Si Thep, an early Siam city-state, before Sukhothai

 

We just visited Phetchabun, to a place in the mountains, then back to Si Thep, the Siam kingdom (?) before Sukhothai.  It's tempting to describe that as the first kingdom of Siam, but this kind of large gap in my own awareness of "local" history has me wondering what else I'm not in on.  It turns out that I've read quite a bit on that, from visiting museums and monuments in different places, some of which is referenced here.  Of course this isn't going to be a research paper quality reference of that history, but I'll pass on what I learned, it just includes some gaps and errors, sure even after adding more parts.  Per Wikipedia it was really a city-state; we can start with that, provisionally.

Many people are familiar with the Ayutthaya and Sukhothai kingdoms and eras, to a limited extent.  You can go visit old temple ruins in both places (those are two distinct locations, the capitals of those kingdoms).  We've been to both enough times that I couldn't say how many.  Maybe only 3 to Sukhothai, or maybe more, but definitely more to Ayutthaya.  We were just there, and the time before that wasn't so long ago.

only part of one of many ancient Ayutthaya temples

visiting Sukhothai in 2021

that was for Loy Krathong, in November, a great time to visit there

Then there was also a state / kingdom in the north of Thailand, La Na, that is well-known.  I referenced that in the last description of visiting Ayutthaya, I just didn't mention it:

Maps like that give you an impression that the boundaries of these empires or states were clearly defined over a long period of time, and they may have kept shifting a bit instead.  It still works as general background; for an extended time that's probably roughly where those boundaries were, give or take some minor transitions.

The Si Thep state (or whatever it was) was described as starting 1300 years ago by our guide on that outing.  It might have been harder for them to pin down a specific date when it ceased to be, since it would've declined over time, perhaps for different reasons.  According to him it was well established when the ancient Cambodian (Khmer) state associated with Angkor Wat wasn't developed yet.  It's hard for me to know how to place all that he said though; it seems possible a lot was left out, and some parts could've been wrong.  Not wrong in the sense that he was badly informed, but related to the whole broad picture changing over time as new details emerge (which gets covered in more detail here).

Scanning the Wikipedia article on Si Thep must fill in some mostly correct background:

Hindu-influenced era: 6th–8th century CE

The second phase of occupation (c. 6th–8th century CE) was characterized by the expansion to the outer city. As the monarchy emerged, Vaishnavism took an important role in Si Thep's society, with relationships to India, Funan, Chenla, and Dvaravati cultures.[12] Si Thep was an urban Dvaravati culture center since the 6th century CE, and one of the earliest communities in Thailand that made contacts with India, attested in stone inscription K 978, written in Sanskrit with Pallava script dated to the 6th century CE. So, Si Thep was developed into an early state along with other early Southeast Asian states like Funan, Chenla, and Sri Ksetra.[13] Charles Higham reports of a 7th-century Dvaravati inscription from Si Thep that states, [a new king took the throne]. " A moat enclosed 4.7 square km, while the Khao Klang Nai structure (Thai: เขาคลังใน) dates from the 6th to 7th century.[14]: 303, 308–309 

Buddhism-influenced era: 8th–10th century CE

This phase (c. 8th–10th century CE) was the most prosperous. An irrigation system was developed, and Mahayana Buddhism influenced art as relationships with India, Dvaravati and northeastern cities continued. Si Thep, Sema [fr], and Lopburi sites controlled the routes in the region.[12] The growth of Si Thep led to the establishment of its neighboring city, Tha Rong (Thai: ท่าโรง), located 20 kilometers northward on the bank of the Pasak River, which was later renamed Wichian Buri during the reign of King Nangklao of Rattanakosin.[15] Via Buddhism, several historical evidences supports the connection between Si Thep and another group of Dvaravati-influenced political entities in present Northeast Thailand, Wen Dan.[16]: 91–92 

During this era, Si Thep, together with Lavo, was the center of the mandala-style state, Dvaravati; however, due to the weather-induced migration or the pandemic, Si Thep lost its prosperity, and Lavo became the only center of power in the area until it fell under Khmer hegemony during the 10th to 11th centuries.[17]

