Category: History

Where Eagles Dare

After learning that Japanese beef was graded with a two dimensional system (A, B, C and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5), I had thought I could work on the reason behind the different grades in tea (the most known being in the former English colonies and only for black teas).

To do so I began looking in my books on tea for evidences on why this system was in use and how it the other tea producing countries that did not follow it dealt with this topic. Let us just say for now that the other system combines geographical references and ways of preparing tea to produce a certain quality. However, I stopped when I found out a small reference about the tea produced in Tanzania, which had its origin in German colonisation.

I know the context nowadays is complicated to speak about such part of history and without ignoring the consequences of such occupation, I would like to focus on a small part of it: the introduction of tea.

As with most European countries (see there), Germany developed an approach based on an Agricultural Research Station in Anami that was grounded in 1902 and taken over by the British in 1920 when they were awarded that part of the former German East Africa. Although this research centre had a good reputation (for coffee or for its botany garden) as stated by William Nowell, new Director of the East African Agricultural Research Station “As you are all doubtless aware, we occupy the site and buildings of the Biological and Agricultural Institute, founded in 1902, which under the direction of the late Dr. Zimmermann rendered most valuable services to the colony of German East Africa. […] but we inherited a valuable library, a considerable herbarium, and plantations stocked with introduced economic plants.” (Proceedings of the Royal Society of Arts, Dominion and Colonies Sections from 24th October, 1933), the British fired all its personal, probably out of fear that they would not be loyal to the Crown (the kind of things that was important in those years).

It seems that the first tea was planted in 1904 but didn’t leave the realm of experimentations before the second half of the 1920s (a recurring problem in these research stations be they in India or in Indochina is how long it took from experiments to real “commercial” use, perhaps a topic for another time). To increase the spread, a tea officer was appointed (I still need to find out what this is) and free seeds were given between 1930 to 1934 with a tea factory opening in 1930.

In 1934, 1,000 ha had been planted, producing 20 tons of processed tea, of which 9.3 were exported (Carr et al. 1988, Tea in Tanzania, Outlook on Agriculture, 17:18-22). I do wonder what happened to the remaining 10.7 tons. Were they drank in Tanzania? This seems quite unlikely.

The outbreak of World War II brings us another information as because of the presence of many German settlers (which must have returned after World War I or decided to remain), the British government decided to dispose them of their estates, which were acquired by a subsidiary of Brooke Bond, an English tea brand famous for PG Tips). The land must have been good for tea as the company began to plant more tea (the final results being that in 2010 29,000 tons produced of which 28,000 were exported).

However and surprisingly enough, some Germans were still there as I found out that a Mr Voigt, last (probably because of its age but I couldn’t find any other information on that part) German tea grower in the area retired in 1986 after 60 years living in Tanzania. He even wrote a book about his life, 60 Years in East Africa: Life of a Settler 1926 to 1986. I guess it contains some information on these plantations and how they fared through the years and could be compared to similar experience from British settlers in Kenya or Assam around the same time.

The question I didn’t answer was how did I learn about the grading of Japanese beef. Did you see my title? It is from a classical 1968 war movie with Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood about a “secret traitor” stuff and I thought it fitted the topic of this post to a T, so I selected it.

What? I didn’t answer the beef question… Let’s save it for another time.

Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

This post owns much to the work done by Dr Pim de Zwart from the Wageningen University and Research that published in 2016 a paper in The Journal of Economic History on globalization in the early modern era: new evidence from the Dutch-Asiatic trade between 1600-1800.

I couldn’t access his paper (De Zwart, P. (2016). Globalization in the Early Modern Era: New Evidence from the Dutch-Asiatic Trade, c. 1600–1800. The Journal of Economic History, 76(2), 520-558. doi:10.1017/S0022050716000553) but to make it short and according to the Journal of Economic History « This article contributes to the ongoing debate on the origins of globalization. It examines the process of commodity price convergence, an indicator of globalization, between Europe and Asia on the basis of newly obtained price data from the Dutch East India Company (VOC) archives. »

This will probably not speak to a lot of people here but what got my interest were the words “price data” as the Dutch East India Company imported tea from China to Europe and I thought that perhaps some interesting data (from my point of view) were available somewhere and I did manage to find them as Dr Pim de Zwart made them freely available.

He had gathered together the prices of 16 goods imported by the VOC over the years around 1600 to 1800 and their buying price in Asia over the same period and converted them to the same monetary system, which helps comparison (even more when you are dealing with circa two centuries of data and two different geographical areas).

Sometimes, data was non existent (it happens) and sometimes my guess is that there might have been several conflicting information regarding it or for tea (which you probably understood for me explaining the ins and outs was present) as I already found out several names/quality that were shifting through the year.

