What does "lieux-dits" mean?

Keith,

I translate from French to English for a living, and most of the work I do is for the wine industry.
That's why I'm so insistant and, well, "pointilleux", about this.

Words have a meaning, and sometimes you just have to hammer away until you understand them.

The problem here is not so much the understanding, it's the translating.
I'm not surprised that there is so much confusion about it all!

The Rumsfeldlike statement I made above could be roughly compared to "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares". Linguistically, it makes sense, but would seem impossible to understand without an explanation by the non-geek, that's for sure!

The real challenge in translating is the fact that there is so much more to it than just words. Plus the fact that cultural factors weigh in heavily.

Best regards,
Alex R.

Alex,

Thanks for the nice words. Indeed, I'm glad that you see this as a friendly disagreement as I do as well.

There is no better guarantee comes from a particualr lieux-dit any more than there is a particular lieux-dit any more than there is a guarantee that your Clerc-Milon doesn't have some declassified Mouton, except for this.

Each parcel of land is registered with the ministre de cadastre. That is within each lieux-dit there are a bunch of subdivisions (e.g., the lieux-dit la Fourchaume has about 76 different parcels, each one with a number). Each parcel is rigidly defined. The winemakers have the full map of every vineyard they own, with their parcels highlighted, so that they know where the hell their vines are, whether it be one row or 100. And, this is how the ministre des impots determines how much tax they owe. So it is rigid.

Click here for Christian Moreau Pere et Fils Chablis parcel maps: http://www.domainechristianmoreau.com/f ... ation.html

Click on Vaillons. The dark green spot are trees at the top of a hill. The hill slopes down from NE to SW. Let's call the parcels A, B, C across the page, followed by two more D and E and then F alone by itself at the bottom.

Parcel C is in the lieux-dits les Lys. Parcels B & D are in the lieu-dit Vaillons. Parcels A, C are in the lieu-dit sur le Vaillons. E and F (if F is still within limits) are in les Epinottes. There's no problem with him bottling any of these with the lieu-dit name. (He doesn't he chooses the broader appellation name of Vaillons.) If he proposed for sale Chablis 1er Cru les Beugnons, there's a problem. If you draw a line starting from C through A and follow it up the page you're in Beugnons. Christain Moreau doesn't own Beugnons. So he can't bottle it. He can only bottle the lieux-dits he owns.

That's how we'd know. Keep in mind that we're talking ROWS of vines in Burgundy, not Hectares like in some other places such as Bordeaux. There are a set number of owners in any lieu-dit. They only own a handful of vines. The authorities would get very suspicious in a hurry if the amount of wine that a Domaine produced would either a) require it to produce 300 hl/ha (say 5 times more than expected) or b) require the domaine to own a lot more land than it does in order to make the wine at legal limits.

In total, these holdings are bout 4 hectares (large by Burgundian standards). If we do 60 hl/ha we have 240 hectoliters. There are 228 liters in a Burgundy barrel. If Moreau bottled them separately Vaillons + Sur le Vaillons + Epinottes + Secher + les Lys = approximately 24,000 liters or 105 barrels. If Moreau puts out 200 barrels, we have a problem.

As seemingly complex as the AOC system is, there are innate checks that do ensure that the laws are followed at least to some degree.

Alan,

I've just reread your e-mail.

I suppose the difference of opinion is that you consider a climat a lieu dit whereas they are not the same thing to me, i.e. do not mean the same thing in French unless I am very much mistaken.

The former is a specific terroir, a named vineyard.
The latter is a named place, and very much larger.

It is not inconceivable that a lieu dit could also be a climat, but rather unlikely.

In the example you cited above (Meursault Charmes), the sub-division of the vineyard describes a plot on a cadastral map, not a lieu dit, which would encompass it. It would not be worthy, for instance, of a small sign one sees all over France indicating a lieu-dit.

In summary, parts of vineyards are (tiny) places with names, but not named places!

