In the wine world, concepts such as Old and New World are often used. The first includes countries where the tradition of making wine dates back thousands of years: Europe and the Mediterranean basin. The New World includes drinks produced in regions that began to engage in active winemaking relatively recently - 200-300 years ago: Australia, New Zealand, the countries of North and South America, as well as South Africa.
Difference between the Old and New Worlds
Over the centuries-old history of the countries of the Old World, wine production has become an integral element of culture with numerous traditions that are strictly observed and zealously protected. The concept of “terroir” plays an important role in Old World winemaking - this is a kind of wine metric that speaks about its place of origin, climate, and soil. Recognition of the concept of terroir dates back to the ancient Greeks, who noted that wines made from a single grape variety grown in 
different regions, have different properties and taste characteristics. A long period of experimentation in the vineyards of the Old World allowed us to find those grape varieties and working methods that are best suited for a given area. This experience was put into the appellation of origin of the goods.
The drinks of each wine-growing region of the Old World have their own style and characteristics that are almost impossible to replicate. New World relies on innovation and technology; they are constantly experimenting and looking for something new. Also in these countries, irrigation (artificial irrigation of waterless lands) is widely used, which is mostly prohibited by winemakers in Europe. The irrigation and hot climate of the New World produce ripe, high-sugar crops, and the New World wines themselves contain higher alcohol levels, more concentrated structures, and lots of fruit flavors. Old World wines are considered to be lower in strength and more acidic.
Wines also differ in price; Old World drinks are often sold at a higher price, firstly, because more manual labor is used in their production, and secondly, due to differences in labor laws; In many European countries, working hours are shorter than in South American countries.
The most active wine producers from the New World countries are Argentina, Chile, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the USA. It is about these wine-growing regions that our further conversation will go.
California wines
The USA is the fourth country in terms of wine production in the world, second only to the famous France, Italy and Spain. Of the 50 states, 46 produce wine, but 90% of the total is wine from California.
A real breakthrough in the history of Californian wines came in 1976, when 11 wine experts from around the world gathered at the “Paris Tasting”, during which the best wines were “blindly” determined, and wines from California won in many categories. After this event, drinks from the region began to be included in the menus of many restaurants around the world.
California produces table wines (about 80% of all production), sparkling and fortified wines. Whites make up 65%, reds 20%, pinks 15%. They produce both simple ordinary wines for the mass segment, as well as exclusive and more expensive drinks. Today, about one hundred different grape varieties are cultivated in California, the most popular being Chardonnay, Sauvignon Blanc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Zinfandel, Merlot and Pinot Noir. Zinfandel has become a symbol of the region; according to many experts, it is a local California grape variety. Zinfandel is one of the most versatile grape varieties in the world, producing drinks that vary in style - from light white wines to rich, full-bodied reds.
In the USA there is no strict wine classification; everything is quite simple and democratic. A single standard appeared in 1983, which introduced the American Viticultural Areas (AVA). If an AVA designation appears on the label, then 85% of the grapes used in the production of the drink must be grown in that area.
If only the state is listed on the label, then 100% of the grapes come from that area. If the wine only says America, the drink may be a blend of grapes from several states.
Chilean wines
Chile's unique geographic location has made it possible to cultivate many famous grape varieties and produce various types of wines in the country. The most common grape varieties here are Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Chardonnay and Sauvignon Blanc. In addition, Chile managed to preserve an interesting French grape variety, Carmenère, which was almost completely exterminated in Europe due to the phylloxera epidemic. Now this variety has been elevated to the rank of national treasure, and the wines produced from it have become the hallmark of the country.
Chilean wines are divided into three categories:
Vinos de Mesa are table wines whose labels prohibit mentioning the grape variety, vintage year, and region name.
Vinos sin Denomination de Origen - wines with an uncontrolled place of origin. The label contains only information about the manufacturer and grape variety, as well as the year of harvest.
Vinos con Denomination de Origen - wines with controlled origin. The label must indicate the place of origin of the wine, the grape variety, the year of harvest, and the enterprise where the wine was bottled. There are some additional regulations, for example, varietal wines must contain at least 85% of the grape variety indicated on the label.
Chilean wines are classified according to aging time:
Corriente - wines aged one year.
Special - two- and three-year-old wines.
Reserva - four and five year old wines.
Gran Reserva - wines six years old and older.
Argentine wines
Over the course of several decades, thanks to a large number of migrants from Europe, Argentina created its own wine industry with a unique variety of varieties. The best varieties from different countries are grown here: French Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Syrah, Italian Sangiovese and Bonarda, German Riesling. But the symbols of Argentine winemaking have become red wines based on the Malbec variety and white wines made from the Torrontes grape.
Typically, the labels of Argentine wines include information about the place of origin, the name of the winery, and the year of harvest. The name of a wine is either designated by the variety of grapes from which it is made, or by whom and where it was produced; a variant name consisting of both components is also possible.
In 1999, Argentina created a classification system for local wines, according to which all wines are divided into three categories based on quality and place of origin of the grapes:
Indication de Procedencia (IP) - wines with a common place of origin.
La Indication Geografica (IG) - wines indicating a specific geographical region.
La Denomination de Origen Controlada (DOC) - wines controlled by origin. This is the highest category of Argentine wines.
As in Chile, in Argentina wines are classified according to aging time.
Vino de mesa is a simple table wine without aging.
Vino fino is a short aged wine.
Reserva is a wine with four and five years of aging.
South African wines (South African wines)
Today, South Africa ranks 8th in the world in wine production, the main share of production being white wines. About 30% of South Africa's vineyard area is occupied by Chenin Blanc, followed by Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay. The most popular red varieties are Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, Shiraz and Pinot Noir. In addition to such popular international varieties, South Africa has a unique red variety that is not found anywhere else in the world. - “pinotage”. It was developed in 1926 by crossing two French varieties, Pinot Noir and Cinsault. 
Pinotage is used to make both light drinks and full-bodied red wines.
South Africa also produces fortified wines - light and dry analogues of sherry, as well as port-style drinks.
In 1973, South Africa introduced a complex system of wine control based on geographical origin (Wine de Origin, WO). A wine can receive WO status only after serious quality tests. On the labels of such wines, the manufacturer indicates its logo (the absence of a logo immediately indicates that the wine is of lower quality), grape variety, year of production, and region of origin.
Australian wines
Wine in Australia is mainly produced by large companies - about 80% of all production comes from the four largest corporations. Most Australian wines are produced through blending - a mixture of wines obtained from grapes from different regions. It is blending that allows Australian wine to be made so consistently in quality.
