1. THE QUARREL BETWEEN SULFURISTS AND AMERICANISTS

 

 

To combat this insect, researchers and professionals in the sector, in America and in Europe, proposed many solutions, sometimes quite fanciful.

Three currents were dominating.

​

Hybridization, by crossing European (qualitative fruit) and American (resistant roots) varieties, was seen as the solution of the future. But several decades were necessary to obtain new varieties. Therefore this current was in withdrawal from quarrels.

 

On the other hand, a real ideological war ignited the debates, between the sulfurists and the Americanists.

 

This ideological and technical war contrasted two conceptions of viticulture. The «Americanists» advocated the systematic grafting of European varieties on rootstocks naturally immune and resistant to the aphid, while the sulphurists absolutely wanted to preserve the old vines, and prevent the denaturation of the wines, by fighting against aphids by all means, thanks to flooding, exploitation of sandy soils, and chemistry (carbon sulphide and potassium sulfocarbonate). These techniques were very expensive and not very generalizable.

 

 

Today, the term “sulphurist” or “sulphator” is pejorative, but, make no mistake, ecology was not the motivation of the debates of the time, in neither of the two currents. It should not be forgotten that it was the Americanists (Ravaz, PAV 1919, who advocated the use of arsenical products to combat the moths and worms of the vine). The problem was exclusively economic.

 

Sometimes different techniques were combined on the same winery. Politics became involved and, even though courteous, fierce debates tore apart for two decades, the supporters of the two "schools" in colloquia, magazines, associations and winegrowers' groups.

  

For the "sulfurists" the most famous representatives were often exemplary winemakers who did not want to see their most qualitative vineyards wither. Among the Americanists, were the known names of the discovery of the phylloxeric plague: L. Laliman, G. Bazille, F. Sahut, J. Lichtenstein, J.E. Planchon, L. Vialla, V. Pulliat, often representatives of the Faculties and Universities of Montpellier, or of learned societies, scientistists by nature, and often ambitious career or political.

 

In France, at Beaune, in 1869, grafting was proposed as the best solution to implement; this decision was strongly encouraged by the policies.

 

This current "Americanist": Bazille, Laliman, Pulliat (Beaujolais) grew, supported by conferences, publications and grafting courses.

 

This method had the great benefit of being easily generalizable. Thus, transplant schools were created.