As for controlling the use of named places on labels, that is something I could check with a person I know who works for the INAO if you'd like me too. I think the authorities close their eyes to the ambiguity of it all.

Best regards,
Alex R.

>> I suppose the difference of opinion is that you consider a climat a lieu >> dit whereas they are not the same thing to me, i.e. do not mean the >> same thing in French unless I am very much mistaken.

>> The former is a specific terroir, a named vineyard.
>> The latter is a named place, and very much larger.

No. we agree on that.



>> It is not inconceivable that a lieu dit could also be a climat, but rather unlikely.

On this we're somewhat in agreement, but not entirely. A climat will often encompass in its entirety a lieu-dit; sometimes it takes the exact same name, sometimes the lieu-dit is spelled just a touch differently.

The entirety of the climat Roncieres in Chablis is the lieux-dit les Roncieres; the entirety of the climat Melinots is les Minos.

>> In the example you cited above (Meursault Charmes), the sub-division of the vineyard describes a plot on a cadastral map, not a lieu dit, which would encompass it. It would not be worthy, for instance, of a small sign one sees all over France indicating a lieu-dit.

I don't cadastral maps of Meursault but I suggest that that's not rue. More than just a cdastral distinction, there's a road that divides them, and they are distinct.

If we move it to Chablis (since I do own cadastral maps of Chablis) where I have already linked to an image, the Climat Vaillons is made up of among others Sur le Vaillons and Vaillons (among others as stated avove); both Sur le Vaillons and Vaillons are listed, in the appellation laws, as distinct lieux-dits that are components of the climat Vaillons. They use the terms climat and lieux-dit.

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your replies.

A couple of messages above, I wrote:

>> I suppose the difference of opinion is that you consider a climat a lieu >> dit whereas they are not the same thing to me, i.e. do not mean the >> same thing in French unless I am very much mistaken.

>> The former is a specific terroir, a named vineyard.
>> The latter is a named place, and very much larger.

To which you replied,

"No. we agree on that".
This to me is the crux of the matter, even though it leaves me somewhat confused with regard to statements you made earlier on the thread, which seem to say the opposite:

"(Reference to the AC documents I linked to shows that lieu-dit and climat are officially regarded as the same thing.)" (there is no reason why not, but this must concern only a tiny percentage of vineyards)

"A lieux-dit is pretty much what we would consider an individual vineyard" (can be but, but rarely)

"Find Morgeot. Morgeot is a climat that consists of the lieux-dit Morgeot" (or just the opposite, if one prefers..)

"He can only bottle the lieux-dits he owns" (rare are the winegrowers who own an entire lieu-dit)

Le me put it to you this way, as long as you accept that any named vineyard is not a lieu dit (which you did in your next to last post), then we can lay this argument to rest.

I fully acknowledge the potential overlapping in certain instances or even, on rarer occasions, a perfect identity.
I also agree that some vineyard plots take their name from lieux-dits – and some lieux-dits take their name from vineyard plots!
In such instances, it takes an expert to understand what's what…

The complexity of this situation puts wind in the sails of New World wines, and is part of the reason that France has lost so much market share on many export markets.

Unless I read your post too quickly, you implied that Mouton Rothschild could sell Clerc Milon as M.R. if they so wished. I don't think this is quite the case, but this would probably be more to do with local wine politics (the Syndicat Viticole de Pauillac and the Syndicat des Crus Classés du Médoc) than the INAO.

As for the legal significance of lieux-dits, can you or anyone else following this thread tell me how they are presented on the labels you've seen? Do they say, for example, "lieu-dit Les Champs", or just "Les Champs"? In the latter instance, it certainly makes Les Champs seem like either a brand name or a superior vineyard…
The person who wrote about print size has a point too.

Last, but not least, does anyone reading this honestly think that the French authorities follow up the precise origin of lieu-dit wines, especially in the Loire Valley, let's say, as opposed to the Côte d'Or? It smacks largely of a marketing gimmick to me.

Best regards,
Alex R.

