Cannubi and its neighbouring vineyards with the name starting with Cannubi can all be legally named as Cannubi. There isn’t much info to tell the customers which producer’s parcel is in which sub-vineyard. Shall we make a comprehensive list for the sake of customers?
Looks like a very incomplete list to me and with several typing mistakes. What’s your source?
From the book of Masnaghetti, owners of Cannubi proper:
Elio Altare
F.lli Barale
G. Borgogno
Serio e B. Borgogno
Francesco Boschis
G. Brezza
G. Camerano
Cascina Adelaide
Michele Chiarlo
Damilano
Marchesi di Barolo
B. Mascarello
E. Pira
Luigi Einaudi
F. Rinaldi
Paolo Scavino
Tenuta Carretta
others
Have a listen to the Levi Dalton podcast interview with Ian d’Agata. Cannubi is the first cru he dives into and he spends a good 10 minutes talking about the soil differences of the different parts and how they affect the style of the wines. All very interesting
I think there is consensus that Cannubi proper is different and “better” than the other parts which also carry the name Cannubi (+something else).
Current rules allow people who make wine from grapes coming from the satellite vineyards to also call the wine just “Cannubi”.
A group of wine producers have opposed to this decision, and the issue will be decided by a court.
Thank you for the link but the issue had not yet been settled fully by then. I just did a quick web search and found out that the final court decision has been taken in November last year, unfortunately confirming the less restrictive use of Cannubi on the label. So a Cannubi-Muscatel can be called just Cannubi. Here the link for those who can read Italian:
Note that several wine producers who asked for a restrictive use of the name Cannubi do not own parcels in Cannubi proper. The legal history of the case is:
1st court: for restrictive use
The ministry of agriculture appeals against the decision
2nd court: against restrictive use
the group of wine producers appeals against the decision
3rd and final court: confirms decision of the 2nd court.
Within the “pure” Cannubi boundaries, as officially defined, there are significant variations in altitude and exposure.
When Slow Food published its Wine Atlas of the Langhe in 2000, giving its geographic definitions for the great crus based on extensive interviews with winemakers and oldtimers, it drew the Cannubi boundaries more narrowly than those adopted later for the vineyard’s legal definition. (It also distinguished Boschi and Muscadel, et al.)
The Atlas states that the lowest portion of the hill, adjacent to the main Alba-Barolo road (orange arrow at the left in the photo below), was used for grazing land or for corn many years ago. Then it was planted to fruit trees. Now nebbiolo is planted. That’s at only about 220 meters elevation and plainly isn’t prime vineyard land. I can’t think of any well-reputed vineyard in Barolo or Barbaresco that reaches much below 250 meters.
As you can see from the topographic lines in the map above and the photo below, there are parts of Cannubi proper that face northwest and northeast.
The photo was taken looking southwest. The officially defined vineyard spans the area between Alba-Barolo road at the left and the smaller road along the ridge, just behind the house. As you can see, there is a large slope with a relatively even southeast exposition.
But the official Cannubi also includes the northwest-facing portion behind the house, just over the crest of the hill, indicated with the red arrow, as well as the northeast-facing vineyard at the near right in the photo, indicated with the yellow arrow. The latter is rather steeply inclined, so would get much less sun than the main slope, or than the relatively flat area at the ridge under the red arrow.
The Slow Food Cannubi excludes the part under the yellow arrow and the immediately adjacent part of the northwest-facing slope indicated with the blue arrow.
Thanks for the remarks, John. I went to reread the Atlas section on Cannubi and it is exactly as you summarized. There, as usual, they quote some of the old experts (who may very well be unknown nowadays).
In Masnaghetti’s book, there is also a description of the different sectors within Cannubi proper, and he also states that the best part is the one facing Barolo, which has a south-east exposure.
It’s interesting to read also his description of the other Cannubi-something vineyards.
I think the section on Cannubi in the Slow Food Atlas is longer than that for any other vineyard.
I just came on this map by Masnaghetti for the central ~15 hectares of Cannubi on a site with an article about who owns which plot. The article points out that there are omissions from this map (e.g., Burlotto) and that the reported holdings don’t add up, but it’s a useful start. The arrows indicate which direction the hill is facing at that point. The map is about 45 degrees off the compass, so up on the map is roughly northwest.
It appears from this that Serio & Battista Borgogno own that northeast-facing portion.
Concerning Burlotto: the article says that perhaps his parcel is hidden among the “privati”, which is possible. On the other hand Masnaghetti reports that Burlotto has a parcel in Cannubi Valletta, which could be all Burlotto owns in Cannubi. It would be interesting to find out…
Kerin O’Keefe, in her book on Barolo and Barbaresco, devotes several pages to the fight over the official boundaries, though I guess that’s out of date with the last court ruling. In her section on Burlotto, she says that Burlotto’s Cannubi plot is in fact in Valletta.
