Skip to content
WineHQ
Search

Wine myths

Chilean vines are unchanged pre-phylloxera originals

“Chile never had phylloxera, so its vines are the original ungrafted European stock.”

Oversimplified

Chile has largely escaped phylloxera and much of its vineyard is ungrafted, which is genuinely unusual. That does not make its vines a preserved nineteenth-century snapshot.

The full answer

The core fact is correct: commercial phylloxera damage has not established itself in Chile, and a large proportion of Chilean vineyard is planted on its own roots rather than grafted.

What does not follow is that the plant material is unchanged. Chilean vineyards have been replanted, re-selected and hugely expanded across the twentieth century, and a great deal of the modern vineyard was planted with imported clonal material in the last few decades.

The barriers usually credited — desert to the north, the Andes to the east, ocean to the west — are real, and Chile also maintains strict phytosanitary controls. Neither guarantees permanence, and the situation is monitored rather than settled.

The most interesting genuine survival is different and better documented: Carménère, largely lost in Bordeaux after phylloxera, persisted in Chile misidentified as Merlot until DNA work in the 1990s.

What is true underneath it

Ungrafted vineyard at Chile’s scale is genuinely rare in the world, and it is a real point of difference.

This correction is a expert interpretation

A reading of the available evidence by people qualified to make it, where the evidence genuinely underdetermines the answer.

What would settle it: Evidence arriving that settles the question either way.

In the timeline

Sources

Sources consulted

  • Wines of ChileWines of Chile
  • Scholarship on the phylloxera epidemic and graftingAcademic history of agriculture
  • Wine Grapes: A Complete Guide to 1,368 Vine VarietiesRobinson, Harding & Vouillamoz (Allen Lane, 2012)