Like every wine-producing country, Australia has its own calling card - red wines from the Syrah (Shiraz) variety. This variety allows you to produce wines of various styles; depending on the region of production, wine from this variety can be either light and fruity or quite dense.
In Australia there are no special laws regarding winemaking and wine naming. Nevertheless, Australian winemakers put on the label as much information as possible about the drink: grape varieties (dominant variety comes first, then in descending order), harvest year, method of obtaining the wine, and even advice on serving it.
New Zealand wines
Over the past 15 years, New Zealand wine exports in value terms have increased by 753%. Due to the country's relatively small area, wine production in New Zealand is small. Thus, neighboring Australia produces 10 times more wine. Today there are about 300 small wineries in New Zealand.
New Zealand is considered a country of white wines; drinks made from the Sauvignon Blanc variety are especially famous - about 80% of the wines produced here are made from this grape. Chardonnay, Riesling and Gewürztraminer are also grown on the islands. Red varieties include Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot and Pinot Noir.
There is currently no strict classification system at the legislative level in New Zealand. However, wines with confirmed geographical origin can be marked with a Certified Origin (CO) label. Wines from New Zealand are named after the grape variety and region of origin.
And where did the “new New World” come from?
In fact, everything is very simple. These concepts first appeared due to the different geographical locations of wine regions and different time periods in the development of winemaking in the world. But now these concepts are understood as something more than just geography and history. Today these are different production styles, different taste styles of wine, different climatic, technological and legislative conditions.
Initially Old World considered classical Europe. Winemaking has been practiced here since the times of the Romans and Greeks, and who exactly is the founder of winemaking and who should give the “vine of primacy” is still being debated. The Old World includes aristocratic France, emotional Italy, vibrant Spain, fragrant Germany, and other countries.
To the New World include areas where winemaking began to develop much later, but over the last century production technologies have skyrocketed. This includes the countries of North and South America, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. Most of these regions were colonies, and winemaking was brought here by European travelers.
And here “new New World”- this is an absolute surprise for many. Most people have no idea that grapes grow here at all. Among such modern winemaking enthusiasts are Japan, Israel, China, India, and, by the way, Russia. We'll likely hear a lot more about them in the coming decades.
As for the taste differences of wine, there are certain subtleties. Of course, taste is characterized not only by bipolarity, but also has its deviations and exceptions, although in general it is possible to form a certain image.
Many critics say that in Europe, the best wines were made in areas with difficult conditions - places where the vines resist cold climates, poor soils and literally struggle to survive. It produces fewer berries, but at the same time makes them more tasty and concentrated. Old World Wines usually less alcoholic and less dense, but also more acidic. The aroma and taste of old world wines are more refined and less fruity. Everything here seems to be in halftones.
New World wines- on the contrary, more alcoholic and “full-bodied”. Due to the hot climate and low rainfall, the vines here are in almost greenhouse conditions. The aroma and taste of such wines can sometimes turn out to be a “fruit bomb”. At the same time, the taste is simple and clear. New World wines should be drunk young - they are less susceptible to aging than Old World wines.
Today there is a fashion in the world for bright and fruity wines, so many producers “adjust” their production to the tastes of customers. However, it is impossible to say which taste is correct and which is not. Here everyone is guided by their preferences, mood, weather or event.
So just experiment!
Ekaterina Smychok
›
If you are an admirer of good wine, have read articles about winemaking or visited, then you have probably heard the concept of “Old and New World wines” and their taste differences. But how fundamental are these differences? Let's talk about this.
New World. This concept unites Chile, New Zealand, Argentina, South Africa, the USA, and Australia.
What is the difference between New World and Old World wines?
A characteristic feature of New World wines is a low level of acidity compared to their opponents. Another distinctive feature is the “fruitiness” of taste and bouquet.
Among the Old World wines, elegant and graceful drinks predominate, the taste of which is piercing and ringing. While to describe the taste of alcohol from the New World, the epithets “lush” and “powerful” are suitable.
But all these “fundamental” differences are quite arbitrary: the style of some wines from South Africa or Argentina is very similar to French (high acidity, restrained and elegant taste)
Some of the truly undeniable differences are “aging” and “cost.”
Among the “discoverers”, wines with a long shelf life and the ability to improve their taste already in the bottle are much more common. New World wines are an order of magnitude cheaper than Old World wines (of a similar variety and level of maturity), although they do not always lose out in the taste category.
Today there are a great variety of different wines on both sides of the fence. Don’t limit yourself to conventional labels, each side has its own advantages, try and find your “favorites”, regardless of the geography of production.
Section 1. Division into the Old World and the New World.
Section 2. Opening Old world.
Section 3. “East” and “West” in history Old world.
The Old World is the general name for the countries of three parts of the world - Europe, Asia and Africa.
The old world is continent of Earth known to Europeans before the discovery of America in 1492.
Division into the Old World and the New World.
The fact is that when the division of the Old World into three parts came into use, it had a sharp and definite meaning in the sense of large continental masses separated by seas, which constitutes the only characteristic feature that defines the concept of a part of the world. What lay north of the sea known to the ancients was called Europe that to the south is Africa, that to the east is Asia. The word itself Asia originally referred to by the Greeks as their primitive homeland - to country, lying at the northern foot of the Caucasus, where, according to legend, the mythical Prometheus was chained to a rock, whose mother or wife was called; from here this name was transferred by settlers to the peninsula known as Asia Minor, and then spread to the whole part of the world lying east of the Mediterranean Sea. When the outlines of the continents became well known, the separation of Africa from Europe and Asia was indeed confirmed; the division of Asia from Europe turned out to be untenable, but such is the force of habit, such is the respect for long-established concepts that, in order not to violate them, they began to look for various boundary lines, instead of discarding the division that turned out to be untenable.
Parts of the world- these are regions of land that include continents or large parts of them along with nearby islands.
Typically there are six parts of the world:
Australia and Oceania;
America;
Antarctica;
The division into parts of the world should not be confused with the division into the “Old World” and the “New World”, that is, concepts denoting the continents known to Europeans before 1492 and after (except Australia and Antarctica).
The Old World was the name given to all three parts of the world “known to the ancients” - Asia and Africa, and the New World began to be called the part of the southern trans-Atlantic continent discovered by the Portuguese in 1500 and 1501-02. The term is believed to have been coined by Amerigo Vespucci in 1503, but this opinion is disputed. Later, the name New World began to be applied to the entire southern continent, and from 1541, together with the name America, it was extended to the northern continent, denoting the fourth part of the world after Europe, Asia and Africa.
