Understanding Montepulciano

Montepulciano
is, in some ways, the “Sangiovese” of central Italy east of
the Apennines. Though the growing habit of Montepulciano and
its resulting wine differ greatly from the growing habit and
wines of Sangiovese, it is in the same league as Sangiovese
as far as its dominance in the areas where it prevails. In
the same way that Sangiovese lords over Tuscany,
Montepulciano lords over Abruzzi. While Emilia-Romagna and
Umbria producers are clearly allied to Sangiovese, producers
in Marches and Molise clearly favor Montepulciano.
Montepulciano, like Sangiovese, makes both inexpensive and
expensive wine. What Montepulciano lacks is the prestige and
international popularity of Sangiovese’s blue chip
appellations, namely Vino Nobile di Montepulciano (a
Sangiovese-dominated wine without the Montepulciano grape
variety in its wine blend), Chianti Classico, and, most
importantly, Brunello di Montalcino. There are, however,
Montepulciano appellations on the way up, particularly,
Colline Teramane, a DOCG in northern Abruzzi, and the
Montepulciano-dominated Rosso Conero on the central Adriatic
coastline of the Marches. There are many acknowledged
masters of Sangiovese in Tuscany: Soldera, Isole e Olena,
San Giusto a Rentennano, to name a few. Though Montepulciano
masters are few, their numbers are growing. Valentini, a
perfectionist producer in Abruzzi, comes first in my list
and in many others. Working on a larger scale and having a
more pervasive influence is Masciarelli. Moroder, a small
producer, was key in establishing the quality image of the
tiny Rosso Conero appellation.

By many accounts,
Sangiovese is more difficult to grow than Montepulciano.
Sangiovese, farmed properly in a stony soil with adequate
water and moderate heat, makes perfumed, elegant wine. As
vineyard conditions stray from this profile, making
excellent Sangiovese becomes more and more difficult.
Montepulciano’s most highly reputed sites, Colline Teramane
in Abruzzi and Rosso Conero in the Marches, have relatively
stoneless soils composed of calcareous clay with lesser
amounts of sand and silt. But fine Montepulciano wine can
also be made in sandier, siltier and stonier sites. During
the growing season, areas planted with Montepulciano
typically experience less precipitation and similar, if not
warmer, temperatures than those planted with Sangiovese.
Sangiovese rarely produces excellent wine along the
seacoast. Inland elevations between 25O to 45O meters tend
to be ideal. Most Montepulciano vineyards, on the other
hand, lie within a 3O minute drive of the Adriatic coast.
Despite this coastal inclination, historians and scientists
believe that the variety evolved in an inland site with a
continental climate. An historian writing in the 18th
century mentions the variety growing in the valley of
Peligna nestled in the Apennine Mountains. A handful of
producers near this valley, notably Cataldi Madonna and
Valle Reale, show that Montepulciano can be ripened
regularly and successfully. It is a common story in Italy,
that the era of phylloxera, which occurred at the end of the
19th century and the beginning of the 2Oth, induced
producers to move their vineyards from the
difficult-to-cultivate hills to the plains at lower
elevations where yields are higher and more regular. This
scenario also likely occurred in Abruzzi.

Sangiovese and
Montepulciano play very different roles in wine blends.
Sangiovese adds fresh cherry fruit aromas, acidity and a
bitter-astringent texture. Montepulciano adds depth of color
and soft astringent texture. Sangiovese is an important
addition in Rosso Piceno wines and lesser percentages are
usually blended into inexpensive Montepulciano d’Abruzzo. It
is illegal to use Montepulciano in Tuscany’s DOCG wines, but
rumors are ever-present that it finds its way into these
wines, particularly in difficult vintages.

Because the trend to make
high quality Montepulciano wine is only about ten-years-old,
there is less known about Montepulciano than Sangiovese
which has been in the spotlight since the 198Os. No one
knows the Montepulciano variety better than the leading
Italian consulting agronomists and enologists who have the
chance to compare and contrast results at and from different
locations. To learn more myself, I selected ten and asked
them each ten questions.