I don’t know how he really dealt with that but I will present you the results below with two charts. The first will show you the selling/buying price of tea over the years (obviously for and from the company store and not for everyday life) and the second is something I called raw profitability of tea selling as Dr Pim de Zwart calculated that ratio (I don’t know why). Me calling it that is an oversimplification of reality as to know the real profitability ratio, you would have to add other costs that are not there like the transport costs, the fixed costs of the VOC for keeping its business operating (and this was a really huge business, just look there at the list of settlements and trading posts it owned and operated like a State) but it gives us some hints about the evolution of the trade as a whole.

But enough talking, let’s go to the charts (you can click on them to have a little more info).

What can we see?

At first (for circa 40 years), tea was a kind of luxury, a product that was rare with high selling prices (and therefore high potential profits). Then the price in Amsterdam began to decrease probably because of increased supply from Asia, be it from the VOC or from competitors, the other India Companies (this was a global race, see for example there or there).

In such a trade war that was raging for all products, what was the likely answer of the VOC (and obviously of the other companies at first)? I don’t know but from what I see here and from what I read elsewhere, it seems to me that they had (and bear in mind that it is my opinion centuries away from the event and with the capacity to use tools and ideas that were unknown by the people at that time, so there is for now for me no way to know if they ever followed a deliberate strategy) few options available as I don’t think (or I couldn’t find any evidence in my readings) there was a real uniqueness perceived by the customer (in other words a ton of a said quality of tea could be delivered by any of the India Companies) and due to the need to generate a lot of money, the VOC couldn’t focus on a single or a few items, which price was likely to drop in case of increased importations.

Because all these companies were focused on only one thing (to say it in simple words going to Asia and getting back from it with a lot of goods and money), because of the path dependence (“we have invested money years after years on this strategy that worked for the others and we need to take gold away from them or prevent them to do so from us”) and because it was also a question of national pride and prestige, no alternative thought on how to act could be at first formulated (once again there is no way of knowing if any deliberate strategy was really devised).

This shows that they were clearly in the conditions described by Michael Porter for his generic strategies. From the picture below that sums up the generic strategies (for a complete overview, go there) and the analysis provided above, the answer to what the VOC and the other had to do is clear

Michael Porter's Generic Strategies

Porter’s Generic Strategies (by Denis Fadeev)

Focus on the costs and aim for the cost leadership.

Is this supported by the facts? If you look closely at the data, the price for the tea in Asia began decreasing around the 1730s (when the VOC was already declining) until it reached a floor between 0.30 and 0.50 fl. per pound.

How was this achieved? First, the Dutch imported their goods in Europe through Batavia (today Jakarta) reproducing a model from earlier empires. This meant that everything had first to go though to Batavia being stocked there before being sent to Amsterdam. However since the VOC didn’t have enough ships and people to trade on a “personal” basis, they (like the others before them) used the services of middlemen, Chinese, Indian or Muslim traders that brought goods to Batavia.

Not the optimal solution as these people would likely sell their goods at a higher price but as long as competition hadn’t increase, it was not a problem. However because the British, French and the other India Companies had not access to the network of the Dutch East India Company, they went directly to China resulting in a lower price for them and forcing the VOC to do the same in order to stay competitive.

After an initial drop, the level of price reached a new equilibrium as after getting rid of the middlemen and saving money, the competition between the European companies prevented any further decrease before other approaches were used later in the 19th century.

With this ends for today my quest to find knowledge out of raw information and ends my travel on T.S. Eliot’s footsteps (from a philosophic point of view obviously).

Where is the Life we have lost in living?

Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?

The Rock by T.S. Eliot

Light! More Light!

I think that Goethe’s last words are more than suited to this rather obscure topic that I teased last time, tea in French Indochina. But perhaps I should start with some explanations for those unfamiliar with the history/geography of the world at the beginning of the 20th century.

French Indochina was the result of a process beginning in the middle of the 19th century with a series of military expeditions earmarked as punitive expeditions by France and Spain, leading to the occupation of the South of Vietnam and in 1887 to the creation of the Union of French Indochina.

Administrative map of French Indochina in 1937

Administrative map of French Indochina in 1937. Showing protectorates and provinces/districts by XrysD

Because of the distances involved and France not being overpopulated, this colony was seen as an economic one and not as a settlement one, meaning that “few” French went there and that the exploitation of natural resources was the priority (with most of the funding coming from taxes on the local people through monopoly on important products). For example, rice was the biggest exported product of French Indochina (both in volume and value), something that was unheard before (mostly because the former government and local people had no use for this kind of sales of goods but this is another topic, one that would lead us too far away from tea).

During the Roaring Twenties, France intended to diversify the French Indochina economy with the introduction of several new commodities to be produced but the Great Depression hurt it like in most colonies as the decline in prices and in exports meant less resources while the cost remained the same.

Rice Fielf by Halong Bay

Rive Field by Halong Bay by Dinkum

But let’s not get too quickly to the end of the story.

