Riesling

It appears that South Africa is finally set to recognise Riesling, rather than the lesser Crouchen Blanc, as Riesling.The long-running scandal surrounding the nomenclature of Riesling in South Africa seems to be edging towards a denouement – though it’s certain there will be a few more twists in this tale.

 

Many years ago – at least before the 1973 legislation which gave us the wine of origin regulations and at least a vestige of integrity when it came to cultivar description – the very ordinary Crouchen Blanc grape came to be called “Riesling”. It’s not certain at what point those who grew it and sold its wine discovered it wasn’t even distantly related to the real thing (the variety we in South Africa have been forced to prefix with Weisser or Rhine).

But by the late 1960s, they couldn’t have been in much doubt. After all, the first white wines to earn the coveted Wine of Origin Superior sticker were real Rieslings from Montpellier in Tulbagh in the 1970s – which suggests that someone in authority knew the difference.

By and large those who drafted the 1973 Act tried to bring an end to the blatant dishonesty of wine labelling. Thenceforth if the words “Cabernet Sauvignon” appeared on a bottle, at least a small percentage (initially just 30% rising to 75% within a few years) had to come from Cabernet grapes. This is not in itself amazing – but the fact that there was so little Cabernet about that the threshold was initially set at under one third indicates the extent to which producers had enjoyed extraordinary poetic licence.

However, when it came to Crouchen Blanc, big wholesaler interests (in other words SFW and Distillers, now all really Distell) prevailed on the authorities to “spare consumers the confusion”. In those days, Crouchen Blanc was the biggest-selling premium dry variety in the country. There was a very real risk that thousands of buyers of Theuniskraal and Nederburg Riesling (i.e. Crouchen Blanc) would be lost – or at least lost as revenue sources.

Now – under considerable pressure – the authorities have recommended that, from the 2010 vintage, real Riesling can be called just that, whereas Crouchen Blanc will have to take the prefix “Cape” if it is still to be sold under the Riesling banner. Muted joy from the small band of Riesling producers that their favourite variety won’t have to suffer the ignominy of the Rhine or Weisser prefix is (or at least should be) tinged with bitterness that Crouchen’s impostor status has, if anything, been entrenched.
The authorities argue that all over the world there are non-Riesling grapes (Olasz Riesling, Welschriesling etc) which still bathe in the reflected glory of the great (Rhine) variety. But this is not entirely true – or even comparable. “Cape” implies a Geographical Indication and buyers who don’t know better will still imagine that “Cape Riesling” is “Riesling from the Cape” – like Rhône Shiraz or Bordeaux Cabernet.

Clearly those responsible for making recommendations to the Minister are not hugely interested in drawing an unequivocal distinction between the two varieties. If their proposal wasn’t driven by a desire to accommodate vested Crouchen interests, they could have brought the cut-off date forward to the 2009 vintage. Their pusillanimity confirms something we always suspected in the bad old days when the Board issued far more Superior stickers to the big wholesale merchants than to the independent estate wine producers. Those charged with administering to the industry as independent officers of the state simply don’t have the cojones to do the job.

Michael Fridjhon is a leading wine writer and consultant. He is chairman of the Old Mutual Trophy Wine Show and has extensive international judging experience.