside the négociant system.) Ch. Haut-Brion owner Prince Robert of Luxembourg recently highlighted a benefit to being outside the classification – announcing his plans to expand Quintus with vineyards from the recently bought Ch. Grand Pontet. And this really gets to the point of what could make the Saint-Emilion classification work. As Anson said to me, “Saint-Emilion is the only classification in Bordeaux that includes the notion of terroir (and in fact taste) and that is also linked to a specific piece of land.” A classified property can’t automatically include new vineyards – unlike estates on the Left Bank. The classification is admirable in many ways – but how can you really quantify excellence? Is it ever really possible to pin down the true quality of a wine, or estate, with such exactitude? Is the picture not more nebulous than points can ever paint? “All classifications are correct as long as all players clearly know the rules,” Frédéric Castéja noted. “One must remember that classifications are always the picture of the past, but of course confirm the potential of the estate.” For Saint-Emilion, even the past feels in flux – discussed and debated. What the future holds is hard to say – but, for now, we’ll wait to see what’s in store for the class of 2022. Read more about Editorial  Since this article was published, Hubert de Boüard was found guilty of having undue influence in the 2012 Saint-Emilion classification. He was fined €40,000 and has not appealed the charge. Two properties, Ch. Croix de Labrie and Ch. Tour Saint-Christophe, are taking the INAO to court over their applications for the 2022 classification. In January 2022, Ch. Angélus announced it too was leaving the Saint-Emilion classification, stating the system had become a "vecteur d'antagonisme et d'instabilité". This leaves Ch. Pavie as the only remaining Premier Grand Cru Classé A estate. September 2022: the new classification has been unveiled, with Ch. Figeac promoted to Premier Grand Cru Classé A, alongside Ch. Pavie.

Saint-Emilion’s classification is in crisis – embroiled in court cases and controversy. But why? And does it matter? Sophie Thorpe investigates

Saint-Emilion’s classification is in crisis after leading names abandoned the system. We talk to Ausone, Cheval Blanc, Angelus and more about the controversy

Criots-Batard--Montrachet

Please wait

Criots-Batard--Montrachet

Filter

Please wait

Related articles