Before presenting their
answers, here are brief descriptions of the consultants’
activities related to Montepulciano wine production.
Riccardo Cotarella from Latium consults for Conte Leopardi
Dittajuti, located in Numana near Ancona in the Marches.
This estate produces Rosso Conero. He looks after Terre
Cortesi Moncaro in Montecaratto in Ancona. Rosso Conero and
Rosso Piceno are on products list there. Another client in
the Marches province of Ascoli Piceno is Villa Pigna. In
Abruzzi, Cotarella has two clients in the province of
Teramo, Villa Medoro at Atri and Monti at Controguerra.
Lorenzo Landi of Tuscany consults for Cataldi Madonna in
Abruzzi. Malandrini is the signature Montepulciano there. In
the Marches, Marchetti, Laila and Montecappone are his
clients. Alberto Antonini of Tuscany guides Saladini
Pilastri in the Marches. Vigna Monteprandone, a Rosso Piceno
Superiore, is the top Montepulciano at this estate. Donato
Lanati is an enologist who comes from Piedmont. His
consulting company is called Enosis. He follows Cantina
Montori di Controguerra in the province of Teramo in
Abruzzi. The outstanding Montepulciano wine of this estate
is called “Fontecupa”. Carlo Ferrini and Gioia Cresti, both
from Tuscany, follow Valle Reale, an estate in an inland
valley in Abruzzi. “San Calisto” is the star wine here. Luca
D’Attoma, from Tuscany, consults for Fattoria La Valentina
in Abruzzi. The outstanding Montepulciano wines of this
estate are “Spelt” and “Bellovedere”. Attilio Pagli from
Tuscany consults for Velenosi, an estate in the Marches.
Velenosi makes “Poggio del Filare” and for Fattoria Le
Terrazze in the Rosso Conero zone. Its “Sassi Neri” is its
best example of Rosso Conero. Stefano Chioccioli, also
Tuscan, has followed Fratelli Barba in province of Teramo in
Abruzzi since the 2OO4 vintage. “Vigna Franca” is the top
wine there. Valerio Barbieri from Tuscany is the consulting
agronomist for Illuminati in the Colline Teramane zone of
Abruzzi. Danieli Cernilli, co-director of Gambero Rosso,
identifies Illuminati’s “Zanna” as classic Colline
Teramane.

The first question I asked
each was, “Is Montepulciano a maritime or continental
variety? If a continental variety, what altitude above sea
level does it prefer?” This question presumes the
understanding that continental climates feature greater
summer-winter and day-night temperature variation than
coastal areas. Terrain at higher elevations above sea level
typically exhibits continental characteristics. The
temperature of a sea or ocean moderates land
temperatures.

Antonini and Lanati have
different opinions. Antonini mentions that Montepulciano
“does well in areas rather warm, not too high in elevation,
nor too cool . . . along the coast is good because the
climate is milder there. One hundred to 25O meters above sea
level works well.” Lanati asserts that it is “a continental
vine variety and prefers an altitude of 2OO to 5OO meters
above sea level.” The other answers are somewhere between.
All mention the highly adaptive nature of the variety.
Chioccioli and Barbieri both agree that although the variety
is principally continental that it adapts well to lower
elevation maritime sites. Chioccioli says between 2OO and
4OO meters is best while Barbieri mentions between 2OO and
3OO meters. Chioccioli says that, while the variety produces
more polyphenols and more aromatic compounds at continental
sites, its early ripening period at lower elevations allows
it to ripen before fall rains and hence avoid botrytis
problems. Pagli mentions that although it is principally
planted in maritime sites, “it also expresses itself well in
climates more continental, usually between 25O and 3OO
meters above sea level.” Landi and Cotarella both emphasize
that Montepulciano adapts to both maritime and continental
climates. Landi says, “Maritime sites produce opulent and
fat wine. Continental sites produce fresher and less opulent
wine.” Landi finds this fresh lean style at elevations up to
4OO to 5OO meters above sea level. Cotarella believes that
Montepulciano excels in “hillside sites which receive the
beneficial effects of the sea”, i.e., gets the best of both
worlds. Ferrini and Cresti say more or less the same thing,
that Montepulciano is “neither maritime nor continental”.
They point out that it needs “a high degree of temperature
excursion” and this can be realized “near the sea or
inland”. “Montepulciano”, they say, “gives its best
expression at 3OO to 4OO meters above sea level in areas
that are cool and ventilated.” D’Attoma recognizes that
Montepulciano “prefers climates with maritime influence of
the Mediterranean type” but that “it can also be grown in
high hills (3OO meters above sea level or higher), in zones
with hot microclimates, with expositions to the south and
soils which reflect heat and light.”