As I said earlier, while looking for information on this topic, I found several old books and among them the Bulletin of the Economic Agency of Indochina, the representatives in France of the Governors-Generals of French Indochina acting also as a centre of information on said region, of promotion or of research on different topics. I accessed the Bulletins from 1928 to 1937 (I don’t know if it was published before (I have some doubts as it displays a 1st year mark followed by “new series”) or after) looking for information on tea as it was quite often filled with articles on politics, on agriculture in the different provinces as well as analysis of the economical situation in the area or in the potential markets around it (like the Dutch East Indies known today as Indonesia) or a little further away (Poland). Obviously, the different Bulletins are written in a style and with ideas that are so 20s-30s but they are quite interesting.

From 1928 to 1933, it was edited every month and from 1934 on, it became quarterly, making it 76 issues of it In 43 of them, I found at least one article on tea, ranging from production statistics to full analysis of the tea sector in French Indochina or to news about foreign markets (including India and Ceylon).

Banknote from the Bank of Indochina

Banknote from the Bank of Indochina

Before I get into more details about the bigger picture, here are some interesting/puzzling facts:

– tea at that time was still painted/flavoured by chemical products, be it in China or in French Indochina. Perhaps it was also done in other places?

– there seems to be some forgery of what is tea with the addition of other plants and herbs (with those guilty being obviously according to the Bulletin the foreign intermediaries) . The solution was to work on a kind of label (“Appellation d’Origine” in French), an idea that is still valid today.

– there were two kinds of producers: the natives (small gardens) and the French ones with bigger gardens with different processing methods.

First thing, if you read For all the tea in China: Espionage, Empire And The Secret Formula For The World’s Favourite Drink by Sarah Rose (I look at a specific aspect of it, here), you might remember that there were experimental stations in most colonies to experiment and help with the spread of new plants and techniques.

French Indochina had some and they experimented with tea plans but for an unknown reason stopped doing so in 1910 before getting back to it from 1922 on. Their work focused on the best species to be used (although this statement written in 1933 is in contradiction with something else written two years ago in the Bulletin, see a little further below) and they had 14 varieties under supervision in 1919, 24 in 1923 and 70 in 1933 but also on the best way to “design” a garden (with shadow, without, with other trees, the use of fertilizers…) or the way to process tea leaves.

For example, the plots shadowed by chine wood oil trees gave 932 kg of fresh leaves per hectare when shadowed and 1,306 when not; with copperpods, the results were respectively of 807 and 1,087. Without any further indication about the differences between the plots, one can’t drawn any further conclusions.

The main areas of production seemed to have been in almost all French Indochina but mostly (and without surprise) in the areas with hills like those of Quang Nam (a name that came back as a good producing area over the whole time period).

However, in spite of what had been written about the experimental stations, two “species” of tea trees were used and seemed according to the authors native to French Indochina (but see above): Thea sinensis Sims and Thea assamica Mast.

The production was split in two with the gardens of the native, with few access to factories to process in an industrial way their leaves (they did it by hand) and a few French gardens, owned either by some settlers or some companies selling teas in France (perhaps a research for another post?), which had full access to one of the three factories I found references to (but there might have been more of them).

What about the productivity? In Annam from a tea tree, you could extract 600 to 800 grams of green leaves, of which 4 kilos were needed to produce 1 kg of saleable tea (made of 60% of the thin quality and 40% of big leaves or waste). At the same time, the production in Java or India was of 600 to 1,000 kg of saleable tea per ha. Since I have no clue about the density of the tea trees in the gardens in Annam, I can’t do the maths. If you have any information, I will edit this part.

In the end, what was the overall production of French Indochina? I am not sure we can say anything but here are some numbers I could find (which might be a bit biased and would need to be checked with other sources).

The crest of Saigon from 1870 to 1975

The crest of Saigon from 1870 to 1975

The tea produced by the natives seems sometimes to have been only for their own consumption but at other times, they are said to be selling it… The truth is probably that they drank some of it but that they also sold it to either the trading firms, the factories or the above mentioned intermediaries. However every year around 2,000 tonnes of tea were imported from China for the use of the native upper class, of the Chinese and of the European. This seems a bit much and my feeling is that part of it might have been just in transit to Europe under the label of Indochina tea (but this is just a gut feeling with no proof to back it).

However, since my sources here were in a way official, I got the numbers of tons exported (at 80% to France) each year over most of the period. I hope you are well seated because the figures are a bit like a roller-coaster with no real explanations for now.

Year Tons exported Year Tons exported
1902 163 1916 918
1903 168 1917 862
1904 327 1918 1,039
1905 224 1919 903
1906 328 1920 357
1907 368 1921 156
1908 306 1922 508
1909 325 1923 878
1910 530 1924 756
1911 559 1925 103
1912 436 1926 1,148
1913 372 1927 776
1914 490 1928 937
1915 963 1929 1,012

Tons of tea exported from French Indochina (in tons per year)

I also got the value in French Francs for the second half of this table but since it wasn’t complete, I didn’t use it here.