Rise of Angkorian: 11th–13th century CE

During this phase (c. 11th–13th century CE), Shaivism was a great influence in Si Thep at Angkorian times, and Si Thep had relationships with Phimai in Mun River basin as Sema [th] ceased to control the routes. Due to Jayavarman VII's policy, Si Thep lost importance and was almost abandoned around the 14th century.[12] Prang Song Phi Nong and Prang Si Thep were built in the 11th to 12th centuries.[14]: 303, 308–309 

After the decline of Si Thep in the 14th century, a new kingdom, Ayutthaya, was subsequently founded southward on the bank of the Chao Phraya River in mid-14th CE, as the succeeded state,[2] as its capital's full name referred to the mandalas of Dvaravati; Krung Thep Dvaravati Si Ayutthaya (Thai: กรุงเทพทวารวดีศรีอยุธยา).[18][19][20][21] The connection between the ancient Mon people, the predominant population of the Dvaravati, and the present-day Thai people in central Thailand, who are the inheritors of Siamese's Ayutthaya, was established in several genetic studies performed in the 20th century.

So they're describing it as a city-state, not really on par with a full-scale kingdom.  It was actually founded in the 4th century (300s CE), but seemed to rise to prominence in the 8th century, as described.  To place that in relation to the Sukhothai time-frame, Google offers this:  "The Sukhothai era (1238–1438) was the first Thai kingdom..."

Some parts of this are especially fascinating, to me.  Apparently there is very little for written references in relation to this city-state, in part because (as I understand it) earlier versions of modern Thailand hadn't developed written language prior to the Ayutthaya era.  My understanding isn't much of a guide, and what I learned from our actual guide didn't seem as convincing as it might have been, even though he worked for the local Fine Arts Department that manages those sites.

Let me elaborate.  It's only recently that they've excavated the sites we saw, and learned that many of them exist.  Of course parts were there to be seen continuously since those centuries back, but not as much as you might expect.  Even the giant main site structure had been buried by soil, or so we were told (by another local; they might've had that wrong).  A fallen down structure being buried and lost is understandable, but not a monument of that size, tens of meters tall.

Other parts were fascinating, and less speculative.  They definitely incorporated aspects of Buddhism and Hinduism in their monuments, and even Khmer artwork, presumably from later on.  As the time periods changed apparently they kept updating design aspects and inclusions.  Indian influence was primary, but not the only external source.  They made parts of the monument, the one in the historical area section, from concrete, a technology our guide said that they would have imported from India.  Of course the Romans did a lot with concrete long before this time-frame, but it's especially fascinating to me that during Europe's "dark ages" they lost the technology to make it (even though it would seemingly be from a very simple recipe).

Across all of this experience it seemed especially odd to me that I'd never heard of Si Thep.  Or actually I probably had; when we visited Lopburi a lot of the historical references in a museum there would've covered that time-frame [or possibly not, per looking up museum display references, cited in a different section here], and that background, and according to our guide some very important artifacts from Si Thep are kept there.  That we saw, no doubt, whether or not the whole background was clear.  

I'm just not great with keeping track.  Of course it was amazing to me three years ago, during that visit, that Thai history was that much more complicated than I had been aware, but not much of a detailed timeline stuck with me.  The more ancient parts were especially fascinating, from 3000 years ago or more, but I'm skipping covering that here.

we hiked up this earlier in the day, which is more difficult than it looks

good views up there

this very zoomed-in temple was playing music we could hear up there, maybe 8 km away

our guide was great, and that historical site dog joined in as a greeter

very old Buddha cave-art in a cave at the top

Lopburi museum reference:

I looked up a museum exhibit reference we visited in Lopburi in December 2022 to see what it said about this history, and if possible about Si Thep:

Si Thep is an hour and a half drive from Lopburi, north of there, so although it's possible that the map scope extends further up, and I cut it off, it seems more likely that Si Thep just didn't make this reference list and map graphic.  It was definitely from that time period, and also heavily influenced by Indian culture, as they describe, but it just wasn't mentioned here.  Strange.

But then if this museum content was from prior to 5 to 10 years ago and much of the scope of ruins at Si Thep were unknown then the omission makes sense.  It just wouldn't have seemed like there was that much up there, never mind a large city-state center complex, and massive monument, second only to Borobudur (in Java, Indonesia) in size from that early time period, according to our guide.  Let's take a look at that, even though similarities or differences might not stand out at a glance:

it's big (from Dec. 2015)

seemingly related to Buddhism

Of course this isn't a claim about tight linkage in background themes between Si Thep and Borobudur, in Indonesia.  Our guide said that it's the only other larger related time period monument in SE Asia.  One might naturally wonder how the later temples at Siem Reap fit into this.  I won't get too far into that, since it's another long history that I'm not all that familiar with, even though I've been there twice.  But citing more related background, about visiting another place, does partly link it together.  

