Sometimes, when I have a wine in my glass that I have never tasted in the past, I think about how the quality – or rather, the concept of quality – has changed over the course of my thirty years of tasting. This does not happen when I taste a wine that I already know, I think to know or recognize, because, in those cases, it is a bit like meeting an old friend and talking about the time that has passed meanwhile. In those cases I think about how that wine has changed compared to the last time I tasted it, considerations that – inevitably – involve many factors, for example the vintage, its progress, the agronomist who worked or works in the vineyard and the winemaker. In those cases, of course, I also consider the quality, but in a different way, that is, comparing it with that of past vintages, trusting in what I can recall from my memory. Often the change in quality is evident – for better or worse – after all this also happens with “old friends”, as over time we all grow up and, inevitably, change.

 The quality of wine. A concept which is often subjective, changing over time, despite various attempts to form an objective and shared definition, only acceptable in the sphere and context in which it is created, developed and shared. This applies to any context and sphere, not just wine. Then there is the quality made up solely of many beautiful words – and in wine it is very frequent – that if you do not understand it or do not support it, it is because you do not understand anything about wine and are inexorably considered incompetent, evidently an asleep follower of who knows what occult and conspiratorial sect. A phenomenon, this, increasingly frequent in recent years, also thanks to the growing number of know-it-all experts who pop up like mushrooms out of nowhere and woe betide anyone who contradicts them. In the past, I admit, in these cases I used to support my idea of quality – with the indispensable condition of civil and constructive dialogue – now I am much less so. After all, if someone is happy with their concept of wine quality and appreciates the wines that express it, this is fine with me and I don't object: as long as those wines do not end up in my glass, it is fine, we are all happy and content.

 During all these years spent tasting wines – both in “rigorous” contexts and in informal, friendly and relaxed ones – the concept of wine quality has changed many times. In some cases, no less, contradicting or radically modifying what until a few years earlier was considered indisputable. When I began to be into wine, so to speak, in a more conscious and rigorous way – it was the beginning of the 1990s – Italy had just emerged from the very serious scandal of “methanol wine”, an event that, undoubtedly, marked the Italian viticultural and winemaking system and in a decidedly profound way. They were still trying to put back together the rubble of a seriously compromised system – at least in terms of credibility – and we considered with undisguised contempt any wine that expressed a certain coarseness that recalled some superficial, approximate and clearly careless winemaking techniques. They were defined with contempt – I could say, unanimously and shared – wines of the peasant referring – it must be clarified – not as an offense to the noble work of those who cultivate the land, but rather to a product that was unfortunately mediocre as well as clearly defective, the result of undeniably rude or, no less, dubious winemaking practices.

 It was, at that time, a decidedly despicable “epithet”, something that would make you even smile at those faults so “rough” and coarse, yet confident in the path that was being built towards a new quality that would allow anyone to avoid certain “enological faults”. That path has been very effective indeed, so much to allow the majority of producers to make wines of good quality, often excellent, free from those embarrassing faults, obvious result of enological inexperience and incompetence. Over the years – I would say, practically recent history – the meaning of that definition has drastically changed, so much so that today, for many “enthusiasts”, the definition of “wine of the peasant” is exactly equivalent to the highest expression of enological quality as well as immaculate genuineness in every aspect and not only enological ones. How times change. Those faults so “embarrassing and crude” – for me, they are still this – have instead become the indisputable proof of the impeccable quality and the purest expression of the territory, of the grapes and of the honesty of those who make it. How times change.

 Let's be clear: high quality wines are produced in great numbers and everywhere, however, compared to a few years ago, there has also been an increase in wines with faults that one imagined would no longer be found in the glass and, worse, on the nose. A sort of return to the past and, we all know this, in past times everything was much better and how lucky our grandparents were to have lived through those fantastic “better” times, including the related living conditions that were not exactly comfortable and prosperous. One might just say “oh dear! There are not those beautiful faults of the past anymore!” Nothing is lost: they exist, indeed they exist and even much worse ones. I stopped getting angry about the non-quality of wine a long time ago, however I am always surprised to note that certain faults, embarrassing to me, are in reality considered by many to be very particular and amazing qualities. I have also stopped wondering whether the “strange one” is really me, given that I am unable to appreciate certain “qualitative finesses”. Which I don't rule out, of course. Our ancestors used to say de gustibus non est disputandum, however, with all the due respect, I don't dispute about them as long as those “enological delicacies” are in someone else's glass and far from mine.