After this “short” introduction, I will try to go through other documents I found online to see if I find more information to share with you or to see if I can find more about the names and whereabouts of the tea companies involved in this business and this area. But this will be for a later article.

Teaser…

You might remember (Or not, I won’t be offended) that I wrote things about tea in the French colonies. Just in case, here are the links:

https://teaconomics.teatra.de/2015/07/28/for-you-little-gardener-and-lover-of-trees/

https://teaconomics.teatra.de/2012/08/28/france-its-colonies-and-tea/

I had completely forgotten this topic and while looking at online archives on maritime power and colonies, I found out new things on the topic of French Indochina (the former name from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia) and tea.

While expanding my research with some references I had found, I came on other older articles and newspapers dealing with this topic or let’s say with the topic of tea in the French colonies or potentially dealing with it and economical/sociological reasoning behind tea or no tea in certain areas.

Unfortunately, there is no way to do a quick search as these old newspapers were scanned but not really indexed. This means I have to go through all of them to see if and what is written and then to make something out of it. I still don’t know what the real scope of my next article (or articles) will be but you know the topic or at least part of it.

As they say on TV, stay tuned.

Curiosity killed the cat or didn’t

I am always looking for old books or old references to tea, both because I like history/books and because I like tea. I must confess that I am lucky to have a habit that allows to mix both (it would be nearly impossible I was a deep hardcore Star Trek fan or something like that).

Cover of the Encyclopédie

This allows me to sometimes find interesting things and I made such a discovery a few days ago as I found out that the original Encyclopédie was online and in a searchable version (it is not new but I hadn’t looked for it before), this Encyclopédie is the one written with the editing of Diderot and D’Alembert (two French philosophers), in the middle of the 18th century that was a representation of the thoughts of the “Lumières”. Out of curiosity, I looked to see if there was an article on tea and there were 3: two on plants and one on tea. The plants were the tea plant itself but this article contained only a description (with an indication to the reader that more was available in the “main” article) and a tea from the Antilles, that apart from sharing the same name (but for false reasons according to the article) has nothing in common with the tea.

I read the article on tea and I found interesting common mistakes or things that showed that some clichés were already common at that time or perhaps should I say that they have their roots even before the 18th century.

For example, Japanese workers plucking tea for the imperial tea had to avoid eating fish or meat, had to wash themselves 2 to 3 times a day in hot waters or in a river or as if it wasn’t enough had to pluck tea with gloves.

There seemed also to be a confusion between the tea plants in China or in Japan that were closely related but it seems not alike and that produced two different sort of quality (more on that later in this post).

According to the reports/books from that time, the tea plants didn’t need much space and were used as fence between rice fields or liked to grow in the most sterile places. Or the fresh leaves were known to have a special effect as they attacked the nerves and produced trembling, bad effects that seemed to disappear once the leaves were dry.

There are other information that left me puzzled: for example, tea is named theh by the Chinese and tsjaa or tsjanoki by the Japanese. I always had problems with the old designation of the tea varieties but it seems more complex than I thought and is not really linked to any name I know for tea and the way its name was brought back from China.

However, there are also some interesting things that are true or partly true. For example, the imperial tea (in Japan) was named ticki tsjaa or powder tea and according to how it was drunk, I think it was matcha, with the best coming from Udsi. This tea is said to be expensive because of the care taken all along the production chain with a kin (it seems this is a weight measure in Japan representing 600g) being paid 30 or 40 thaels or 42 to 46 écus, which converted in silver (this is how its value was determined would make between 1,285 g and 1,407 g, something between 530 and 620 euros or between 0.88 euro per gram and 1.03 euro per gram. Pretty impressive isn’t it? However I am not sure if this evaluation is to be trusted as evaluation in other monetary systems was a bit tricky.

The Chinese tea was divided and sold in 4 different qualities but drunk in a special way that reminded me of gong fu cha. The lowest quality was not given a name and was made of a mix of everything harvested without any intent to sort them. The third one was ban-tsjaa and was dried in stove and then hand-rolled. The second one is not mentioned or at least I couldn’t find any split in the text between the third and the Imperial tea (obviously the best one). The only difference in the production process was the care for the selection of leaves and the fact that it was more dried and then made into dust.

Apart from the text on the usual wonderful medical effect of tea (this drink was already a panacea, something that we all know) with the “once you tried it, you cannot stop drinking tea” sentence, there is also an indication that at the time of the writing, 8 to 10 millions French pounds of tea were sold in Europe yearly, something between 4,000 and 5,000 tons. Out of curiosity, I looked at the statistics from the Food and Agriculture Organisation and in 2016, Europe imported 518,778 tons.

This might seem impressive but since I have no clue how the author of the article on tea found this figure, I will avoid drawing conclusions.

Regarding this old saying that I used as title for this post, I think that we can agree that today, curiosity didn’t kill the cat and allowed it to find something quite interesting.

