Puer Tea

by Zhang, Jinghong. ,Project Muse.

  Many people, including me, initially felt that it was absurd for Simao to declare itself the home of Golden Melon Tribute tea, as it had been generally accepted that the Golden Melon's basic tea material originated in Yibang, one of the Six Great Tea Mountains in Xishuangbanna. Many people in Xishuangbanna were also angry about Simao's name change, since “Puer” had been a common term used by many tea regions of Yunnan, and they felt uneasy that their tribute glory had been appropriated.

  However, staying in Simao I found that the city had made significant preparations for this ritual, going so far as to develop a discourse legitimating the name change. This was documented in a special issue of a magazine also called Pu-Erh,4 published in April 2007 by the Simao government.

  The special issue presented historical details to show that the fine processing for the Golden Melon Tribute tea took place in Puer before it was sent to Beijing. This proved that, regardless of where the tea resources were from, Puer was the necessary assembly and processing place for the final tea products. Hence, Simao was of historical importance for the circulation of Puer tea as a tribute and commodity (Huang Yan and Yang Zhijian 2007:14–17).

  Second, the issue highlighted an important historical event in the local administration. In 1729 Puer Prefecture was established by the Qing, and since then the eastern Mekong of Xishuangbanna has been under Puer Prefecture's administration. Yibang and the whole Six Great Tea Mountains, now part of Xishuangbanna, were actually part of Puer Prefecture, which later became Simao. Therefore, the special issue argued that Simao was the home of the tribute tea. And the authors emphasized that the Yiwu tea family Cheshun Hao, which had been given the prized signboard inscribed with “Tribute to the Emperor” (Rui gong tian chao), was within the administration of Puer Prefecture at that time. Thus, although all the tribute tea did have a specific small home, Yiwu or the Six Great Tea Mountains, they were more importantly part of a larger home: old Puer Prefecture, the past Simao, and the renamed Puer City (Huang Yan and Yang Zhijian 2007: 14–17).

  Third, even before the name change people had begun to believe that it was untrue that “Puer tea was never grown in Puer” but was just named after the place.5 Proof was found to show that, in fact, Puer and Simao both used to plant and produce Puer tea (Huang Guishu 2002; Shen Peiping 2008). According to local tea experts including Zhou Deguang, whom I interviewed, there is a whole chain of tea trees located in Simao (see map. 3.1) that prove that Simao is one of the world's origins of tea: the 2,700-year-old wild tea tree in Qianjiazhai; the 1,700-year-old transitional tree in Bangwai; and the domesticated 1,000-year-old tree in Jingmai (see also Huang Yan and Yang Zhijian 2007: 17).

  In addition, Simao's status was elevated in the magazine by being linked to the tea consumption of the imperial household. Historical records were produced to show that Puer tea was cherished by the Qing imperial family, praised by Emperor Qianlong in a poem, and given by the emperor to George III in 1792. Being intimate with royalty had always been considered by the Chinese to be a supreme glory, and when the royally cherished substance was returned to its origin, the origin was also glorified. At this point, the Golden Melon's homecoming was, in a way, analogous to the imperial concubine's visit home during the feudal period of China, as described in the famous novel Dream of Red Mansions.6

  Moreover, the royally cherished consumption of the Golden Melon was reproduced in contemporary tastings. An account of drinking the Golden Melon written by a professor at Yunnan Agricultural University was included in the following issue of the same magazine to prove that this 150-year-old tea still tasted good, with “aged appeal” (chen yun) (Shao Wanfang 2007). In comparison, tribute Dragon Well green tea from east China of the same age had become worthless.7 Once again the profile of the original place stood out, and the lasting value of the aged tea encouraged people to buy and store more Puer tea originating from Simao or Yunnan.

  These testimonials made the welcoming of the Golden Melon tea an important ritual, which justified the name change from Simao to Puer and supported the declaration that Puer née Simao was the authentic hometown of Puer tea (Zheng Yongjun 2007: 9).