My second question was,
“Montepulciano is considered a low acid variety. Is this
true?” Do the consultants have a different opinion? Only
D’Attoma seems to think that the wines are generally low in
acidity. Lanati accords it a normal range: “With
Montepulciano, we obtain a wine with a fixed acidity between
5.OO and 6.OO grams per liter.” Chioccioli puts more detail
into his answer: “In the hills, the fixed acidity at the end
of fermentation is between 6.OO and 6.5O grams per liter.
Near the sea, the fixed acidity is lower by about 1 gram per
liter.” Pagli, Ferrini and Cresti, Cotarella, Antonini, and
Barbieri all feel that the wine normally has high acidity.
Ferrini and Cresti, Pagli, and Barbieri qualify by saying
that if the vines are pushed to yield too much fruit that
acidities can drop to low levels Lanati tells me that more
often than not the acidity is on the low side but that this
is because the vines are “cultivated in warm areas where the
acidity diminishes naturally during ripening. In the
internal areas where the altitude is rather high, the
acidity is high.”

I then asked, “What soil
types and characteristics does Montepulciano prefer?”
provoked a wide range of answers, some of them
contradictory. Many agronomists and enologists pair
varieties with soils. A classic pairing is Merlot with clay
and Sangiovese with rocky, calcareous soil. D’Attoma says,
“Montepulciano needs clay soils, better if deep and rich in
stones. ” Barbieri agrees but adds that the soil should have
some sand and silt mixed in too. Cotarella adds that the
soil should also be “moderately calcareous”. Chioccioli adds
more precision, “The best soils are mixes of sand, clay and
silt with a tendency towards clay. The active lime content
should be between 9% and 12%.” The 9% to 12% active lime
content Chioccioli mentions is not high enough to impose the
use of specialized rootstocks. Landi says that “calcareous
soils are best because they help preserve wine acidity.”
Donato Lanati on the other hand says that Montepulciano
“does not like calcareous soils.” Antonini recommends soils
which “drain well and are not too heavy.” This would exclude
clay. Pagli agrees with Antonini. Ferrini and Cresti
emphasize that the best soil is a stony one.

Key to the profession of
enologic consultancy is skill in blending. Consulting
enologists usually have blending preferences. For this
reason, I asked them, “What variety do you prefer to blend
into Montepulciano?” All of the respondents indicated that
Montepulciano was complete enough in itself not to need
blending. If they had to blend, however, Cotarella would use
Nero d’Avola; Antonini, Sangiovese; Ferrini and Cresti,
Cabernet Sauvignon; D’Attoma, Cabernet Sauvignon or Sirah;
Lanati, Sangiovese, Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon; Pagli,
Merlot; Barbieri, Merlot; and Chioccioli would use
Syrah.

My next question was, “To
what diseases is Montepulciano particularly susceptible?”
All the consultants agree that Montepulciano has good
resistance to a wide range of diseases. Oidium seems to be
the biggest problem for the variety. Barbieri says it is
very sensitive while Lanati feels the vulnerability level is
moderate. Chioccioli says that oidium is most problematic in
coastal areas. Cotarella and Landi say it is a problem, but
it can be easily controlled. Chioccioli reports that
peronspera is a problem in hilly areas (higher altitude).
Antonini and D’Attoma point at botrytis as being the
principle disease, particularly at harvest. Pagli says that
botrytis is a problem with clones that exhibit tightly
packed bunches. Cotarella mentions that Montepulciano grapes
have a tendency to shatter.