You must unlearn what you have learned

Everyone knows that in Europe, tea is something English (or British if you prefer), that they invented everything regarding tea rituals and that they are at the core of everything related to tea.

Well, I won’t tell you that everything in this common belief is a lie but let’s say that not everything is true.

As I once wrote, Hamburg is also a major hub for tea in Europe and in spite of the evolutions described in my article is likely to remain its role for some years as it holds a significant advantage in terms of logistics and know-how that will take years for any other interested in the role to reach.

The second point you might know is that tea is said to have become mainstream in the United Kingdom following the marriage of King Charles III with Catherine of Braganza in 1662. This Portuguese princess is said to have introduced tea drinking at least in the English court as this drink was widespread among the Portuguese nobility.

As for early knowledge of tea or mention of it, it has nothing to do with English or Northern Europe people. According to All about Tea by William Ulkers published in 1935, the first mention of tea in Europe was in 1559 in the second tome (but to ease our understanding third to be published) in a compilation of travel books by an Italian Giambattista Ramusio, Navigationi et Viaggi (Navigations and Travels). He translated the works of Haji Mohamed, a Persian traveller, who had spoken of Chai Catai (literaly Chai of Cathay or in modern English, tea of China), a plant that grows in the district of Cathay, which is called Cacian-fsu , ie Sichuan, This was followed by several mentions by Italian, Portuguese and even French mentions of tea, for most of them priests or missionaires; which seems logical since apart from the Church missionaries, only the Portuguese could travel towards East Asia. Afterwards, Dutch and English boats managed to get access to these seas and began bringing back goods among them tea, which was seen as a medicine plant and drink. For a reason I don’t really understand (apart from the obvious “let’s not make our trade too attractive so that people will stay away of it” that doesn’t fit with everything going on at that time), Dutch merchants introduced tea in Europe at the beginning of the 1600s and sold it later on to the English (1652). The first recorded public auction in England for tea happened after that in 1657.

Based on common knowledge and the clichés about tea, I always thought that France wasn’t in the lead for tea. However, at the end of the reign of Louis XIV of France, during the Regency and in the early years of Louis XV of France (in other words between 1707 and 1738), a man called Nicolas Delamare, police commissioner, wrote a Traité de la Police (Treaty on Police) and in it mentioned in the 4th book that (the translation from old French being mine) Tea is the leaves of a shrub that come to us from China, the use of which began to be known in Paris, around the year 1636.

However, like in other countries, things were not going straight ahead for the new medicinal drink and several debates were going on in France like in other countries. For example, the dean of the Faculty of Medicine in Paris in 1650-1652, Guy Patin wrote between 1648 and 1659 several letters to different people where he mentioned tea (I found them online in Correspondance française de Guy Patin edited by Loïc Capron, Paris : Bibliothèque interuniversitaire de santé, 2015, http://www.biusante.parisdescartes.fr/patin/).

The first one was on the 10th of March of 1648 to Mr Charles Spon, where he stated that a badly written thesis by Dr Philibert Morisset on “Does Chinese tea increase mentality?” was to be defended and that this thesis was only made to flatter the chancellor, which was at the heart of this plant reputation, a reputation that will immediately disappear with the noise. The idea being that tea was a panacea.

On the 22nd of March of the same year, he wrote to the same correspondent that one of our doctors, who is much more a braggart than a skilful man, named Morisset, wishing to favour the impertinent novelty of the age, and trying thereby to give himself some credit, has spread here a thesis on tea, with a conclusion that is as well done as this president has his head well done. Everyone has disapproved of the thesis. There has been some of our doctors who have burned it and reproaches have been made to the Dean for having approved it.

On the 27th of March of 1648, he wrote that tea was being taken by the Cardinal Mazarin to deal with his gout, which was in line with the belief that this medicinal plant could cure everything.

Some years later, he wrote on the 22nd of June of 1657 to Johannes Antonides Vander Linder, physician and professor in Leiden (in the Netherlands) asking him (among other things) about the properties of this leaf that was quite common in the Netherlands, saying that for some it was Indian while from others it was Chinese or from Europe (and this debate raged on until much later), stating too that it was quite a hype and that the spouse of a magistrate wanted him to prescribe this “new” plant but that being careful and cautious, he wanted before using it to have some proofs of its efficiency.

The last letter on this topic was written on the 7th of March of 1659 to a Dr. Sebastien Scheffer in Frankfurt, where he stated that this hype for this Chinese plant was only a hoax and that most tea was not true one but made of other plants from Europe, the only way for him to have good tea was to go in China, something that only Jesuits could do.

Another more famous letter writer that spoke about tea was Mme de Sévigné, a famous woman letter writer during the reign of Louis XIV. She corresponded with her daughter for over 25 years with 2 to 3 letters each week and mentioned two times tea.