The “Old World” continent includes 2 continents: and Africa.
Also, the territory of the continent “Old World” is historically divided into 3 parts of the world: Europe, Asia and Africa.
Discovery of the Old World.
Over the past two centuries, millions of Britons have left their homelands in search of work abroad: in America, Canada, Australia and other countries. After the Second World War, due to large restoration works and the development of industry increased the influx of workers from European countries. Now in England There are about 1 million immigrants from various European countries (not counting the Irish). The growing number of immigrants from the former English colonies raised questions about race relations in the British Isles. Government Britain in special acts it attempted to limit immigration from its former colonies. Increasing racial discrimination and an increase in the number of racially based conflicts led to the adoption of a number of special laws on race relations from the beginning of 1960 to 1971.
In the 1970s, due to immigration restrictions and economic difficulties in England itself, the number of people leaving the country began to exceed the number of immigrants. About 200 thousand Britons now live in New Zealand alone, and for Australia, England has been and remains the most important “supplier” of skilled labor. The flow of emigrants to North America (Canada, USA) and other Western European countries was somewhat smaller. Mostly specialists emigrated, and a so-called brain drain occurred.
Emigration and immigration have been and continue to be a vital factor in the development of the economy and every year international students alone spend more than £3 billion on accommodation and food in Britain. According to the Ministry of Finance, if migration processes in the country cease, the economic growth of the state over the next two years will decrease by 0.5%. A decrease in government revenue means a decrease in individual and family well-being and a reduction in funds allocated for social needs.
The number of immigrants in the country today has reached 10% of the total working-age population. Based on research, analysts have concluded that immigrants do not pose a threat to the British labor market. Contrary to popular belief, admission to work“foreigners” does not provoke an increase in unemployment among the indigenous population, and in some cases even contributes to an increase in wages. Britain as a whole is not a country with a high rate of migration. Even today the number of foreign-born British subjects in relation to the total population of the country is much lower than the similar figures in France, USA or the Republic of Germany.
At the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries, England annually receives about 160 thousand immigrants from countries outside the European Union. considers itself a multinational state and the role of foreign workers and entrepreneurs who manage to fit into English society is important not only because they bring diversity to British culture, but also because due to them the birth rate in the country does not fall. The fact is that in Britain there is process an aging population due to improvements in the health care system, and because young couples in which both partners are working face increasing economic difficulties, the birth rate is falling, resulting in a smaller population.
The government of England, led by Prime Minister Tony Blair, has decided to revise some provisions of immigration policy in such a way as to encourage migration if it is consistent with the public interest, and to limit it. Britain will continue to accept immigrants who are able to invest financial resources in the country's economy, contribute their intellectual and professional abilities and skills in the development of the British economy. On the other hand, new measures are being taken to restrict the entry of persons undesirable both from the economic, social, and from the point of view of maintaining the security of the country. Border and immigration controls are being strengthened and the introduction of ID cards for immigrants is being introduced. In addition, some immigration routes into the UK that were used illegally in the past are now being closed. International students will only be permitted to enter the country to study if they have chosen an accredited educational institution. To prevent fictitious marriages, a new requirement will be introduced for residents of third world countries: they will have to undergo additional registration in specially created services.
Legislation relating to internal politicians countries are also undergoing changes. Immigrants will be limited in their rights to use social benefits: they will not have access to the social housing program until they receive official permission to stay and work in Britain.
The censuses of England and England* do not contain statistical data about Koreans, therefore, other sources and materials are used that do not allow for detailed demographic analysis, primarily related to migration processes, but allow us to understand the main course of the history of the emergence of the modern Korean community in Britain.
By data Embassy of the Republic of Korea in England, the number of Koreans as of May 2003 was 31 thousand people. It turns out that the largest Korean community lives here, second only to the number of Koreans in the Russian Federation.
Some of the first Koreans to come to Britain in the post-war period were 6 employees of the Republic of Korea Embassy in England, which opened in March 1958. They were later joined by about 200 Korean students who arrived to study at universities and colleges. Thus, the first Koreans to arrive in Britain had no intention of staying and were not strictly classified as immigrants. Due to the numerical advantage of students, first of all, the “Korean students in Britain” was formed. Anyone who had studied at a university for at least 3 months or completed a scientific internship at research institutes in the UK could become a member of the association.
With the increase in the number of Koreans in November 1964, at a general meeting, this student company company was renamed the "Association of Koreans in Britain", whose members, in addition to Korean students, were all other Koreans who had lived in the UK for more than 3 years. In November 1965, the association underwent structural and organizational changes, and in 1989 it renamed itself the Society of Koreans of Britain.
"East" and "West" in the history of the Old World.
From time to time, it is very useful to revise our usual historical concepts so that when using them we do not fall into errors generated by the tendency of our mind to attribute absolute meaning to our concepts. It must be remembered that the correctness or falsity of historical, as well as any other scientific concepts, depends on the chosen point of view, that the degree of their correspondence with reality can be greater or lesser, depending on the historical moment to which we apply them, that their content is constant, sometimes imperceptibly and gradually, sometimes it changes suddenly. Among the concepts that are especially frequently used, and with the least degree of criticism, are the concepts of East and West. The opposition between East and West has been a common formula since the time of Herodotus. By East we mean Asia, by West we mean Europe, two “parts of the world,” two “continents,” as school textbooks say; two “cultural worlds,” as “philosophers of history” put it: their “antagonism” is revealed as a struggle between the “principles” of freedom and despotism, striving forward (“progress”) and inertia, etc. Their eternal conflict continues in various forms, the prototype of which is given in the clash of the King of Kings with the democracies of the land of Hellas. I am far from the idea of criticizing these formulas. From certain points of view, they are quite correct, i.e. help to cover a significant portion of the content of historical “reality,” but they do not exhaust its entire content. Finally, they are true only for those who look at the Old World “from Europe” - and who would argue that the historical perspective obtained from such a perspective is “the only correct one”?
Not for “criticism”, but for a better analysis of these concepts and to introduce them into proper boundaries, I would like to remind you of the following:
The antagonism of East and West in the Old World can mean not only
antagonism between Europe and Asia. The West itself has “its own East” and “its own West” (Roman-Germanic Europe and Byzantium, then Rus') and the same applies to the East: the opposition of Rome and Constantinople here corresponds to some extent to the opposition of “Iran” and “Turan”, Islam and Buddhism; finally, the opposition between the Mediterranean region and the steppe world emerging in the western half of the Old World corresponds in the Far East to the relationship between the People's Republic of China and the same steppe world in the center of the Eurasian continent. Only in the latter case do East and West change roles: China, which is geographically the “East” in relation to Mongolia, is culturally the West for it.
