Use Arnold p. 293 for the regionality argument and Martini p. 334 for the Texas-specific warning against treating a large state as one homogeneous whiskey region.
A whiskey terroir need not align with political state boundaries because environmental regions can cross or subdivide those borders.
Arnold passage visually verified at printed p. 293; Martini/Greene passage visually verified at displayed p. 334 / PDF sheet 48.
State borders may still matter through law, institutions, shared practice, and market identity.
Arnold explicitly argues that terroir may be more about regionality than state lines, distinguishing environmental geography from political mapping.
Promoted after two-source corroboration. Ready for qualified drafting; state law and institutions remain separate place-forming factors. September28 fresh Arnold review: associated passages rechecked against enlarged source pages. This checks Arnold's contribution only; other linked sources retain their own audit history.
Evidence judgment
Arnold argues that terroir may follow regionality rather than state lines. Greene’s Texas-specific observation independently reinforces the point: a very large state may contain multiple physical conditions, and geography does not obey governmental boundaries.
Synthesis
Political borders, production communities, legal categories, and environmental regions are different maps. They may overlap, but none should automatically stand in for the others.
Drafting guardrail
Do not describe an entire state as one terroir without evidence. State identity may still be historically, legally, institutionally, or commercially meaningful even when environmental regions cross or subdivide it.