Bordeaux Terroir

Over generalized statement: Burgundy is defined by terroir; Bordeaux is defined by producer. This topic has been discussed from several different angles, but I am curious about how you all feel about the role of terroir in Bordeaux. The only terroir discussion about Bordeaux I hear regularly is the gravel of Graves. Maybe the predominance of clay on the R Bank? That seems to be it, whereas the talk of the dirt and rocks, drainage and soils of Burgundy goes on and on and on. Why? How do the differences between, say, St. Estephe and Pauillac compare to that of Chambolle and Gevrey, or Volnay and Pommard? What about Pomerol and St. Emilion vs Vosne-Romanee and Nuit-St-Georges? What about the f*cking Left Bank and Right Bank versus the Cote D’Or, Chablis, and Beaujolais?!

If the greatness of Bordeaux and Burgundy is comparable (a big assumption), why is terroir in Bordeaux painted with such a broad brush? We talk of Left Bank and Right Bank in Bordeaux versus the individual villages, vineyards, and plots of the Cote D’Or. Is this because terroir does in fact differ less in the geology of Bordeaux? Is it because Pinot and Chardonnay transmit terroir characteristics better than Cabernet and Chardonnay? Is it because Burgundy vineyards are shared by producers where Bordeaux chateaux own the land they farm? Is it because Burgundian monks had nothing better to do than divide up land and build walls to define separate clos hundreds of years ago? Something else?

This is a nebulous question, I realize that. I would welcome you all to respond however you want. Kind of reminds me of high school English class where the teacher would write a statement on the board and ask us to respond. “Terroir in Bordeaux…Write!” Thanks for entertaining my random Saturday night musings.

Correction in second paragraph; “Is it because Pinot and Chardonnay transmit terroir characteristics better than Cabernet and MERLOT?”

Do the best producers in Bordeaux have the best sites, generally? I would think they must, but honestly don’t know.

Limestone plateau in Saint-Émilion?

Bordeaux is a much much larger area than Burgundy and thus more heterogenous in its landscape. The Medoc is low lying, relatively flat ground (and much of it underwater before the Dutch came in the 17th century) whereas St. Emilion and Pomerol and even Entre-Deux-Mers have more dramatic topography. You ought to visit both regions if at all possible. To see them in person explains a lot.

It might also help to have a look at this book. It goes into granular detail with some amazing maps of the various soil types within Bordeaux (there are a lot more than gravel and clay). It is worth noting that the various appellations do not necessarily fall along lines where soil changes. So you can’t generalize (at least not with any precision) and say that St. Estephe tastes like this or St. Julien tastes like that. Margaux is often described as floral, Pauillac has tobacco, etc, but each chateau has its own signature and I find it difficult to create any heuristic that makes me better at blind tasting between the AOCs. Would really love to hear Leve’s take on that though.

I think that you are on to something about transmission of terroir though. The patina (to borrow William’s expression) is a bit more dense on cabernet/merlot/cab franc, than it is on pinot noir. Each chateau has a signature based on when they pick, sorting, what concentration techniques are used, the quality, proportion and time spent in oak, along with myriad other choices and that signature often takes precedence over terroir, especially when the wines are young. Having said all that, there are certainly Pomerols I’ve enjoyed that leave the impression of clay!

FIFY

I understand that one of the differences between Bordeaux and Burgundy is the options that are open to estates. Take Meyney in St Estèphe for instance, a property that many consider to be on the up. Within the vineyard they have fine gravels and cooler black sand soils. They have Cabernet, Merlot and Petit Verdot to match against those soils however, and sufficient resources to select a first and second wine. You could argue that the producer can therefore maximise what the terroir is offering.

In Burgundy would the cooler soils perhaps be the village wines and the gravels the crus? Perhaps the producer is therefore doing the job already done by AC system in Burgundy.

There is plenty of terroir in the medoc. Case and point - you just play hide and seek to find a resemblance of terroir in the Napa valley for the same grape/blend. The mountains help. As someone above planted out above. There is much more slope in burgundy.

Whilst being British I would love to take the credit for all that is great in the Medoc, unfortunately we lost it at Castillon in 1453, so will have to give the French the kudos for calling in the Dutch.

This.

And arguably even better, the blue clay in Pomerol, home to some of my fave wines.