On a separate trip we visited a related Khmer temple at the edge of Thailand, in Sa Kawo province, again in December 2022, which related to this:

Thai fine arts department page on the temple:

Prasat Sdok Kok Thom is located at Nong Ya Kaeo village, Moo 6, Tambon Khok Sung, Amphoe Khok Sung, Sa Kaeo Province and away from the border of Thailand – Cambodia about 1 kilometer.

It was originally called “Prasat Muang Phrao”, and then Prasat Sadok Kok Thom and Prasat Sdok Kok Thom. The word “Sdok Kok Thom” is Khmer language, “Sdok”came from “Sadok” which meant to overgrown, “Kok” meant to reeds, and “Thom” meant to large. Therefore, “Sdok Kok Thom” meant to overgrown with large reeds.

The religious place was built in 1595 B.E., in the reign of King Uthai Thitayavarman II (1593 – 1609 B.E.) to bestow the Brahmin who left the buddhist monkhood named “Sri Chayantaravarman” or his former name “Sadashiva”. This Brahmin was a son-in- law of King Suryavarman I and also an officiant who performed the Royal Coronation Ceremony to King Uthai Thitayavarman II.2

Prasat Sdok Kok Thom was constructed by the style of Khmer architecture.

Those dates are a little confusing because they're based on the Thai dating that sets the time of the Buddha to zero, not Jesus's birth (it's 2568 now; they're 543 years apart).  A related Wikipedia page converts parts over:

Udayadityavarman II (Khmer: ឧទ័យាទិត្យវរ្ម័នទី២) ruled the Angkor Kingdom from 1050 to 1066 A.D. He was the successor of Suryavarman I[1]: 137  but not his son; he descended from Yasovarman I's spouse.

He built the Baphuon Temple to honor the god Shiva, but some of the sculptures are dedicated to Buddha. He also completed the construction of the West Baray reservoir and built the West Mebon, a raised-earth island in the center.[1]: 138 [2]: 103 [3]: 371 

The Sdok Kak Thom temple, located near the present day Thai town of Aranyaprathet, was also constructed during his reign. The temple was home to a gray sandstone stele, 1.51 meters high, with a detailed inscription that recounted the sequence of previous Khmer kings. 

This was from that temple:

And it looks like this:

It loses a little for people who don't read Thai, but this helps place it and other early somewhat local monuments:

Note that the time-frame for that temple fell between 1050 and 1066 (the beginning of the "Angkorian phase," in that other reference), with the main Buddhist related and most prosperous Si Thep time period falling between the 8th and 10th centuries (700s to 900s CE).  Our guide's reference to the main temple being 1300 years old corresponds to this, but that really was the second phase of Si Thep's development, with an earlier Hindu era from the 6th to 8th centuries.

That's probably basically what our guide had been describing.  The mix of different dates tied to different parts of the two sites we visited was probably a little confusing to me, but spelled out more clearly in those text citations it all comes together.

Additional thoughts on the Light and Sound show:

Is anyone still with me, through all of these tangents?  During that light and sound show one thing that came to mind was considering how authentic any presentation about that history could be.  I asked our guide, and he said that they tried to make the clothing (costumes) period specific, based on what little they could find of formal clothing back then.  It wouldn't have been much.  They were dressed like these guys:

Who were "holding up" part of the temple monument here:

I didn't get a good broad-angle shot of that monument section, so here's one from a virtual tour page hosted by the Thai Fine Arts Department that manages the site:

I guess that it doesn't look like much, but for something 1300 years old that was generally lost to time for an extended period it's still impressive, just probably not in good condition compared to the original form.  Of course they have more on the history from other sources; it wouldn't only be based on those ruins, as already covered here.  This reference covers the general area, with background on both sites that we visited, Khao Klang Nai (the Si Thep Historical Park) and Khao Klang Nok, the other monument where the light and sound festival was held.