The history of the Old World, understood as the history of the relationship between the West and the East, is not exhausted by the struggle of two principles: there are too many facts at our disposal that speak of the development both in the West and in the East of common, and not fighting, principles.
Along with the picture of the history of the Old World, which is obtained when we look “from the West,” another, no less “legitimate” and “correct” one can be constructed. As the observer moves from West to East, the image of the Old World will change in front of him: if he stops at Russian Federation, all the outlines of the Old Continent will begin to emerge more clearly: Europe will appear as part of the continent, however, a very separate part, having its own individuality, but nothing more than Iran, Hindustan and China. If Hindustan is naturally separated from the main mass of the mainland by the wall of the Himalayas, then the isolation of Europe, Iran and the People's Republic of China (PRC) follows from their orientation: they face the “main face” to the seas. In relation to the center, Europe remains predominantly defensive. The “Chinese Wall” became a symbol of inertia and not at all wise “ignorance of foreigners,” although in fact its meaning was completely different: China shielded its culture from the barbarians; Thus, this wall fully corresponds to the Roman “border”, with which Middle-earth tried to defend itself from the barbarism that pressed from the North and East. The Mongols showed an example of brilliant divination when in Rome, the Roman Empire, they saw “great China,” Ta-Tzin.
The concept of the history of the Old World, as the history of the duel between the West and the East, can be contrasted with the concept of interaction between the center and the outskirts, as an equally constant historical fact. Thus, in general, the same phenomenon is revealed that we have hitherto been better known to be found in one part of this whole: the problem of Central Asia corresponds to the problem of Central Europe. The concentration in one hand of trade routes leading from West to East, connecting our Middle-earth with India and China, the involvement of several economic worlds in one system - this is a trend running through the entire history of the Old World, revealed in politics the kings of Assyria and Babylon, their heirs, the Great Kings of Iran, Alexander the Great, later the Mongol khans and, finally, the All-Russian emperors. This great task first emerged with complete clarity at the end of the 6th century in 568, when Bu-Ming, the Khagan of the Turks, reigning over a power that stretched from the Republic of China proper to the Oxus, holding in his hands the roads along which Chinese silk was transported, sent his ambassador to the emperor Justin with a proposal for an alliance against the common enemy Khozru I6, king of Iran.
At the same time, Bu-Ming enters into diplomatic relations with China, and emperor Wu-Ti marries a Turkish princess. If the Western Celestial Empire accepted offer Bu-Mina, the face of the earth would be transformed: what in the West people naively took for the “circle of lands” would become part of a great whole; the unity of the Old World would have been achieved, and the Mediterranean centers of antiquity would perhaps have been saved, for the main reason for their depletion, the constant war with the Persian (and then Perso-Arab) world should have fallen away. But in
Byzantium Bu-Mina's idea was not supported...
The above example shows how important acquaintance with the political history of the “East” is for understanding the political history of the “West.”
Between the three marginal coastal “worlds” of the Old World lies its own special world of nomadic steppe dwellers, “Turks” or “Mongols”, fragmented into many ever-changing, fighting, then splitting - not tribes, but rather military alliances, the centers of formation of which are “hordes” " (literally - main apartment, headquarters) receiving their names after the names of military leaders (Seljuks, Ottomans); an elastic mass in which every shock is echoed at all its points: thus the blows dealt to it at the beginning of our era in the Far East are echoed by the emigration of the Huns, Avars, Hungarians, and Polovtsians to the West. Thus, the dynastic clashes that arose in the center after the death of Genghis Khan responded on the periphery with Batu’s invasion of Rus', Poland, Silesia and Hungary. In this amorphous mass the points
crystallizations appear and disappear with incredible speed; Gigantic empires that last no more than one generation are created and disintegrated several times, and Bu-Ming’s brilliant idea is almost realized several times. Twice it is especially close to realization: Genghis Khan unites the entire East from the Don to the Yellow Sea, from the Siberian taiga to the Punjab: merchants and Franciscan monks go all the way from the Western People's Republic of China to the Eastern within one state. But it disintegrates upon the death of the founder. In the same way, with the death of Timur (1405), the pan-Asian power he created perishes. All through this period a certain completeness prevails: Central Asia is always in antagonism with the Middle East (including Iran) and is seeking rapprochement with Rome. Abassid Iran, a continuation of Sassanid Iran, remains the main enemy. Back in the 11th century, the Turks were disintegrating the Caliphate, but taking its place: they themselves were “Iranized,” breaking away from the general Turkic-Mongolian mass, becoming infected with Iranian fanaticism and religious
exaltation. They continue the policy of the caliphs and great Kings - the policy of expansion to the West, to Asia Minor, and to the South-West - to Arabia and Egypt. Now they are becoming enemies of Central Asia. Menge-Khan repeats Bu-Min's attempt and offers St. Louis joint action against the Middle East, promising to help him in the Crusade. Like Justin, the Holy King did not understand anything in the plan of the eastern ruler: the negotiations, opened on Louis’ part by sending a model of the Parisian Notre Dame and two nuns with her, led, of course, to nothing. Louis sets off against the “Babylonian” (Egyptian) Sultan without allies, and the Crusade ends with the defeat of the Christians at Damietta (1265).
In the XIV century. - a similar situation: in the battle of Nikopol, Bayazet destroys the crusader militia of Emperor Sigismund (1394), but soon he himself is captured by Timur near Angora (1402) ... After Timur, the unity of the Turanian world collapses irrevocably: instead of one there are two centers of Turanian expansion: western and eastern, two Turkeys: one “real” in Turkestan, the other “Iranized” on the Bosphorus. Expansion proceeds from both centers in parallel and simultaneously. The highest point is 1526 - the year of two battles of world-historical significance: the battle of Mogac, which gave Hungary into the hands of the Caliph of Constantinople, and the victory of Panipasha, which gave Sultan Baber over India. At the same time, a new center of expansion is emerging - on the old trade routes through the Volga and the Urals, a new “middle” kingdom, the state of Moscow, until recently one of the uluses of the Great Khan. This power, which the West looks at as Asia in Europe, plays in the 17th-19th centuries. the role of the vanguard in the West's counter-offensive to the East. " Law synchronicity" continues to operate now, in a new phase of the history of the Old World. Penetration Russian Federation to Siberia, the victories of John Sobieski and Peter the Great are simultaneous with the first period counter-offensives of the People's Republic of China (PRC) against the Mongols (Reign of Kang-Hi, 1662-1722); wars Catherine and the beginning of the collapse of the Osmanlis Empire coincide chronologically with the second decisive moment of Chinese expansion - the completion of the formation of the current Republic of China (the reign of Kien-Lung, 1736-1796).