 I however continue to be surprised when I am forced to pour wines with embarrassing and gross faults in the glass, which go well beyond haziness and show a disturbing and thick cloudiness, no less, flaunting, without any shame, aromas that I have a hard time defining as “faults” as the only possible definition is “abominable stench”. It is such a hard taster life. But when it is necessary – alas – professionalism takes over, reluctantly “putting a good face on a bad situation”. In those cases, I wonder how can it be possible to regress so much in qualitative and enological terms, after all these years in which so much has been done for the quality of wine, with a sharing and spreading of enological techniques and knowledge that is practically accessible to anyone and as has never happened before. Even to those who, stubbornly, make obscene wines in the apotheosis of the most embarrassing faults, even managing to be proud of them. I continue to think, even after all these years spent studying and tasting wine, that Émile Peynaud – the famous French enologist, indisputable father of modern wine quality – was right and continues to be right. One of his famous quotes has always accompanied me and, even today, I find it to be absolutely true and current: «It is you (consumers) who in a certain sense make quality. If there are bad wines it is precisely because there are bad drinkers. Taste conforms to the crudeness of the intellect: everyone drinks the wine he or she deserves».

 Latium and Abruzzo, two important regions of central Italy, in addition to having bordering territories, also share some grapes with which they make wines. Not many, in truth, considering that – as a matter of fact – the vineyards of the respective regions are mainly cultivated with native varieties and not present in the other. There are exceptions, of course, as in both are found grapes in common. These are, not least, also so-called international varieties, often used blended with local grapes as well as for the production of monovarietal wines, including the composition of Denominazione d'Origine Controllata (Denomination of Controlled Origin, DOC) wines. Latium and Abruzzo are characterized by an interesting variety of white and red wines, with an evident and significant qualitative development that has mainly occurred in recent decades.

 It should be noted that, both in Latium and Abruzzo, wine production was in the past mainly characterized by wines that met the criteria of bulk production, wines for mass consumption, with immediate and modest characteristics. The change, for both regions, began in the 1990s, by paying greater attention on quality production, a trend that has progressively affected the respective territories and denominations, allowing Latium and Abruzzo to emerge with wines of excellent value and winemaking interest. The change began, both in Latium and Abruzzo, with the revaluation and the improvement of viticultural and winemaking management of local varieties, today not only cornerstones of winemaking in the two regions, but also important representatives of the Italian one. This month's tasting by contrast will examine two red grapes of primary importance in the panorama of red wines in the respective regions: Cesanese for Latium, Montepulciano for Abruzzo.

 Cesanese del Piglio – or simply, Piglio – is the only Denominazione d'Origine Controllata e Garantita red wine (Denomination of Controlled and Guaranteed Origin, DOCG) in Latium. Produced in the municipality of the same name in the province of Frosinone – therefore in the southern part of the region – Piglio is certainly the most famous wine produced with the Cesanese grape. It should be noted that, in addition to Piglio, in Latium there are two other Denominazione d'Origine Controllata territories in which wines based on Cesanese are produced: Cesanese di Affile and Cesanese di Olevano Romano, both in the province of Rome. As regards the grapes used for the production of this wine, it should be noted that there are two varieties referable to the same name: Cesanese Comune, typical of the province of Frosinone and always identified with the town of Anagni, and Cesanese d'Affile, originating from the municipality of the same name in the province of Rome. According to the production disciplinary, Piglio is produced with both varieties – alone or together – for a minimum of 90% and the remaining possible quota represented by red grapes permitted in the Latium region.