On the subject of how "lost to history" monuments of this scale could be this was from the Sadok Kok temple we visited in Sa Kaeo province, the one that was part of the Khmer empire:

In 1901 a French explorer told the outside world that it was there.  Thais already knew that, but the historical context and meaning they probably weren't as clear on, although they probably also knew that it was a part of the Cambodian (Khmer) empire.  One particular stone with a lot of writing described important parts of the Khmer history in detail; that's what the citation means "inscriptions discovered there are more important than any inscriptions in Cambodia."  This Wikipedia source on Sdok Kok Thom describes that in detail:

The inscription (classified K. 235) is a 340-line composition, in both Sanskrit and ancient Khmer, carved on a gray sandstone stele 1.51 meters high that stood in the northeast corner of the temple's court. Dating to 8 February 1053, it recounts two and a half centuries of service that members of the temple's founding family provided to the Khmer court, mainly as chief chaplains to kings. In laying out this long role, the text provides a remarkable and often poetically worded look at the faith, royal lineage, history and social structure of the times.

Back to the event theme, it seems like the prints of that period costume fabric would only be an interpretation drawn from later time periods.  The jewelry worn in the dancing they probably didn't have; according to our guide from early relics found they were using copper and tin (so brass, or other alloys), instead of gold in Thailand in that early period.  Of course there couldn't really be a reference to music from then, or dancing style; there isn't much written about the local history and culture, at all.  

So a lot of what we saw in that show was from general, modern Thai culture, informed by the Ayutthaya and Sukhothai era background.  They had the ancient king (in the story) pay respect to Shiva (I think it was him; a Hindu god, at least), so they at least mixed in a little related story line.  I suppose if that particular monument structure was created during the later Buddhist period it might not have all synced.

the related festival sales booths parts were nice

One last tangent:  for being from a rural area myself (in PA) I love small towns in Thailand, and Si Thep had a great feel to it.  We walked around a market area in town and found all sorts of great food for next to nothing, buying fruit and snacks to go with it.  Walking around that festival people seemed incredibly relaxed and friendly, familiar from my own earlier days.  I suppose they're still like that back there now; I visited last a year ago (rural PA), and people there are nice.  As they are in Si Thep.

I would highly recommend Bangkok locals or expats go and check it out.  It's like visiting Sukhothai before developed tourism shifted everything there to a tourism themed hotel, hostel, restaurant, or gift shop.  Actually Sukhothai and Ayutthaya are both great too (you'd be crazy to not eat boat noodles visiting the latter), perfect places to rent a bike and check out at a slow pace, or just to walk around.  But Si Thep adds a local small-town feel, at the cost of them still developing the museum display side of things.

if you do hike up that mountain wear pants (there are mosquitos), carry plenty of water, and take your time

Hong Tai Chang 1988 Thai sheng

This tea version was shared by the owner of Tea Side, which is much appreciated.  I've tried very little relatively old sheng like this, so I'll keep this intro short and move onto a description.  It will be a good opportunity to let the vendor offer his opinion in more complete citation:


1988 Yuen Neun Hong Tai Chang Aged Raw Pu-erh Tea Cake


The original old sheng from the famous brand Hong Tai Chang. Delivered directly from the warehouse of the factory, where it was produced and stored since 1988. It’s already more than 30-year-old pu-erh tea.

This sheng is made from old Thai trees of Chiang Rai province in northern Thailand. The pu-erh was made exactly at the factory from which the brand Hong Tai Chang had started to walk around the world.

We are well aware of the Thai Pu-erh "kitchen" from the inside and are convinced that the traditions of Hong Tai Chang (and of course the original material from old trees) are owned by different pu-erh factories in Thailand...


There's more there related to the issue of diversity of sources and authenticity, including the remark "Hong Tai Chang is one of the most frequently forged tea brands." 

I'm reminded of writing about the Xiaguan "Love Forever" cake recently, created in 2013 from older material, so very recently in comparison, about how there were two relatively identical versions produced (differing greatly in character, reportedly) that were only wrapped in a different tong wrapper, one paper and one bamboo.  In that case varying storage condition issues seemed to diversify experienced outcomes a lot as well. 

On to that Tea Side description of this tea character:

The taste is distinct and clear with the richest palette of hues of the wood-nut spectrum and the noble aroma of old age Chen Xiang (陈 香, Chén Xiāng). Infusion is smooth and easy to drink. Cha Qi is dense but delicate. The power of the material, amazing stamina, softness and density of the liquor gain endless respect for these samples of the classic puer tradition of Hong Tai Chang...