On the 16th of February of 1680, she wrote that another noblewoman, Madame de La Sablière was drinking milk with her tea. Some says that this was done to cool the tea to prevent her bone teacups from cracking. Perhaps it was the origin of the English custom of drinking tea with milk.

Some years later, on the 4th of October of 1684, she wrote to her ill daughter that the Princess of Tarente (Emilie von Hessen-Kassel) had said to her that she drank 12 cups of tea every day and that her father was up to 40 every morning.

The debate regarding the properties of tea kept on and for example in 1671, Philippe Sylvestre Dufoud, an apothecary, banker, collector and author, which dealt with medicines from the Orient (like at that time tea, coffee, chocolate) wrote De l’usage du caphé, du thé et du chocolate (On the use of coffee, tea and chocolate), which was partly a translation from the works from other people. This book was followed by a rework and re-edition in 1685 under the title Traitez nouveaux et curieux du caffé du thé et du chocolate (New and curious treatise on coffee, tea and chocolate), which became a success and was translated and reprinted several times.

As can be seen above tea was quite popular among some parts of the population in France but in spite of that (or is because of it), it never managed to get the same popularity as in England and even if France was for a long time an importer of tea, it was mostly to smuggle it in the United Kingdom where taxes were too high.

Was the French Revolution the killing blow to this trend? Was it a little earlier the several wars under Louis XIV and Louis XV with the loses of territory and ships suffered by the French East India Company? Some other reason? I couldn’t find a definitive answer yet but there is probably a good explanation to this

However these findings made me think about what I thought to be the history of tea in Europe and as said by a small and green one, which was not a cup of green tea but a Jedi Master, sometimes you must unlearn what you have learned.

Unsung hero

We all know about Robert Fortune and the British East India Company (for a really small summary, you can look there) in the spreading of tea from China to India (I will not go on the topic about the different Camellia sinensis varieties and their origins).

We all know that he went through a lot of efforts to find the tea bushes, to bring them to the coast, to ship them to India and then to Darjeeling.

I say through a lot of efforts as even at that time, sailors, warehousemen, customs officials… (but not botanists or should I say not all of them) knew few things or cared not about the way to take care of plants, seeds, resulting in heavy losses like the ones suffered by the first delivery Robert Fortune made as of the 10,000 seeds sent 100% had rotten and of the 13,000 young plants and only 80 were healthy enough to try to thrive in their new home.

And this result was achieved in spite of the use of up-to-date technology from Victorian times, the real unsung hero of the tea adventure: the Wardian case.

What is a Wardian case? It is a sealed container protecting the plants or the seeds that needed to be protected from salt, moisture… yet at the same time needed light, water… because it is a living being that can’t live without food, water, solar light. Through its glass top, it allowed the light to get in and the closed container allowed humidity to develop, humidity that gave the plants the water they need.

The name comes from its inventor Dr Ward, a physician interested in botanic. He made in 1829 an experiment with a glass bottle and some moths and seeds; the final result being that plants could live/grow (okay not like in wild nature but enough for other uses). Since at that time, the different European powers were all looking for ways to develop their colonies with new agricultural products (a trend that began the first time that someone somewhere saw a fruit and managed to bring it back alive to its own country), the Wardian case seemed perfectly suited to give an answer to this difficult problem: how to bring alive the seeds or plants.

Sometimes as with tea, this exportation of new agricultural products to a country was done through smuggling, because one country (China, France, the United Kingdom…) didn’t want to lose its competitive advantage by allowing someone else to produce the same products they had. This too is a really long story that can be seen in the history of the spice trade once the European managed to get into the Indian Ocean (for an example of this, you can look at the history of Mr Poivre (Pepper in French and yes, it was his true name))..

This case was not using any breaking technology but Dr Ward was the first one to reduce the scale of a greenhouse, freeing it from the need to add extra heating and water, as his case was self-regulated.

To be perfectly honest, Dr Ward might not have been the first to have the idea or to experiment with it (according to some a Scottish botanist might have created one around a decade earlier but I couldn’t find more than a tenuous reference) but he was the first to publish (if you want to protect your inventions, get a patent or publish) and he found an associate in Mr Loddiges, owner of a well-known plant nursery in London that traded with the whole world (it pays to have friends), which helped him spread the use of his invention with for example the shipping of plants from Australia to England in 1833 with almost all of them surviving.

This was what Robert Fortune used like so many others for sending his findings be them plants or seeds and an invention that was instrumental in bringing tea from China to India.

And after this explanation, you might wonder why the Wardian cases failed the first time. The explanation is simple: human curiosity. Custom officials eager to know what was so special about these cases did the only thing that shouldn’t have been done: break the seal and open the cases, breaking the process.

Every luxury must be paid for

I have what I would call a professional bias: when I read about prices from old times, I think about how much it would be today. You might not know it but for different reasons, prices are changing over time meaning that you can buy more or less goods for the same amount of money. This is what is called inflation.
This has been going on since the human kind invented money (don’t worry, I won’t bother you much longer with details) and it explains why the real value (real in economics) is different than the nominal one (again in economics).

