Talk:Tokaj wine region

[Untitled]

Juro,

As you suggested, let me make this discussion more scientific. In reply to your comments: "The Slovak region is NOT a separate wine region - unless you are claiming that the Hungarian region "by coincidence" ends exactly at the state border between Slovakia and Hungary. The region was one region throughtout centuries and only became separated in 1918. But of course, you can create two articles. I hope you are not going to argue with the seemingly different Hungarian name"

Actually, the state border is precisely why there are now two different wine regions. Comtemporary wine regions are (at least in the EU) administrative entities, and strictly defined by law. The Hungarian wine region of Tokaj-Hegyalja is strictly defined in geographical terms and does not extend beyond the state border. No one would seriously argue that the northern and southern Zemplen hills are today part of the same county - of course not, an international border splits the historic county into two. The 'international treaty' you have referred to, or rather treaties (I presume you are referring to the separate accession treaties signed by the Slovak and Hungarian governments), in fact define two separate wine regions, so please don't use this as an argument for the opposite. Furthermore, UNESCO's definition of the Tokaj World Heritage Site clearly refers only to the Hungarian wine region (compare with the 'Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst' World Heritage Site which extends across the Slovak-Hungarian border).

There was another treaty between the two countries in 2004. This has nothing to do (directly at least) with the EU accession.

Besides, the above 'official' explantion of two separate Tokaj wine regions (one in Hungary, one in Slovakia), there are various other arguments for classifying them as separate regions. Each region has its own regulations. In the case of Tokaj-Hegyalja the strict regulations are a legacy from the communist era (many wine makers complain that they are too strict and do not allow for innovation, which is one reason why some are now producing Aszu wines but labelling them as "late harvest" so that they don't have to follow the regulations). These regulations clearly define what can be labelled as Szamorodni, Aszu etc (e.g minimum time maturing in the barrel) and as 3, 4 puttonyos etc. (minimum residual sugar and extract content). The regulations in Slovakia are different and result in wines of a different character, just as an Aszu wine from the Balaton region of Hungary is different to a Tokaji Aszu (though of course the differences are due to other factors too). Another factor which differentiates the two wine regions is that the Tokaj-Hegyalja region has recently received massive foreign investment (approx 50 million Euros) which has enabled the larger wine makers to invest in state-of-the-art facilities. Many of the wines now being produced in the region are significantly different in character, to the wines of ten years ago, let alone the typical wines of the communist era.

Since the Slovak wines are being produced using the same techniques and cellars and the Hungarians from Hegylja themselves are claiming now that the quality of their wines has decreased because of too many low-quality producers, the question is whether two wines from the Hungarian region from different producers are less different than one Tokaj wine from Slovakia and one wine from Hungary - the answer is, I am quite sure, no. So in this sense it is one single region.The Slovaks are even claiming that they are using the same standards and the same definition of the Tokaj region for decades, while the Hungarian standards have been changed several times and the region is (as the Hungarians have said themselves) constantly moving (if you look at particular vineyards). So, actually, the Slovak wines are closer to the original Tokaj wines than the Hungarian ones (as the Slovaks claim). The argument with the investments is not sufficient, because you could take any region and say that in the western part there are investments, in the eastern there are no investments (provided that its true - I do not know) - that does not change the fact that it is one region. Next, (almost exactly) the Hungarian and Slovak region is even one region in terms of geomorphology and soil (a separate unit). Next, the whole discussions in 2003-2004 between the (by the way Hungarian-) Slovak minister and the Hungarian minister were led with the aim of accepting the territory as one region and I remember having seen an interview with the Hungarian minister after the treaty has been signed where he said that of course it is one region only separated by a border from 1918. The arguments you and your books are using are simply the result of Hungary's decision from 1958 to start to compete with Czechoslovak producers, which is a typical trade/brand dispute. And the books are a kind of Hungarian marketing accompanying this dispute and trying to persuade the world to buy wine from Hungary and from no other country in the world (which again is nothing new in the world)...But we have two articles now, so this question should be closed for now...Juro 02:18, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Those are not "Slovak" wines, those are Hungarian wines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.43.216 (talk) 17:32, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Actually there is a dispute over what is the character of historical Tokaj wines. During the communist era, Hungarian Tokaj Aszu was heavily oxidized resulting in wines deep in colour and repressing the characteristics of the individual terroirs and of the grapes themselves. The regulations, with a minimum time of maturation in the barrel, still seem to be aimed at encouraging this style of Aszu. However, some producers believe that this isn't the historical style and are calling for the elimination of legal minimums for barrel aging. Do you know what the regulations are in Slovakia? What is the position of the Slovakian producers on this debate? Scott Moore 10:01, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Text from a Nov 2002 US magazine article on this debate: "The controversy about the style of Tokaj comes down to a debate over what is the true tradition and, once this is established, what deviations from it should be allowed. Specifically there are different opinions about the degree of oxidative aging required. If Tokaj is to establish its place on the palate of contemporary connoisseurs, how faithful must it remain to historical models? Why, when classic wines such as Bordeaux, Barolo and Port have evolved, should Tokaj remain exactly as it has always been? At the heart of this debate is disagreement over what is traditional, and what changes were introduced during the Communist period. According to exhaustive research undertaken by Miles Lambert-Gocs, a student of Eastern European winemaking history and employee of the US Department of Agriculture, the historical style of Tokay has always involved substantial oxidative aging of the wine after fermentation, a finding that reinforces the position of Hungary's National Wine Classification Board. The NWCB, in opposition to some of the new private investors in Tokaj, seeks to maintain the traditional style of the wine and actively discourages proposed innovations away from it, such as using grapes which are not fully botrytis-effected for Aszu, aging Tokaji in a completely reductive state, and shortening the duration of barrel maturation. Lambert-Gocs agrees that these proposed changes would distort and alter what it is about the wines that have made them special over the centuries - the flavors and aromas created by substantial oxidative exposure and long maturation in cellar. In keeping with Europe's other wine industry boards, which guard the quality and authenticity of their region's classic appellations, wines cannot be released into the market until a tasting panel, in this case the OBB, authorizes their regional typicity. Tasters who support the more oxidative style and insist that this is what sets Tokaji apart as a distinct dessert wine category, just as heating the wine distinguishes Madeira, dominate this panel. Although some wines submitted for approval as Tokaji Aszu have been rejected, many of the more recent releases taste to me reflective of reductive rather than oxidative winemaking practices.