  In response, the Xishuangbanna government commented sarcastically that Simao's name change was “good.” An official working in the Xishuangbanna government said that as a result of Simao's propaganda, Xishuangbanna would also benefit, because both were important production areas. He mentioned this to me in early March 2007, when I participated in a visit to one of the tea mountains in Menghai, Xishuangbanna, where a ceremony of “Protecting the Old Tea Trees” was launched by the Xishuangbanna government. When we arrived at the central part of the tea mountain and saw many tall tea trees flourishing, this official said, “Now you can understand where the hometown of Puer tea should be; whether or not it is called Puer, it is always our Xishuangbanna, whose tea price is the highest in Yunnan every year.”

  On the Dai New Year8 in mid-April 2007, shortly after Simao's name change, Xishuangbanna launched a ritual homecoming for another tribute tea, a brick of Puer originating in Yiwu. At the same time a major forum on Puer tea was held in Jinghong, its capital city.

  Various maps showing alternative ideas about the home of Puer tea were published in advertisements, on tea packages, and in teahouses. Some of these maps positioned Puer as the origin and dissemination center of Puer tea. While in Jinghong, I saw another imaginative map in a teahouse that its owner, a local tea trader, had created. With an exaggerated scale and intentionally selected details, Xishuangbanna takes up most of the tea territory (map. 3.2).

  The home of Puer tea was mapped by different people's imaginations, existing in their minds but being developed at a deeper level—on foot. In May 2005, a reenactment of past caravans set out from Simao toward Beijing (Baidu 2006). Over five months, 120 mules and horses with 68 drivers in ethnic costumes walked through six provinces, covering 4,000 kilometers before finally arriving in Beijing. The Puer tea carried by the caravan was auctioned there at a surprising price. Seven pieces, each weighing 2.5 kilograms, were sold for ¥28,000 to ¥120,000; one stack (seven caked pieces, each 357 grams), purchased from the caravan and donated back by the famous actor Zhang Guoli, was auctioned at ¥1.6 million.9 In the following year, another new caravan set out from Yiwu toward Beijing. In Yiwu there is a well-known site where the past caravans assembled to start their journey. Since the start of the new caravan, this site has become an important part of the local tea tour. In various ways, home was represented with royal approval and the new proof of this royal linkage was imagined in rituals and maps and practiced in the mind and on foot.

  This competition over Puer tea's origin echoed an earlier debate, which began in the early nineteenth century and lasted over one hundred years, about whether China or India (Assam, in particular) was the birthplace of tea more generally (Baildon 1877; Ukers 1935; Zhu Zizhen 1996). Most Chinese scholars insisted that tea had originated in China, using the evidence that older and wilder tea trees are found in southwest China; these scholars considered the argument in favor of India to be an attempt by the British to boost its colony's tea industry (Chen Chuan 1984; Chen Xingtan 1994). A later debate focused on which part of China tea is indigenous to. Eventually, a general consensus was reached that the tea varieties in other parts of China are mainly of small-leaf variety (Camellia sinensis sinensis), which originated, evolved, and were disseminated from the large-leaf variety (Camellia sinensis assamica) of Yunnan (Chen Chuan 1984; Chen Xingtan 1994; Evans 1992). Decades later, subregions within Yunnan continued to argue about which was the authentic home of Puer tea.

  From the side of both Simao and Xishuangbanna, this debate about the origin of Puer tea seemed significant. It would directly determine which subregion was better known to the world, and in turn which would attract more traders, investors, and tourists. Both sides stressed the importance of “respecting history,” implying that there existed only one authentic version of the narrative.

  But from the provincial point of view, this ba
ttle seemed unnecessary. Some people thought that the success of either side would bring benefits to Yunnan, while others thought it was an unnecessary civil war because Simao and Xishuangbanna are both part of Yunnan. Actually, many people would not venture to judge which subdistrict was the true home of Puer tea; rather, they said that Yunnan, including all the subregions along the Mekong, is the home of Puer tea. When I asked a tea expert from the Menghai Tea Association his opinion about Simao's name change, he laughed and recalled a story: In one of his articles, he had identified the production area of Puer tea as Xishuangbanna, Simao, Lincang, and Dali. This, however, offended another two other areas, Baoshan and Dehong in west Yunnan, which have tea resources but were not included in his article (See map I.1). He eventually revised the article and added these two areas, and Puer tea was given a broader scope. This tea expert's action reflects the view of many people who consider Yunnan itself to be the heartland of Puer tea. Following this logic, the 2008 national standard assuring Puer tea's geographical origins put its production scope even more broadly; eleven subareas of Yunnan were all authorized as Puer tea production regions, including not only the regions along the Mekong in the south but also areas in western, eastern, and central Yunnan (NBQIQC 2008).10