Expansion of the Celestial Empire in the West in the 17th and 18th centuries. was dictated by the same motives that guided China in ancient times when it built its wall: the expansion of the People's Republic of China was purely defensive in nature. Absolutely
Russian expansion was of a different nature.
The advancement of the Russian Federation into Central Asia, Siberia and the Amur Region, the construction of the Siberian Railway - all this dates back to the 16th century. and to this day constitutes a manifestation of the same tendency. Ermak Timofeevich and von Kaufman or Skobelev, Dezhnev and Khabarov are the successors of the great Mongols, the creators of paths connecting the West and the East, Europe and Asia, “Ta-Tzin” and China.
Like political history, the cultural history of the West cannot be divorced from the cultural history of the East.
The transformation of our historical vulgate here should not be imagined in a simplified way: the matter is not about its “refutation”, but about something else; about putting forward points of view from which new sides would be revealed in the history of the development of cultural humanity. The contrast between the cultures of the West and the East is not an aberration of history; on the contrary, it has to be emphasized in every possible way. But, firstly, behind the contrast we must not lose sight of the similarities; secondly, it is necessary to re-raise the question of the bearers of contrasting cultures themselves; thirdly, it is necessary to end once and for all the habit of seeing contrast in everything and everywhere, even where there is none. I'll start with the latter and give some examples.
Until recently, the prevailing opinion was the complete independence of Western European, medieval German-Romanesque art. It was recognized as indisputable that the West in its own way processed and developed the ancient artistic tradition and that this “own” was the contribution of the German creative genius. Only in painting for some time did the West depend on the “deadening spirit” of Byzantium, but by the 13th and early 14th centuries. The Tuscans are freed from the Greek yoke, and this opens the Renaissance of the fine arts. Now little remains of these views. It has been proven that the West owes the first examples of “Germanic” art (jewelry work from Frankish and Visigothic burial grounds and treasures) to the East, namely Persia, that the prototype of the characteristic “Lombard” ornament is located in Egypt; that from the same place, from the East, comes both the plant and animal ornamentation of the early miniatures, which until recently testified, in the eyes of art historians, of a specifically German “sense of nature.” As for the transition from conventionalism to realism in fresco painting of the 14th century, here we have before us a fact common to both the East (Byzantium and the areas of influence of its culture, for example Old Serbia) and the West: no matter how the question of priority is resolved - in in any case, the scheme dating back to Lorenzo Ghiberti and Vasari, which previously limited the revival to one corner of Italy, must be abandoned.
The opposition between “Romano-Germanic Europe” and the “Christian East” is equally untenable in another area - philosophical thought. The Vulgate depicts the matter as follows. In the West there is scholasticism and the “blind pagan Aristotle,” but here a scientific language is forged, a dialectical method of thinking is developed; in the East, mysticism flourishes. The East feeds on the ideas of Neoplatonism; but, on the other hand, religious and philosophical thought here turns out to be fruitless for
“mental progress in general,” exhausts itself in childish debates about unnecessary subtle concepts, gets entangled in the abstractions it creates and degenerates without creating anything significant... The facts decisively contradict the vulgate. Platonism is a common phenomenon of all medieval thought, both Western and Eastern, with the difference that the East was able to put Platonic idealism at the basis of its religious philosophy due to the fact that it turned to the primary source of Neoplatonism - Plotinus; Meanwhile, the West knows Plotinus only second-hand, as well as Plato, and, moreover, often confuses them. Mysticism in the West is as significant a fact as scholasticism, or rather, it is one and the same thing: scholasticism cannot be opposed to mysticism, for the great scholastic systems of the West are created precisely by mystics and are aimed at preparing for the mystical act. But the mysticism of the West, the mysticism of St. Bernard and the Victorians,
St. Francis and St. Bonaventure, not inferior to the Eastern either in the power of mood or in depth, is still lower than the Eastern as a worldview. This, however, does not diminish its role in the cultural history of the West: on the basis of mysticism, Joachimism arose, which gave a powerful impetus to a new historical understanding and thereby became the ideological source of the early Renaissance, a great spiritual movement associated with the names of Dante, Petrarch and Rienzi, as later in the 15th century
The rebirth of mysticism in Federal Republic of Germany was the source of Luther's reformation, just as Spanish mysticism gives rise to Loyola's counter-reformation. That's not all. Modern science puts forward the need for a comparative study of Christian philosophy - Western and Eastern - Jewish and Muslim, because here we have one and the same ideological phenomenon, three branches of one stream. The Muslim religious culture of Iran is especially close to Christian, where “Islam” has nothing in common with the Islam of the first caliphs or with Islam as it was understood by the Turks.
Just as the Abassid power is a continuation of the Sassanid power, so Islam in Iran acquires a specifically Iranian coloring, absorbing the ideological content of Mazdaism3, with its mysticism and its grandiose historical and philosophical concept, which is based on the idea of progress completed in the other world .