The modernists or innovators claim that they are simply seeking to bring Tokaj more in line with conventional modern taste as a cleaner, lighter colored white wine that will fit with current preferences for fresh fruit flavors rather than heavily wood-influenced characteristics. Further they charge that Tokaj historically was not a dark amber-colored wine full of oxidative characters, but that this was only a legacy of the Communist era when winemaking at the State Farms was careless and unconcerned with quality. In particular, Tokaj's foreign investors, many of whom have red wine production backgrounds, have sought to top casks up to minimize oxidative exposure, and to shorten the time of barrel maturation altogether. This is a position which Lambert-Gocs' research vigorously disputes. Tokaj is and always has been, according to him, a wine of deep amber colors and substantial rich oxidative character. This was not a fall from grace attributable to Communist bureaucratic meddling, but the authentic practice which originally established the reputation and excellence of the wines."

Earliest viticulture in Tokaj

No one really knows when viticulture begin in Tokaj - it could have been started by the Celts, or it could have begun only in the 12th Century. Here are the views of some of the leading experts (the text is from "TRADITION AND INNOVATION IN THE TOKAJ REGION" by Tim Atkin, Master of Wine:

"The origins of Tokaji are unclear. No one knows when the first wines were made in the region, whether dry, medium or sweet. Phillips argues that the area was first planted in the early 1300s, while Johnson admits that ‘the very early history of this singular region is little known’. Grapes could have been planted here by the Celts, the Greeks or the Romans, according to Johnson. Halász asserts that ‘in all probability’ the first vineyards were planted by indigenous Celts, but points to the part played by French settlers, who arrived in the mid-eleventh century, in the development of Tokaji."

References: Phillips, A Short History of Wine, p. 85; Johnson, The Story of Wine, p. 246 Halasz, Hungarian wine through the ages, p. 84

Name of the article

Shouldn't this be at Tokaj-Hegyalja? It is now a redirect, but it's the real name of the region. Tokaj is the town's name only. Alensha 13:57, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A good idea, although - as far as I remember - strictly speaking Tokaj-Hegyalja is more the geological/geographical term and the geological region is (obviously) not 100% identical with the region of viticulture...Juro 23:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard Tokaj-Hegyalja being mentioned in any other context than viticultural (and my family is from there :). I'll request the move at Wikipedia:Requested_moves. Alensha 23:57, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have seen it in a Hungarian internet encyclopedia, I just do not remember anymore where ...Juro 21:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 16:10, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

pls remove details of the debate from the intro

I agree that the controversion between the Hungarian and Slovakian region is worth mentioning, but definitely not in first place. See Wikipedia:Lead_section. --Torzsmokus 20:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not also Slovakia?

Guys, shouldn't it be mentioned in the first sentence and also in the Infobox, that the Tokaj wine region lies in Hungary AND Slovakia? I'm from Slovakia, but please don't take this as a nationalist attack. It's a plain fact that when the borders of Czechoslovakia were agreed upon by the foreign powers after the WWI, a small part of the Tokaj region was left outside the newly-created Hungary. That's it. (BTW, the border was created quite unfairly for a single reason: so that the important railway track between Košice and Čierna nad Tisou - a strategic connection to Carpathian Ruthenia, to Russia and also to Romania - could remain entirely in Czechoslovakia.) Nowadays the EU regulations recognize the Slovak part also eligible for selling wines branded "Tokaj". So why not mention Slovakia equally? Comments please. In case of no objections, I'll change it. Johnnyjanko (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Tokaji is a Hungarian wine, the Slovakian part produced Hungarian wine, too. Tokaj is not a Slovak wine.