  The Puer tea battle between subdistricts of Yunnan continues to this day, with new historical “discoveries” or botanical proof being regularly unearthed. Nevertheless, there is now a broad acceptance that Yunnan is the common home for all Puer tea. However, opinions diverged again when the development of Puer tea broke through the borders of Yunnan and challenged the position of other Chinese tea.

  REDEFINING PUER TEA

  When Puer tea became more prevalent, its exact definition became a matter of controversy. This controversy was launched by the tea scholars of Yunnan and reinforced by the provincial government.

  In the past, Puer tea had been categorized as a fully fermented dark tea. Starting around the turn of the twenty-first century, some tea experts in Yunnan began to formally argue that Puer tea is not dark tea and should be independent from the other six categories of Chinese tea (Su Fanghua 2002: 49–51; Mu Jihong 2004: 5; Zou Jiaju 2004: 9–10). The key reason, they explained, is that Puer tea is fermented using a different procedure from that used for other dark teas (see table I.1). Other kinds of dark tea, such as the one produced in Hunan province, are postfermented soon after rolling, when the tea leaves are still moist; Puer tea, by contrast, is not postfermented until after the tea leaves have dried. Furthermore, the Yunnanese experts pointed out that other kinds of dark tea are made from small- or medium-size tea leaves, but Puer tea must be made from big-leaf tea.

  This updated approach to tea definition was considered an important way of exempting Puer tea from the chaotic situation in the market. As Zou Jiaju, the vice head of the Yunnan Tea Association, stated:

  Among Chinese tea, there has never been a tea like Puer, whose image is in such chaos. Many incentives are about money. Some people impute the emergence of “fake Puer tea” to the social transformation in modernity. Besides this aspect, I suppose it is also because Puer tea has lacked an accurate definition among Chinese tea. Before its recent prevalence, it wasn't really cared about, and in contempt it was wrongly categorized as dark tea. Perceptual mistakes cause chaos in actual trade. Other types of tea have clear identities and don't run into so many troubles. Puer tea alone is homeless and has to live under another's roof. The lack of its development is due to its unclear identity and inaccurate definition. (Zou Jiaju 2005: 135)

  According to these suggestions, Chinese tea should be categorized into seven types, with Puer tea as the seventh. Because this argument was not only concerned with Puer tea's reclassification but also meant rewriting the whole system of categorizing Chinese tea, it was attacked by tea experts from other provinces.

  Since the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, official government statements about Puer tea have been updated several times in response to market conditions. Before the increase in demand for Puer tea, there were regulations about quality standards, rather than definitions. The first quality standard was enacted by the national government in about 1955. The second was set by Yunnan in 1979 to respond to the emergence of the artificial fermentation technique that was invented in 1973 (Xu Yahe 2006: 129). The first official attempt at a definition was issued in 2003 by the Standard Counting and Measuring Bureau of Yunnan. It defined Puer tea as follows:

  Puer tea is made of large-leaf tea leaves that have been dried in the sun. The tea leaves should be produced within a certain area of Yunnan. The final product is loose or pressed tea via postfermentation. Its appearance is brown-red; its tea brew is bright and dark red; it has an “aged aroma”; it tastes mellow, with sweetness following bitterness; and after infusing, the tea leaves are brownish red. (Xu Yahe 2006: 133)

  In contrast to the academic mode of classification based on production technique, the government's regulation was more concerned with the origin of the tea. It was characterized by a strong geographical sense. This became more prominent in the next updated version, enacted by the Yunnan Provincial Supervision Bureau of Technology and Quality in 2006:

  Puer tea is the geographically marked product of Yunnan. It is made from large-leaf tea leaves that have been dried in the sun. The tea is produced in tea areas of Yunnan whose conditions are suitable for producing Puer tea. After a certain special production process, the tea develops its unique characteristics. Puer tea is categorized as Puer sheng cha [raw Puer tea and aged raw Puer tea] and Puer shu cha [artificially fermented Puer tea]. (Zhang Shungao and Su Fanghua 2007: 313)