We have come to the main problem of the history of world culture. We will understand it most quickly if we briefly trace its origins. Overcoming the historical vulgate began with a gradual expansion of the sphere of interest of historians. Here it is necessary to distinguish between the 18th century and our time. The noble universalism of Voltaire, Turgot and Condorcet was rooted in the assumption of the sameness of human nature and, in essence, in the absence of genuine historical interest, in the absence of a sense of history. Voltaire contrasted the Western Europeans, who still allow themselves to be led by the nose, the “priests,” with the “wise Chinese,” who managed to get rid of “prejudice” a long time ago. Volney undertakes a “refutation of the truth” of all religions, originally using a kind of comparative method, namely, establishing that the “misconceptions” and “inventions” of the worshipers of all deities were the same. "Progress" in the 18th century. They imagined something like this: one fine day - here earlier, there later - people’s eyes open, and from delusions they turn to “Common Reason”, to “truth”, which is everywhere and always identical to itself. The main, in essence the only, difference between this concept and the concept created by the “positive” historical science of the 19th century comes down to the fact that now the transition from “misconceptions” to “truth” (in the 19th century, instead of lumieres or saine raison, they speak of “accurate science") is declared to occur "evolutionarily" and naturally. On this premise the science of “comparative history of religions” is built, with the goal of:
Understand the psychology of religious phenomena by attracting materials selected from everywhere (as long as the compared facts fall at the same stages of development);
To construct, so to speak, an ideal history of the development of the human spirit, a history of which individual empirical histories are partial manifestations. The other side of the question—the possible interaction of the facts of the development of cultural humanity—was left aside7. Meanwhile, the evidence in favor of this assumption is such that it inevitably attracts attention. Modern science has stopped short of a phenomenon of exceptional importance: synchronicity in the religious and philosophical development of the great cultural worlds. Leaving aside the monotheistic tradition of Israel, we see that after the beginning of the monotheistic reform of Zarathustra in the northwestern corner of Iran, in Hellas, in the 6th century, the religious reform of Pythagoras occurs, and in India the activity of the Buddha unfolds. The emergence of the rationalistic theism of Anaxagoras and the mystical teaching of Heraclitus about the Logos dates back to this time; their contemporaries in China were Confu-tsi and Lao-tsi, the teaching of the latter contains elements close to both Heraclitus and Plato, their younger contemporary. While “natural religions” (fetishistic and animistic cults, cult of ancestors, etc.) develop anonymously and organically (or is this, perhaps, only an illusion generated by the distance?), the considered “historical” religions are obliged to creative activity genius reformers; religious reform, the transition from a “natural” cult to a “historical religion” - consists of a conscious rejection of polytheism.
The unity of the history of the spiritual development of the Old World can be traced further. Regarding the reasons for the undoubted similarity of mental development lands of Hellas and the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the same era, one can only make assumptions. It is difficult to say to what extent Hindu theophanistic religious philosophy influenced Near Eastern gnosis and the theophanism of Plotinus, in other words, the religious philosophy of Christianity; but it is hardly possible to deny the very fact of influence. One of the most important elements of the Christian worldview, which left perhaps the greatest mark on all European thought, messianism and eschatology, was inherited by Judaism from Iran. The unity of history is also reflected in the spread of great historical religions. Mithra, the old Aryan god, whose cult survived the reform of Zarathustra in Iran, becomes, thanks to merchants and soldiers, well known throughout the Roman world just at the time when
preaching Christianity. Christianity spreads in the East along the great trade routes, along the same routes as Islam and Buddhism. The Christian religion in the form of Nestorianism was widespread throughout the East until the middle of the 13th century, until the careless and awkward activities of Western missionaries, which developed after the unification of Asian enterprises by Genghis Khan, aroused hostility towards Christianity in the East. Since the second half of the century, Christianity begins to disappear in the East, giving way to Buddhism and Islam. The ease and speed of the spread of great spiritual movements in the Old World is largely due to the qualities of the environment, namely the mental
warehouse of the population of Central Asia. The highest demands of the spirit are alien to the Turanians. What Saint Louis and Pope Alexander IV naively accepted as “the natural inclination of the Mongols towards Christianity” was in fact the result of their religious indifference. Like the Romans, they accepted all kinds of gods and tolerated any cults. The Turanians, who entered the Caliphate as mercenary warriors, were subject to Islam as “yasak” - the right of a military leader. At the same time, they are distinguished by good external assimilation abilities. Central Asia is a wonderful, neutral, transmitting environment. The creative, constructive role in the Old World always belonged to the marginal-coastal worlds - Europe, Hindustan, Iran, China. Central Asia, the space from the Urals to Kuen Lun, from the Arctic Ocean to the Himalayas, was the field of crossing of “marginal-coastal cultures”, and also - since it was a political value - both a factor in their spread and an external condition for the development of cultural syncretism...
Timur's activities were more destructive than creative. Timur was not that fiend of hell, that conscious destroyer of culture, as the frightened imagination of his enemies, the Middle Eastern Turks, and, in their wake, the Europeans, pictured him. He destroyed to create: his campaigns had a great cultural goal, definite in their possible consequences - merger of enterprises Old World. But he died without completing his work. After his death, Central Asia, exhausted by the fighting of several centuries, perishes. Trade routes move from land to sea for a long time. Relations between the West and the East are interrupted; of the four great centers of culture, one - Iran - is spiritually and materially declining, the other three are isolated from each other. China is frozen in its religion of social morality, degenerating into meaningless ritual; in India, religious and philosophical pessimism, combined with political enslavement, leads to spiritual numbness. Western Europe, cut off from the sources of its culture, having lost contact with the centers of excitement and renewal of its thought, is developing its inherited heritage in its own way: there is no numbness, no marking time; here there is a consistent degradation of the great ideas bequeathed by the East; through Comte’s famous “three stages” - to agnosticism, to stupid optimism with its base, naive faith in the kingdom of God on earth, which will automatically come as the final result of “economic development”; until the hour of awakening strikes, when the whole enormity of spiritual impoverishment is immediately revealed, and the spirit grabs at anything, neo-Catholicism, “theosophy,” Nietzscheanism, in search of lost wealth. Here lies the guarantee of the debt of revival. That it is possible and that it is possible precisely by restoring the broken cultural unity of the Old World is evidenced by the fact of the revival of the East, as a result of “Europeanization”, i.e. mastering what the East lacked and what the West is strong in - technical means of culture, everything that relates to modern civilization; Moreover, however, the East does not lose its individuality. The cultural task of our time should be imagined as mutual fertilization, finding ways to cultural synthesis, which, however, would manifest itself everywhere in its own way, being unity in diversity. The fashionable idea of a “one world religion” is as bad taste as the idea of an “international language”, a misunderstanding of the essence of culture, which is always being created and never “done” and therefore is always individual.
What role can the Russian Federation play in the revival of the Old World?.. Is it necessary to recall the traditional interpretation of the Russian “world mission”.
This is not new. That Russia “defended the European Union with its breasts” civilization from the pressure of Asiaticism" and that this is its "merit before Europe" - we have been hearing for a long time. Such and similar formulas only testify to our dependence on Western historical vulgate, dependence, which, as it turns out, is difficult to get rid of even for people who have sensed Russian "Eurasianism" "A mission, the symbol of which is a shield, a wall or a solid stone chest, seems honorable and even sometimes brilliant from a point of view that recognizes only the European" civilization" "real" civilization, only European history "real" history. There, behind the "wall" there is nothing, no culture, no history - only the "Mongolian wild horde". The shield falls out of our hands - and the "fierce Hun" will be "white fry brothers." I would contrast the symbol of the "shield" with the symbol of the "path", or, better said, I would complement one with the other. The Russian Federation does not so much separate Asia as connect it with Europe. But Russia did not limit itself to this role of the successor of the historical mission of Genghis Khan and Timur Russia is not only a mediator in cultural exchange between individual Asian outskirts. Or rather, it is least of all a mediator. It creatively carries out a synthesis of Eastern and Western cultures...