When I read thanks to Twitter that the oldest reference to tea in Britain had been found in a document from 1644 I was really curious but when I read that there was a price for a cup of green tea from China, I was even more.
4 shillings for a cup… How much would this amount of money be worth now? And how would it compare to our standards?

As I explained earlier, to know that, you just need to find either a table with all the figures of the yearly inflation from 1644 to nowadays or one showing the real value of the money between those two time periods.
The problem being that statistical institutes weren’t around so early and the goods making the price basket weren’t the same now and them. Both things making it quite complex to make extrapolations.
Luckily, I found two papers dealing with this topic in Great Britain. The first is Seven Centuries of the Prices of Consumables, Compared with Builders’ Wage Rate by E.H. Phelps Brown and Sheila V. Hopkins in Economica, New Series, Vol. 23, No. 92 (Nov. 1956) and the second is Inflation: the value of the pound 1750-2011, Research paper 12/31 from the House of Commons Library (29 May 2012).
With these two papers combined, it should be possible to go as far as 1244 and back to 2011. I said “should” because the method used in both papers is not really the same and the second one uses also several methods to give the members of the House of Commons an approach and a range for the oldest inflation rates.

So by mere calculation (those that followed until now will tell me that there is a gap in my years but converting pounds from 2011 to 2017 is easily done thanks to some tools found on the Internet), the 4 shillings of 1644 become between 37.22 and 46.50 pounds of today or between 42.20 and 52.72 euros.

To give you (and me) an idea, I looked at prices for 100 grams of green tea of China and I found a price between 5 and 68 euros depending on different things, which for a cup of tea with let’s say 3 grams of tea in it would make a price between 0.15 and 2.04 euros.
Even if the price would probably be a little higher (people have to make a living out of it) and if there might be a few mistakes in the conversion to real value (something quite understandable due to lapse of time under consideration), the difference shows us that in 1644, tea was really a luxurious product and that drinking a cup of tea was the sign of belonging to the upper class.

I am glad I don’t live back in these times as I wouldn’t be able to indulge in tea drinking and that would be really sad.

Winter is coming

Winter is coming and no, this has nothing to do with Game of Thrones or with the season. Yes, in both cases, winter is truly coming but in tea, you could say that.

But first we need to take a step back in time and go back to the Canton system and understand how the VOC (the Dutch East India Company), the EIC (the East India Company) and all the other companies traded with China through one of the only ports if not the only one opened to foreigners, Canton.

For different reasons, which I will not deal with, China, until the First Opium War only “traded” with Europe through merchants (the Hong Merchants) appointed for that. Trade might be a big word as for Chinese, it was all about tributes to the Emperor and gifts from him (also the trade along the Horse and Tea Road between Tibet and China). And translating the role of the Hong Merchants as simple merchants is too narrow as they were responsible for everything regarding to the trade with the foreigners from managing the warehouse, buying the goods (and selling them), dealing with the inland suppliers, paying the port charges and taxes for the foreigners and getting this money back… but detailing what these “middle men” did would bring us too far away from my topic.

What I will explain here was something that happened every year before 1833 (year of the vote of the India Act, by which the Parliament ordered the East India Company to say goodbye to its last trade monopoly: the trade with China) and probably some years after that but I couldn’t find any real evidence for the year when winter tea was no longer sold.

Yes you read it, a tea was sold that was called winter tea because they were sent from Canton to England by the first ships of the new trading season that left the Chinese coast in early autumn and arrived and were sold in London or any other port of call in winter.

Their price was lower as they were older leaves that were just the left-overs from the previous season.

But why will you ask? Why was there any left-overs?

In this time, contracts were agreed upon between the EIC and the Hong Merchants by asking each one of them for a quantity of a said quality at a fixed time and price. However for practical reasons, the quantity could vary depending on the overall production and how well each merchant did. The same went for the quality of the tea and thus its classification among the different type of teas that according to several reports from that era was rather subjective.

This meant that quite often a lot of tea boxes didn’t make it to the market on the first move and were stored for a later use (at a lower price).

Let’s explain this with a real example. In 1831-1832 season, the need in London was estimated at 17.5 millions pounds while the stocks (from winter tea) were almost at 7 millions, which meant that 10.5 millions pounds of tea (or 124,000 chests) were to be imported.

The EIC ordered 110,000 of them and received in Canton 204,000 chests; of which 140,000 were said to be of the “quality asked by contract” while the remaining 64,000 chests were said to be of inferior quality, and became the winter tea of the next season.

This can seem quite unbelievable but is partly explained by the fact that all those contracts were not written but oral and by the differences between the two countries.

For the English law, a contract was a contract be it written or oral. However, it seems that the EIC had a different approach in China by which an oral contract was more an indication of how much tea it needed and how much it was willing to pay for. This indication bounded the honour of the company but less than a written contract.