That listing includes a link to a video review by the guys at TeaDB (which I've not seen yet), and a positive comment by Emmett Guzman, a name that might be familiar to some.  Good signs, but personal experience is a better yardstick, even for someone with more limited related prior exposure. 

It's interesting how the two product reviews there that include flavor-aspect evaluation vary so much, and don't necessarily match my own.  The general character described is very common between the three; that's how it goes with such interpretations.

Review:

I tasted the rinse to see where this is coming from and a bit of char or related milder carbon was present; the tea has seemingly aged to quite well fermented.  I'll probably go a little longer on the first two infusions than I normally would to clear past that, not so much over 5 seconds, but stopping short of using very fast infusion times.

First infusion:  hard to say if this is clearer, but it's pleasant as it is.  A very "dark" range aged tree bark is closest to that carbon-like range, which again I expect to clear off relatively quickly.  Beyond that aged furniture flavor and other range typical to aged sheng joins that, well roasted chestnut leaning towards dried fruit.


Second infusion:  it's transitioning well, and quickly.  The roasted chestnut range is much clearer.  Next the obvious difference in people drinking and describing teas comes up, that there is a standard expected pattern of drinking tea for taste, then for mouth-feel and aftertaste aspects, then later for effect of the tea more, the cha qi theme.  Feel of this is soft; all of the compounds giving young sheng that aggressive feel have transitioned.  It has a rich fullness to it, and that flavor trails over, but that effect will change a lot as this opens up.

Maybe it's just my imagination but I think that I can feel this already, not even finished with the second cup.  The dry leaf amount was in between what I would normally drink and not quite to double that so I used all of it, a judgement that usually goes the other way (and maybe should have in this case).  I would hate to be stretching the infusions and preparing this in atypical form, but in short timeframe retrospect drinking a dozen rounds is probably going to be way too much, and I'll probably really be feeling it halfway to that point.  I have some time off, since it's a Thai holiday, but my wife will be starting in about going to a shop somewhere for some errand, always.  We'll see how it goes.

Third infusion:  part of the sweetness resembles marshmallow; that's cool.  Flavor may not be the main thing a lot of "advanced" sheng drinkers would be focused on but that part is pleasant, complex and unique.  I probably over-use "unique" as a description; this really is different.  The way this is so clean already, and combines that marshmallow with roasted chestnut and hints toward dark dried fruit is very nice.


Fourth infusion:    I think next round it might be more where it's going to, which is probably going to be a long transition path.  I am using relatively fast infusion times for this, around 5 seconds.  For using a relatively high proportion of tea even that's a bit long, a bit on the intense side.  This would be great as flash infusions; maybe I'll try one after the next round.

Not so different; again that marshmallow touch is nice, a great addition to the rest.  The roasted chestnut is picking up sweetness, adding more in the toffee range.  One aspect I can't really identify is how I'd imagine betel nut to be, an odd mix two different Chinese herbs people chew together that results in a dark spit that you don't swallow, if I'm remembering that right.  It's something unfamiliar, at any rate.


Fifth infusion:  with the pour this might have brewed five seconds; still not on the light side.  I'm definitely feeling this.  It's a heady buzz but also with a lot of body feel.  It's probably a good thing I had breakfast before this, or I might be tapping out right about now.

As happens with every tea the flavor range shifts, the aspects balance, for going slightly faster, but it's not so different.  I've not been doing justice to the role dark wood plays in this.  It's like a mix of how mahogany and driftwood comes across, heavy in rich flavor (or aroma) and also mineral undertone.  Then the rest I keep repeating.  The higher end note that is in marshmallow range is picking up a hint of citrus as well; that's different.  I could relate to a description that's just a list of dried fruits instead; dried tamarind and dried dark cherry would make sense.  There's a lot going on for flavor layered in together, and expectations would naturally lead someone to identify the parts they were already expecting.


Sixth infusion:  more of the same really; maybe as well to take a round off describing this.


Seventh:  this really has settled into where it will be in these middle infusions, it seems.  It's pleasant, interesting in flavor and other character, clean and complex, definitely intense.  The hint of citrus is probably changing character and level a bit, more clearly an orange zest at this stage, more distinct.