  Both definitions, from 2003 and 2006, emphasized “large-leaf tea” (Camellia sinensis assamica), the tea category that is more distinctively Yunnanese than the “small-leaf tea” (Camellia sinensis sinensis) prevalent in other tea areas of China. Although the 2006 definition supposedly drew on academic insights, it actually contradicted the academic approach. According to the academic tea experts, whether Puer tea is categorized as a dark tea or placed in an independent category, the definition is based on the production technique (Chen Chuan 1984: 238). That is, a certain type of production process shapes a certain kind of tea. Following this rule, a product can be Puer tea as long as it is processed in the same way as Puer tea, regardless of the origin of the tea material.11

  When Puer tea became profitable, however, the academic definition became too broad, according to the authorities in Yunnan. They worried that the fame of Yunnan's Puer tea was being illegally exploited. Large amounts of low-cost tea, mostly small-leaf tea from Sichuan, Guangxi, or Guangdong, were being carried into Yunnan or even processed locally to make Puer tea. All these products were branded as authentic Yunnan Puer tea, even though they were made from small tea leaves, a very different category from the large tea leaves of Yunnan.

  Why must Puer tea be made of large-leaf tea? Zou Jiaju, the vice head of the Yunnan Tea Association, makes an analogy with red wine to illustrate. To him, both good red wine and good Puer tea have a unique mellow flavor, which is developed from the astringent element. The more astringent the grape, the mellower the wine made from it; if the grape tastes sweet, it is no good for making wine. The same applies to Puer tea. Tea made from small leaves is not astringent enough to develop a mellow flavor. Only large-leaf tea has stood the test of time and proven its vitality when aged, whether via natural or artificial fermentation (Zou Jiaju 2004: 98).

  Yunnan is acknowledged as the home of large-leaf tea, but it's not the only area where this kind of tea is grown. Large-leaf tea material is also available in Guangxi, Hunan, and Hainan, though these regions cannot rival Yunnan in terms of quantity. When the availability of large-leaf tea in other areas was mentioned, supporters of Yunnan argued that the large-leaf category for Puer tea is shaped by the unique natural conditions of Yunnan that distinguish it from other tea areas. In a series of articles about Puer tea's value, microbiologist Chen Jie places great emphasis on “geographical value.”
To him, this criterion is an efficient way to distinguish authentic Puer tea:

  Although those fake Puer teas made of non-Yunnanese tea material greatly resemble Yunnan's, they remain at an obvious disadvantage: they can't be stored too long. The quality of Yunnan's Puer tea improves as time goes by, but the fake Puer tea made of tea leaves from outside Yunnan will only worsen. (Chen Jie 2009)

  According to these explanations and arguments, the only authentic Puer tea was that which would stand the test of long-term storage, and by this logic only the large-leaf category of tea leaves, grown in Yunnan, could succeed.

  But one doubt remained. What about the regions bordering Yunnan that share the same tea category as well as similar natural conditions? In Yiwu I have often observed that loose tea from Phongsali in Laos easily crossed the border to Yiwu and became part of the raw material of “Yiwu's authentic Puer tea.” This tea is of the large-leaf category and shares the Mekong as mother river with the other main tea areas of Yunnan. When I raised this example to question the geographical classification of tea, the answer, from the perspective of the geographical supporters, was still “no.” Tea experts admitted that tea from Laos, Vietnam, or Burma shares many characteristics with tea from Yunnan, and that, using correct production techniques, it could be made into Puer tea that would be hard to distinguish. But Xu Yahe, an expert from Kunming, emphasized that Puer tea does not refer only to a certain kind of tea with a certain production technique, nor is it based simply on a biological categorization; rather, it is a “historical geographical substance.” He reminded me that Puer tea is named after a place, that Puer Prefecture was established by the Qing during the eighteenth century, and that all the tea gathered there must be taxed before being traded to other places. This, he argued, was a unique history belonging to Yunnan rather than to Laos or any other neighboring countries.