Pardon the laziness of just quoting, but easy enough to just cut and paste this write-up from Leve’s site:

However, all of the most famous estates in Pomerol are located on what is referred to as the Pomerol Plateau. Clay soils consists of very small particles which unlike gravel soils, have the ability to retain water. These small particles also allow the soil to expand and contract, allowing the vines to easily penetrate the soil, searching for nutrients.

The best clay soils are the most compact and dense, which makes it difficult for the vine roots to penetrate. This is what takes place in the famous blue clay soils found at Petrus.

In Pomerol, there are several types of clay found in the soils. But the famous blue clay of Petrus is considered the best terroir in Pomerol. The button or circle of blue clay resides in an inexact circle in the north east corner of the Pomerol plateau.

This blue clay only exists with this much scale at Petrus. No other vineyard in the world has that wealth of blue clay. The blue clay is incredibly dense, making it almost impossible for the vines to penetrate. Petrus is the only Pomerol producer with close to 100% of their vines centered on buttonhole of Smectite clay.

However, other estates located in the general vicinity have some of their vines planted on that small area of blue clay as well including; Vieux Chateau Certan and Chateau LEvangile. However, as you can see from the photograph, the top soil in Pomerol as well as in St. Emilion, are often littered with small stones of quartz, gravel and various other rocks and pebbles.

Another way to look at the differences in clay versus gravel or sandy soil in Pomerol is to compare the finished product. Generally speaking, the denser the clay, the richer and more concentrated the wine. Pomerol from gravel based soils usually creates a slightly lighter, more finesse styled, fresher, brighter wine. The lightest wine from Pomerol comes from the areas with sandy soils.


Read more at:> Learn everything about the Soil, Terroir and Climate of Bordeaux

A unique wine, by the way, is La Conseillante. Part of its vineyards are in the St Emilion ridge where most of its Cab Franc is grown, then it has some blue clay as well for the merlot. I love this Chateau, it’s rarely a powerhouse, tends to be more elegant and lifted, perfumed, over most of its Pomerol peers. I assume that’s the Cab Franc cut in the wine.

It was used for raising farm animals before mid-17th century. Hard to raise animals if the land is underwater.

Jane Anson’s Inside Bordeaux has terrifically detailed maps that help show type of soil and substrate across all of the Bordeaux regions. Two things become pretty apparent when looking at the maps: many estates are big, with multiple plots that are not necessarily contiguous, and they generally cover many different terrains types. So it’s difficult to speak of individual terroir for many Estates, except in special exceptions like Petrus, as mentioned by Robert.

Both are true. It’s a big place

I found Anson’s review of the terroir of bdx fascinating and seemed like a fresh perspective. I would also recommend this book.

There certainly are terroir differences in Bordeaux. But, Bordeaux is comprised a lot of wines made on a much larger scale (in many cases 20,000 cases or more) from much larger parcels of land and not from small plots of land. As a result, comparing one Bordeaux to another is more like comparing one Burgundy village to another, not one Burgundy vineyard to another (this can be less true on the right bank where estates are smaller). Also, while Burgundies can vary someone because of thing other than terroir - e.g., weather, oak, farming decisions, types of pinot noir in the vineyard, etc. - there are more things other than terroir that can influence the tastes of various Bordeaux. Most significantly, Bordeaux producers use several wine varieties - Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Cabernet Franc, Malbec and Petit Verdot. Red Burgundy is all Pinot Noir. And, many more Bordeaux estates are owned by banks and insurance companies while more Burgundy producers are still individuals or families. Banks and insurance companies tend to make more conservative decisions and therefore less distinctive wines. Then, Bordeaux seems to have been more influenced by “modern” consultants like Rolland whose winemaking philosophies tend to make wines less distinctive. Some Burgundy estates have flirted with such consultants, but they are much more widely rejected there today.

Finally, anyone who buys Burgundy based primarily on terroir rather than producer is gong to be disappointed a lot. Many Burgundy newcomers often find say a Clos Vougeot at a cheaper price from a producer who they do not know, thinking they have “found” a bargain - look at me, I got a Clos Vougeot for only $xxx. They often learn to their regret that a villages level wine from an excellent producer often is by far the better value and better wine. So, even in Burgundy, look for producer then terroir.