 Both Cesanese Comune and Cesanese di Affile are considered native varieties of Latium and are supposed to have been used for wine production since ancient Roman times. The Piglio area has a long history of viticulture – probably since ancient Roman times – and the Statutes of the Land of Piglio, issued on May 30, 1479, refer to many chapters of areas to be used for vineyard cultivation, as well as establishing the harvest period and the rules for marketing the wine. Cesanese del Piglio was recognized as a Denominazione d'Origine Cntrollata in 1973, while in 2008 it was recognized as a DOCG, Denominazione d'Origine Controllata e Garantita. The disciplinary provides for three styles of red, defined as “base”, “superiore” and “riserva”, the latter reserved only for wines that have aged for at least 20 months, of which 6 in the bottle. As far as aging is concerned, the disciplinary does not provide for specific procedures or containers, but does allow the use of wooden barrels, a practice – this last one – among the most used for the production of Cesanese del Piglio.

 Montepulciano – the grape and the wine made fro it  is undeniably the primary ambassador of Abruzzo winemaking. A red grape with a strong personality, rebellious and surly, decidedly vinous, it requires the utmost attention and expertise to make great wines, a result that in Abruzzo is strongly confirmed by the many beautiful bottles produced with this grape. In the distant past, Montepulciano was mainly used as a blending grape, suitable for making wines mainly intended to give color and structure to the weaker ones, and not only in Abruzzo. Thanks to careful enological re-evaluation and valorization, not least, the work of tenacious and visionary producers, Montepulciano today is undeniably among the great grapes of Italian and Abruzzo winemaking, capable of making wines of notable quality and not only in this region.

 Montepulciano d'Abruzzo is now recognized as a Denominazione d'Origine Controllata wine (Denomination of Controlled Origin, DOC), including – moreover – the sub-zones Terre dei Vestini, Alto Tirino, Terre dei Peligni, Teate, Colline Pescaresi, Terre Aquilane or Terre de L'Aquila, San Martino sulla Marrucina and Terre di Chieti. To these is added Montepulciano d'Abruzzo Colline Teramane, today recognized as a territory with Denominazione d'Origine Controllata e Garantita (Denomination of Controlled and Guaranteed Origin, DOCG), just like Casauria, once a sub-zone of the DOC. The wines belonging to the Montepulciano d'Abruzzo denomination, in accordance with its production disciplinary, are made with the homonymous grape for at least 85% and any remaining quota represented by grapes admitted to cultivation in Abruzzo. Furthermore, the disciplinary do not provide for specific practices for aging, except in the riserva style, for which the use of wood barrels is mandatory. The tendency of the producers of Montepulciano d'Abruzzo – therefore not the riserva style – is in any case to carry out the aging in casks, however noting that, in any case, wines aged in inert containers are produced as well.

Il colore del Montepulciano d'Abruzzo

 The bottles that we will pour into the glasses of our tasting by contrast should not present any particular difficulties in finding them. Montepulciano d'Abruzzo is certainly the easiest to find, even in large-scale distribution. Cesanese del Piglio, although it is increasingly frequent on the shelves of wine shops, could present a certain difficulty and, probably, more difficult to find it in large-scale distribution. As always, by relying on a well-stocked wine shop, it will be possible to find both Montepulciano d'Abruzzo and Cesanese del Piglio. For both wines, as the respective production disciplinary provide for the use of many grapes, we will make sure they are both exclusively made from the respective primary grapes. For Cesanese del Piglio, a bottle mainly or exclusively made with Cesanese d'Affile will be preferred. As for aging, and considering the most common choice of the majority of producers, we will choose wines aged in casks and belonging to the most recent vintage available. The wines are poured into tasting glasses at a temperature of 18 °C (65 °F).

 Let's pour Cesanese del Piglio and Montepulciano d'Abruzzo into their respective glasses and begin this month's tasting by contrast, starting with the evaluation of the appearance of the wine from Latium. We place the glass tilted over a white surface – a sheet of paper and adequate lighting are sufficient – then we observe the base. The color of Cesanese del Piglio is an intense ruby red and, by placing an object in contrast between the glass and the white surface, we can observe a low transparency. We now shift our attention to the opening of the glass – where the thickness of the wine is thin – and observe the color of the nuance. In this case too, a ruby red color with purple hints can be seen. We now move on to evaluating the appearance of Montepulciano d'Abruzzo and observe the base of the glass tilted over the white surface. The color is ruby red with a low transparency, not so different from the wine from Latium. The same color, ruby red, is observed in its nuance.