For the Chinese, the situation was even more complex as in that time, there was no commercial law in China, which meant that any conflict had to be solved through negotiation, help from other merchants and discussion.

The only things that made both parties fulfil year after year their part of the deal were the knowledge that they would be back the following year but also the money they made in that business, ensuring that they all wanted to stay in it.

From the EIC and the Hong Merchants point of view, winter tea was just a way of doing the best of a “lawless” situation, of regulating the market and being able to cope with the complexity of the supply chain and the uncertainty of the quality and of the demand.

However, only a few years after the market was deregulated, this winter tea vanished as the market found a new equilibrium after both the EIC and the Canton system were taken away and also because of the introduction of more formal contracts because of the multiplication of people involved in this business.

While follow eyes the steady keel

Those who follow me may have noticed that I have a soft spot for tea (obvious) and for history and when both are mixed, it is pure bliss. And this is what happened to me during my holidays.

I had seen that there was a possibility to go near Lorient, a town in the Southern part of Brittany, famous for being bombed by the Allied air forces because of a massive U-boat base there but less known for being the headquarters of the French East India Companies (its name coming from L’Orient, which means in French The Orient).

And near Lorient, on the other side of the estuary, in Port-Louis, a citadel could be found and within it, the East India Company’s Museum (or Musée de la Compagnie des Indes in French).

To be honest, the citadel was not built by the French but by Spanish (yes I know, what where they doing in Brittany? Let’s say it had something to do with kings, nobles and rebellion). And even today, it looks impressive, even if Vauban, the foremost military engineer of its time, wrote that it was strong but unnecessarily complicated.

Just take a look at it

La citadelle.
« La citadelle de Port-Louis ». Sous licence CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons.

But let’s get back to what brought me there: history, tea and the East India Company.

JpegThe French East India Company’s coat of arms

The motto reads Florebo quocumque ferar (“I will flourish wherever I will be brought”), something quite in line with the spirit of the French monarchy of that time.

Speaking of which, the first company was founded by no other than Louis XIV.

Founding declaration of the French East India CompanyFounding declaration of the French East India Company

I said first company as it is not well known that there were 3 different companies over the under 131 years it existed : the French East India Company from 1664 from 1719 (having lost its monopoly in 1682), the Companies of the Indies (Compagnie perpétuelle des Indes) from 1719 to 1769 (when the French King made its debt a public one after it had survived a financial bubble, a war, the lose of all its holdings in Asia but not the lack of confidence of Choiseul, the “Prime Minister”) and then the French East India and China Company from 1786 to 1795 falling to the Reign of Terror and ending in a financial scandal.

ColbertLaw

Jean-Baptiste Colbert and John Law, two Statesmen behind the first Companies

What the company lacked was a proper base in France and the first one was Port-Louis (you know the place where you can see the citadel above) with some land given on the other side of the roadstead where the Company first put some slipways. In 1675, its base of Le Havre being too exposed to Dutch attacks, the Company transferred its activities on the other side of the roadstead, which lead to a development of the town of Lorient where the main activities where soon relocated.

A view from Lorient and all the buildings needed to support the Company activities and fleetA view from Lorient and all the buildings needed to support the Company activities and fleet

Speaking of which, let’s have a look at the different trips and those built to make them.

Map of AsiaMap of Asia

Two maps of Asia

The different routes taken by the ships

The different routes taken by the ships

How long did it take?

For a trip to China, the ships would leave in January-February and get there in August-October before leaving with goods in December-January and come back in July-August, a 19 months trip.

For a trip to India, all would begin in March-April and end in July-August of the following year, a 17 months trip.

Over the 15 years, a ship could be expected to survive, it could only make 7 or 8 trips. 15 years is a long time if you take into account the storms, the wars, the pirates…, even for ships built with care.

A shipA shipA ship

Three different ships

If you take a closer look at the ship on the upper left side, you will see cargo: porcelain, silk, spice and tea.

I know you were thinking “when will he at last speak of tea.” I am sorry to say that tea was only one good among others as you will see.

Name of the gameName of the gameCoffee, spice and tea, the names of the big Game

But these exchanges, even if they were regulated on both sides, provided an exchange of technologies and cultural goods.

The legations during the 19th centuryA view from the European legations in Canton during the 19th century (the white flag was the French flag at that time)

A Chinese shop full with tea for EuropeA Chinese shop full with tea for Europe

Items from the VOCItems from the VOC

Items from the VOC

And the jewel of the collection, at least from my point of view, teaware, all kind of teaware with different themes and inspirations: Asian landscapes or people, European ones, stories from the mythology, libertine ones…

You will see some of them below.

A tea boxA tea box

A tea box from the 19th century

A small tea boxA small tea box

A small tea box from the 19th century, following a model available since the end of the 18th century

TeawareTeawareTeawareTeawareTeawareTeawareTeaware