FRANCO BIONDI SANTI IS FRANK WITH WINENEWS: “ROSSO DI MONTALCINO MUST CHANGE ITS IDENTITY. BRUNELLO, INSTEAD, MUST REMAIN 100% SANGIOVESE”. THE MAN WHO RUNS THE HISTORIC LABEL THAT INVENTED BRUNELLO WANTS THE ROSSO DI MONTALCINO DISCIPLINARY CHANGED

“Rosso di Montalcino must change its identity, with a modification of the disciplinary that would allow it to mix Sangiovese with the few other varietals that have roots in the territory. Instead, Brunello must remain 100% Sangiovese”. This is the idea that Franco Biondi Santi (who has run for the past forty years the historic winery that actually invented Brunello di Montalcino in the 1800’s) proposed in a recent interview with WineNews.

It is an idea (by a man whose Brunello di Montalcino Riserva Biondi Santi 1955 is the only Italian wine to make it onto the 12 wines of the century list by the cult American magazine Wine Spectator) that makes up one of the proposals in the debate over whether to modify the Brunello di Montalcino disciplinary that currently requires the use of solely Sangiovese grapes.

“Not all of the areas of Montalcino have a vocation for Sangiovese” - explained Biondi Santi - “and Brunello must be respected. Unfortunately, over the years and on the wave of its success, there has been both speculation and error made, even in good faith. In the 1960’s there were about sixty hectares of Brunello, today, there are 2,000.

“Now, rather than discussing a modification of the Brunello DOCG disciplinary, which must remain what it already is, pure Sangiovese” - continued Biondi Santi - “that of the Rosso di Montalcino should be re-discussed: non longer a pure Sangiovese, but a mix with other varietals cultivated in Montalcino, possibly just a few, in percentages to be studied and then stabilized with clarity, that could express the typicality of the territory, giving value to the other wine producers whose lands are not particularly adapted for Sangiovese, but who, regardless, can meet the tastes requested by a part of the global market. This should be a possibility that is exploited, not a situation to be withstood. Rosso di Montalcino must no longer be seen as a ‘little brother’ but as a ‘different twin’ to Brunello.

“As Angelo Gaja rightly said, on the one hand there are those who have the land adapted for Sangiovese and the vineyards enrolled under the Brunello consortium, on the other hand, those who are only enrolled without the right terrain, because it is too low or with a non-optimum exposure. This does not mean that these lands do not have any typicality to express, but they should do it in a different way. And they are terrains that have made up, however, the history of Brunello, not because they made the best wines, but the most ‘ready’ wines.

“My suggestion” - concluded Biondi Santi - “is not, therefore, to modify the disciplinary for Brunello, or even to make two Brunellos - a traditional one with Sangiovese and a more modern one with other varietals - because it would lose its identity, which was created through the encounter between a particular clone of Sangiovese (Brunello) and with the territory of Montalcino. Instead, a new role must be found for Rosso di Montalcino, by opening the disciplinary, thus giving more value to both Brunello with its historic origin, as well as Rosso, which could express other typicality and other potential for Montalcino, which remains an important name that is not just linked to Sangiovese alone. This could also bring about a change in prices, probably higher for both Brunello and Rosso, even though this would be determined by the politics of each producer”.