My next question was, “To
what climatic conditions is Montepulciano sensitive?”
Consultants agree that because of the long ripening period,
cold weather can be a problem. If rain and humidity also
occur the problems get worse, and during the harvest can be
a major problem, say Cotarella, D’Attoma, Ferrini and
Cresti. Barbieri went so far as to say that it does not
mature well at altitudes over 3OO meters above sea level.
Chioccioli says that the variety needs good day-night
temperature variation. He elaborates that the vine suffers
during sudden spring cold spells and if the vine is pushed
to produce too much as would be the case if planted on rich,
flat alluvial soil, the vine can easily go into hydric
stress.

“What particular problems
does Montepulciano have in the vineyard?” Chioccioli and
Cotarella are concerned about restraining the vigor.
Cotarella assesses the vigor as “moderate plus”. Pagli calls
it “a very productive variety” and warns that yield
management is difficult. Chioccioli, Cotarella and D’Attoma
urge to limit the number of the buds. Both recommend green
pruning and green harvesting. Chioccioli warns not to add
too much nitrogen to the soil. “Even reduce the supply to 2O
to 3O units per hectare and not more.” D’Attoma warns that
Montepulciano suffers from too much direct sunlight and that
it is wise to cover the grapes with foliage. Barbieri
marvels at the vine’s flexibility: “There are no particular
problems. It adapts well to all forms of training from
tendone (pergola) to cordon-spur.”

As varieties such as
Montepulciano become increasingly important commercially,
attention is brought to bear on clonal selections. I asked
the consultants, “Are clonal selections of Montepulciano
available? Have they been well-selected?” Chioccioli
mentions that some farms use estate selections derived from
the old vineyards planted around 19OO. Many clones available
today come mainly from old selections made by the
agricultural school at Ascoli Piceno. New vineyards or
vineyards where mass selection has not been consistently
applied or where the old clones are not satisfactory can
improve their potential by using clones recently developed
and tested by nurseries and research institutions. Cotarella
recommends clones such as R7 and R1OO which produce loose
bunches of medium-small size with little tendency to
shatter. Chioccioli, Ferrini and Cresti mention R7, too.
Lanati mentions R7, but also VCR1OO, VCR453, and
VCR456.

My last question was a
fundamental one. “Where is the best place for Montepulciano
and why?” Pagli mentions that since it is only recently that
producers have tried to make top class Montepulciano wine it
may be too early to come to a definite conclusion. He and
Antonini both point to Marches and Abruzzi. They believe
that the tradition of Montepulciano wines in these two areas
gives these two regions a big advantage. Ferrini and Cresti
feel that Abruzzi is the best region. Lanati mentions the
province of Teramo in Abruzzi. Cotarella mentions the DOCG
zone of Colline Teramane. Landi remarks the answer to my
question depends on the wine that one wishes to obtain. He
gets the results that he wants, high aroma wine, fine
tannins and moderate to high acidity, at Cataldi Madonna.
Antonini says that Tuscany is a good site for Montepulciano.
D’Attoma spreads his net wider than Marches and Abruzzi,
saying that excellent wines can be made in Molise, Latium
and areas of central Italy. Chioccioli casts the net even
farther south to Apulia.

These consultants and I
agree that Sangiovese is a more difficult grape to work with
than Montepulciano. The intense effort over the last thirty
years to improve Sangiovese wine has yielded definitive
results, while we are still in relative infancy concerning
our knowledge of Montepulciano. For only about a decade has
the attention of Italy’s best enological and viticultural
minds been directed at the Montepulciano variety. In another
decade’s time, Montepulciano will be much better understood
and valued.