 The aromas of Cesanese del Piglio and Montepulciano d'Abruzzo are mainly characterized by sensations recalling red and black pulp fruits, as well as aromas recalling the world of flowers. The wines produced with the Cesanese Comune and Cesanese d'Affile grapes express to the nose aromas of black cherry, as well as cherry, plum, blueberry and raspberry, in addition to aromas of violet and cyclamen as regards the sensations attributable to the world of flowers. The olfactory profile of the wines produced with Montepulciano – therefore also that of Abruzzo – is decidedly more vinous and on the nose can be appreciated aromas of black cherry, blueberry and plum, while for the flowers, the main aromas are those of violet and, sometimes, rose. In the specific case of the wines in our tasting by contrast – Cesanese del Piglio and Montepulciano d'Abruzzo – considering the common tendency of the aging in cask, from the glass will also be perceived aromas that wood and time normally give to wines. Not only vanilla, the most frequent of such aromas, but also more pungent spices, such as black pepper, more frequent in Cesanese.

 Let's resume this month's tasting by contrast and proceed with the analysis of the olfactory profiles of Cesanese del Piglio and Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, starting – as in the previous phase – with the Latium wine. We keep the glass in a vertical position and, without swirling, we do the first smell in order to evaluate the opening of the wine, that is, its primary and identifying aromas. From the glass we can perceive intense and pleasing sensations of black cherry, cherry, plum and raspberry, as well as the floral scent of violet. We now swirl the glass, an operation favoring the development of the remaining aromas, and do the second smell. The olfactory profile of Cesanese del Piglio is completed with blueberry, blackberry, rose and cyclamen, in addition to the aromas attributable to the aging in wood. Let's now move on to the analysis of the opening of Montepulciano d'Abruzzo and do the first smell. From the glass can be appreciated, intense and clean, the aromas of black cherry, plum and blueberry, in addition to violet, with a character a little more vinous than the Cesanese del Piglio. After swirling the glass and doing the second smell, the profile of the Abruzzo wine is completed with blackberry, raspberry and rose, in addition to the typical aromas of the aging in wood.

 Let's now move on to the evaluation of the gustatory profiles of our wines, starting, as in the previous phases, with Cesanese del Piglio. Let's start by evaluating the attack of the wine, that is, the primary gustatory sensations that are perceived in the mouth after the first sip. Cesanese del Piglio expresses in the mouth a quite perceptible but not excessive astringency, balanced both by the effect of alcohol and by the aging in wood, in addition to the crispness, conferred by the acidity, decidedly modest. In the mouth, moreover, are perceived the flavors of cherry, plum and raspberry, in addition to good structure. Let's now move on to the evaluation of the attack of Montepulciano d'Abruzzo, so let's take a sip of this wine. In the mouth, it is appreciated for the good astringency of the tannins – not very different from that of Cesanese – immediately balanced by the effect of alcohol and aging in wood, with a crispness usually more accentuated than Cesanese, also in this case with good structure. Moreover, in the mouth can be perceived the flavors of black cherry, blueberry and plum.

 We are now at the final stage of our tasting by contrast, so after having swallowed the wines, we proceed with the evaluation of their taste-olfactory persistence. The finish of Cesanese del Piglio is persistent, leaving in the mouth clean flavors of cherry – as well as black cherry – plum and raspberry, with good agreeableness well supported by a proper structure. We can also continue to perceive a moderate astringency, still finding balance with the effect of the alcohol and aging. The finish of the Montepulciano d'Abruzzo is equally persistent, leaving in the mouth intense flavors of black cherry, blueberry and plum, in addition to its typical vinous character that combines with the overall agreeableness. In the mouth we can also continue to perceive the pleasing and proper astringency balanced by the alcohol, in addition to a moderate sensation of crispness conferred by the acidity, more intense than the Cesanese. We proceed with the final smell of the two wines, first the Cesanese del Piglio and then the Montepulciano d'Abruzzo: the olfactory differences – although with some qualities in common – are still distant and distinct.

 In this section are published news and information about events concerning the world of wine and food. Whoever is interested in publishing this kind of information can send us a mail to our address.