Once again we have to subject the inspired words of a great poet to a “cold” analysis, because such an analysis reveals a curious and very typical confusion of ideas.
The essence of the confusion lies in the fact that the entire “East” is taken into one bracket. We have “narrow” or “slanted” eyes - a sign of a Mongolian, Turanian. But then, why are we “Scythians”? After all, the Scythians are by no means “Mongols” either in race or in spirit. The fact that the poet, in his enthusiasm, forgot about this is very characteristic: the image of “Oriental man in general” was obviously floating before him. It would be more correct to say that we are “Scythians” and “Mongols” together. From an ethnographic point of view, Russia is a region where dominion belongs to Indo-European and Turanian elements. Regarding the cultural atavistic influences of the Turanian elements cannot be denied. Or maybe it was simply the inoculation of Tatarism, as the spiritual heritage of the Batu and Tokhtamysh times, that had an effect here? Anyway, firm Bolshevik Russian Federation in too many ways resembles the “horde” company: just like the Mongols of the 11th century. perceived the will of Allah revealed in the Quran as “yasak”, so the communist manifesto became “yasak” for us. Socialismo Asiatico, as Francesco Nitti dubbed Bolshevism, is a very wise word. But there is nothing “Turanian”, nothing “Central Asian” in the deep religiosity of the Russian people, in their penchant for mysticism and religious exaltation, in their irrationalism, in their tireless spiritual yearnings and struggles.
Here again the East comes into play, but not the Central Asian one, but another one - Iran or. Likewise, the exceptional sharpness of artistic insight inherent in the Russian people brings them closer to the peoples of the East,
but, of course, not with Central Asians deprived of artistic independence, but with the Chinese and Japanese.
“East” is a multi-valued term, and one cannot talk about one “eastern” element. The receptive, transmitting Turanian-Mongolian element was processed, absorbed, and dissolved for centuries by the higher elements of Iran, the Republic of China, India, and the Russian Federation. The Turco-Mongols are not at all a “young” people. They had already been in the position of “heirs” many times. They received “inheritances” from everywhere and each time they acted the same way: they assimilated everything and everything in the same superficial way. Russia can bring higher culture to the Trans-Ural spaces, but for itself, from contact with the neutral, meaningless Turanian element, it will gain nothing. To carry out your “Eurasian” mission, to realize your essence of the new Eurasian cultural world. Russia can only follow the paths on which it has hitherto developed politically: from Central Asia and through Central Asia to the coastal regions of the Old World.
The outline of a plan for a new historical scheme outlined here is in deliberate contradiction both with the historical vulgate known to us from textbooks, and with some attempts to transform it that pop up from time to time. The basis of the proposed plan is the recognition of the interconnectedness of history and geography - in contrast to the vulgate, which at the beginning of the “guide” separates itself from “geography” with a small outline of “surface structure” and “climate” so as not to return to these boring things again. But unlike Helmolt, who took geographical division as the basis for the distribution of material in his
world history, the author puts forward the need to take into account the genuine, and not the conventional, geography of the textbook, and insists on the unity of Asia. This makes it easier to understand the fact of the unity of Asian culture. Thus, we come to the need to make some adjustments to the new concept of world history proposed by the German historian Dietrich Schaefer. Schaefer breaks with the vulgate “world history,” which has long since turned into a mechanical collection of individual “stories.” He argues that we can speak about “world history” only from the moment when peoples scattered across the earth begin to come into contact with each other, i.e. since the beginning of modern times. But from the very presentation of Schaeffer’s Weltgeschichte der Neuzeit it is clear that, from his point of view, “world history” is preceded by the same old “history of Western Europe”. From our point of view,
The history of Western Europe is only part of the history of the Old World;
The history of the Old World does not lead through consistent development to the stage of “world history.” Here the relationship is different - more complex: “world” history begins precisely when the unity of the Old World is broken. That is, there is no linear progress here: history at the same time gains in “extensiveness” and loses in “integrity.”
The proposed plan is also a correction to another well-known diagram depicting the world historical process as a series of stages at which, embodied in individual “types of development”, “cultural values” are alternately realized, chronologically replacing each other and stretching into a progressive series.
There is no need that the ideological sources of this theory go back not only to Hegel’s metaphysics, which violates history “as it actually happened,” but even worse - to the mythological ideas of antiquity and the Middle Ages about the “nomadism of culture”: for the error here lies not in stating fact, but in its interpretation. It is a fact that culture does not constantly remain in one and the same place, but that its centers move, as well as another fact that culture is always changing, and not quantitatively, but also qualitatively, or rather, only qualitatively (for culture cannot be to “measure” in general, but only to evaluate), is not subject to any dispute. But it would be futile to try to subsume cultural transformations under " law"about progress. This is firstly. Secondly, the usual, chronological series of individual stories (first Babylon and Egypt, then Hellas, then Rome, etc.) is not applicable to the history of the Old World as a whole. We have adopted the point of view from which open
synchronicity and internal unity of the history of the Old World in its totality. First - and this “beginning” stretches from approximately 1000 BC. to 1500 AD - one huge, unusually powerful and intense movement, from several centers at once, but centers that are by no means isolated: during this time all problems were posed, all thoughts were changed, all great and eternal words were spoken. This “Eurasian” left us such riches, beauty and truth that we still live by its legacy. It is followed by a period of fragmentation: Europe is separated from Asia, in Asia itself the “center” falls out, only the “outskirts” remain, spiritual life freezes and becomes scarcer. The newest destinies of the Russian Federation, starting from the 16th century, can be considered as a grandiose attempt to restore the center and thereby recreate “Eurasia”. The future depends on the outcome of this attempt, still undecided and now darker than ever.
Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Literary Language Read more
The traditional region for the production of classic wines is considered to be old Europe, or more precisely France, Italy, Spain, and to a slightly lesser extent Portugal and Germany. The term “New World wines” primarily refers to products from Africa, Australia, South and North America: this category includes Argentina, Chile, New Zealand, South Africa, the USA and Canada. Unlike the “Old World”, there are no winemaking traditions that have developed over centuries, so local brands turn out to be exotic, bright and very original. This is the only way for young, ambitious manufacturers to win market share from established competitors.