We're getting there We agree more than we thought, but on a few things we don't...


>> "(Reference to the AC documents I linked to shows that lieu-dit and climat are officially regarded as the same thing.)" (there is no reason why not, but this must concern only a tiny percentage of vineyards)

I just looked, but can't find where I said that - if I did say that than that is a typo and the word NOT should be in there and that will explain much of the difference. Lieux-dits and Climat are different.

>> "A lieux-dit is pretty much what we would consider an individual vineyard" (can be but, but rarely)
Restricting ourselves to the world of wine, I think that it is...

"Find Morgeot. Morgeot is a climat that consists of the lieux-dit Morgeot" (or just the opposite, if one prefers..)

The lieux-dit does not consist of the climat Moregot. A subset does contain a set, but rather the opposite. The Climat Morgeot a collection of lieux-dits is 10 - 20 times larger than the liexu-dit Morgeot, a vineyard.

"He can only bottle the lieux-dits he owns" (rare are the winegrowers who own an entire lieu-dit)

I'm not saying that he must own it in its entirety, but he must have landholding within the lieux-dit in question to use the lieux-dit in question to bottle it, rather than a more general name. Just like you must own Gevrey-Chambertin to bottle it, and can't instead choose to bottle it as Volnay.

>> Unless I read your post too quickly, you implied that Mouton Rothschild could sell Clerc Milon as M.R. if they so wished. I don't think this is quite the case, but this would probably be more to do with local wine politics (the Syndicat Viticole de Pauillac and the Syndicat des Crus Classés du Médoc) than the INAO.
No, you misunderstood me here. You seemed to indicate doubt as to whether or not we could prove if a wine was bottled form a particular lieux-dit and I was just making the point that it's basically impossible to know FOR SURE where the grapes fro any wine come from. That's all. They can't put the grapes where they want in Bordeaux either.


As for the legal significance of lieux-dits, can you or anyone else following this thread tell me how they are presented on the labels you've seen? Do they say, for example, "lieu-dit Les Champs", or just "Les Champs"? In the latter instance, it certainly makes Les Champs seem like either a brand name or a superior vineyard…

The person who wrote about print size has a point too.


"Let me put it to you this way, as long as you accept that any named vineyard is not a lieu dit (which you did in your next to last post), then we can lay this argument to rest.


Best regards,
Alex R."

I think at this point, it has run its course, so I agree to a truce. It was a nice discussion though. (I will certainly allow for a final rebuttal as a courtesy! And do reserve the right to search for an image of a label or two!)

Alan,


>> "(Reference to the AC documents I linked to shows that lieu-dit and climat are officially regarded as the same thing.)" (there is no reason why not, but this must concern only a tiny percentage of vineyards)

>I just looked, but can't find where I said that - if I did say that than that is a typo and the word NOT should be in there and that will explain much of the difference. Lieux-dits and Climat are different.

That's cool. No problem. For information, the quote I copied was one you made on Tuesday at 8:45.

>> "A lieux-dit is pretty much what we would consider an individual vineyard" (can be but, but rarely)

>Restricting ourselves to the world of wine, I think that it is...

Well, yes, we cannot agree on this. Perhaps you could ask another opinion from someone who has a good command of French or knows French law. My e-mail is alex@aquitaine-traduction.com. If you send me yours I'll get back to you down the line sometime when you least expect it.

>>"Find Morgeot. Morgeot is a climat that consists of the lieux-dit Morgeot" (or just the opposite, if one prefers..)

>The lieux-dit does not consist of the climat Moregot. A subset does contain a set, but rather the opposite. The Climat Morgeot a collection of lieux-dits is 10 - 20 times larger than the liexu-dit Morgeot, a vineyard.

As explained above, not every plot with a name is a lieu dit, which explains what I perceive as the essential confusion clouding this issue. But we've been around the block on this and can only break the vicious circle if someone else chimes in.

I'll be glad to see your labels.

All the best,
Alex