Peculiarities. Several factors contribute to the popularity of New World wines:
- rich soils and sunny climate of producing countries;
- affordable prices (due to cheap labor and the absence of European restrictions on yields);
- exotic tastes due to local grape varieties and unique geographical location.
The area and diversity of the “New World” is incomparably larger than the “Old”, but Europe still benefits due to more developed wine-making traditions and established positions in the world market Historical reference. Until the 15th century - the era of the Great Geographical Discoveries - winemaking was not very common in the territory of modern Venezuela, Mexico and Colombia. Local residents skillfully made low-alcohol spirits from corn, quinoa, chinese and even strawberries, but remained completely indifferent to grapes. Everything changed with the arrival of the Spaniards: the conquerors were not going to give up their usual gastronomic traditions, and it was impossible to export wine from their homeland - the wine did not withstand the long journey and turned sour.
In the 16th-17th centuries, a number of American countries could already boast of flowering and productive vineyards, in particular: Peru, Chile, Paraguay, Argentina. Some of them achieved such success that the Spanish government, fearing competition, banned the establishment of new vineyards in the colonies. However, to no avail: the process could no longer be stopped.
True, there was a shortage of local products: European colonialists required wine not only for gastronomic, but also for religious purposes, and the Indians themselves were more willing to make pisco - local grape vodka - and weather conditions did not always allow for a rich harvest. Therefore, the Spaniards gradually opened up new territories, and by the 18th century they began to import South African wines.
In Australia, winemaking was established by 1820, and in 1873, during a blind test in Vienna, judges even confused the Antipodean brands with French samples.
New World wines are not always inferior in quality to European ones; a lot depends on the producer Characteristics. In the countries of the New World, the climate is predominantly hotter than in Europe; accordingly, local wines are made from more ripe and juicy grapes, which is why they are richer and richer in taste. In addition, New World wines are usually a couple of degrees stronger than “Old World” wines.
As for names, initially American, Australian and African manufacturers used established names, such as “Burgundy”, “Champagne”, “Sherry”, etc. (especially since the wines were made from grape varieties exported from the respective regions). This caused confusion and indignation among European winemakers.
Since the 1960s, New World wines have been released under alternative "local" labels, even if the composition of the drink is exactly the same as, say, classic Chardonnay. However, completely original blends also appeared, for example, Syrah with Cabernet Sauvignon or Semillon with Sauvignon Blanc.
Argentina
Argentina is considered the fifth largest wine region in the world. The style of Argentine wines was originally dictated by Spanish colonialists, but then local products were heavily influenced by Italian and German immigrants.
One of the brightest representatives of this category is the aromatic white wine Torrontes; red varieties Malbec, Barbera, Bonarda (aka Corbo) are also popular.
Wine regions: Province of Mendoza, San Juan, Rioja, Salta, Catamarca, Rio Negro, Buenos Aires.
Australia
Excellent wines, in no way inferior in taste to European ones. The phylloxera epidemic that broke out at the end of the 19th century did not affect the South Australian regions, so the local vineyards were not affected and are currently considered one of the oldest in the world. In 2000, Australian table wine exports to the UK exceeded French exports. Despite the fact that wines from the “land of kangaroos” are often criticized for their excessive sweetness of taste, at the moment this alcohol is considered one of the most complex and sophisticated.
Wine regions: Barosa Valley (Syrah), Kunawara (Cabernet Sauvignon), Eden Valley (Riesling), Hunter Valley (Semillon).
Canada
In Canada, as well as in the eastern states of the United States, it was not possible to graft and cultivate the European variety Vinis vinifera, which led to the export of the varieties Vitis Labrusca and Vitis riparia, which have a characteristic “foxy” aroma due to the presence of specific essential oils in the skin of the berries. The most commercially successful ice wines in Canada are Riesling, Vidal Blanc and Cabernet Franc.
Chile
The tenth largest wine producer in the world, local varieties have long been classified as Merlot, although, as it turns out, they actually belong to the Carménère family. Traditionally, in this country, quantity is valued over quality, which is why Chilean wines only entered the “big league” after the 1990s.
Wine regions: Lleida Valley, Bio-Bio Valley.
Colombia
In Colombia, unlike other South American countries, wine production operated primarily for religious purposes, while the state did not accept European emigrants, as a result of which winemaking here developed in an original and independent way.
Colombian wines are of excellent quality, but they are almost never exported, so you can only get acquainted with the drinks in the country.
Wine regions: Villa de Leyva, Valle del Cauca.
Mexico
In 2013, almost 90% of all Mexican wine was produced in the state of Baja California. This is one of the oldest wine regions not only in Mexico, but in the entire New World.
New Zealand
Winemaking in this country began with immigrants from Croatia who arrived in New Zealand at the end of the 19th century, but for about a hundred years the industry was in its infancy. New Zealand winemakers experimented with different varieties and eventually settled on Sauvignon Blanc, later complementing it with Chardonnay and Pinot noir.
Today in the “land of kiwi birds” they love aromatic wines: Gewürztraminer, Riesling, Auslese.
One fishery does not interfere with another... Peru
In 2008, Peru had approximately 14 thousand hectares of grape plantations, which produced more than 610 thousand hectoliters of wine per year.
Wine regions: Pisco and Ica.
South Africa
The most popular African variety is Pinotage (a mixture of Pinot Noir and Cinsault), but South African winemakers also use varieties more familiar to Europeans - a variety of Cabernet, Shiraz, Merlot, Chardonnay.
Despite the fact that the first batch of African wine was made just over 300 years ago, today the aromatic and full-bodied wines from Cape Town are considered a real pearl of the New World.
USA
More than 90% of American wine is produced in California, with the remaining 10% coming from Washington, New York and Oregon. In the northern states, wine is produced from indigenous grape varieties, but their specific “foxy” aroma is not to everyone’s taste.
“Fox smell” is found in wines of the USA and Canada, due to the presence of specific essential oils in some grape varieties Prohibition had a huge impact on the development of winemaking in the United States (or rather, its stagnation), as a result of which noble dry wines gave way to sweet fortified alcohol of low quality. In the northwestern states today, good Pinot Noir and Riesling are produced, and in New York, Vitis Labrusca and its hybrids are popular, and California is famous for its Zinfandel variety.