This is not a tea to drink in a hurry.  I'm not supposed to be in a hurry, but of course my wife not only has something she wants to do, there's a driving need to get on with it.  The effect works much better for relaxing and appreciating the cool feel to the day (maybe 25 C / 75 F now, so room temperature, but cool for me), and the colors and sounds outdoors.  I'm doing that, I just don't have long to go in keeping it up.


Eighth:  I'll try the first longer brewed infusion for staring around at things outside so much, brewed much longer, well over 20 seconds.  That effect is cool too, the blast of mellow intensity.  All of those flavors I'd listed had taken turns to be dominant but none really dropped out, beyond the range cleaning up over the first 2 to 3 rounds.  It's complex.  I'd expect that hint of citrus to get pushed out of the way by the heavier, earthier range (when brewed for so long) but it ramps up in the same proportion.


Ninth:  maybe that citrus hung in there brewed strong because it was still ramping up.  This is definitely a dried version of orange zest; that drying process drops off the brightness but leaves behind plenty of related flavor.

It's interesting comparing this fermentation effect to that of shu.  I can see why it's not a completely different thing, for a version that is completely fermented like this.  It's just as unrelated as it is the same though.  Lighter, subtle versions of shu can be closer to this than most, which taste like peat and the like.  One part is earthy, for sure, but range in between earth and mineral is closer to root spices of some sort, not far off how ginseng comes across, that's just not exactly it.  This is really clean, even though the descriptions I keep using probably don't sound it (well roasted chestnut, dark wood, etc.).

The feel from the tea is changing, less of a head buzz but still well centered in both my head and body.  It's lightening a little, while still intensifying at the same time.  I'm not really into "cha qi" feels like that but it is notable.  As with thinking that bitter and sweet sheng is very pleasant it leads me to consider whether it would have to be interpreted as positive or not.  I'm mostly against any and all drug use, pulling my own bias in that direction, away from embracing anything related.  It's not exactly like being stoned (on weed), but also not completely dis-similar.  Of course there is weed for that, or tranquilizers, stimulants, etc.


Tenth:  it's nice how the root spice and citrus keep ramping up, with a hint of dried fruit around the range of dried tamarind, making this much less earthy at this stage.  It's not losing intensity, more changing in form.  In a sense the taste was stronger before, so that doubling timing to 20 seconds or so would maintain that level, if desired.  This works well light though, not really all that light for brewing for just over 5 seconds.

11:  I brewed this for around 10 seconds; that might be where I like it best at this stage.  I don't think I'll get to try another half dozen infusions to "see this through;" I'm a few warnings in that it's time to go.  Apparently we're off to see a "Lego museum," whatever that is.  This hasn't changed enough to warrant repeating the round 10 description anyway, and probably will brew a few more similar rounds prior to later cycle transition and extending timing changing things a little.

I think I'll drop the notes and just drink the tea.  What to add as a conclusion?  It's an interesting experience, pleasant and novel.  This is definitely not a breakfast tea; rushing through a dozen rounds would make no sense at all, and I've been at the edge for rushing things a little taking over an hour to drink part of it.

Conclusions:

Thinking back on that it seems likely that the extent to which you "feel" a tea might relate a lot to what you expect.  One could probably mindfully, with a lot of pre-conceptions, drink a strong mug of Lipton and seem to have a lot of whatever experience they expect as a result; calming, a real lift, whatever it is.  Maybe caffeine and theanine always really combine to support both.  Spending an hour just drinking tea and relaxing outside on a cool morning should feel energizing and relaxing, maybe even without the tea.

A second point, not so closely tied but not completely unrelated:  no matter what someone experiences related to tea, or prefers, or expects, it seems that someone else would comment that to them that experience isn't valid, or in line with what they understand related to that particular tea (or subject theme, etc.).  This was highlighted in a discussion about tea and cults in a Facebook group recently, a subject I wrote about not long ago. 

Half the people responding seemed completely against mixing tea experience and religion / formal ceremony, or wearing flowing, naturally dyed robes as a shared group aesthetic choice.  The other half (roughly speaking) were for all of that.  That's an oversimplification that people inclined towards either side (bias) could object to, with good reason, but still at the core that seems to be what was happening.  Specific types of liberal and conservative biases seemed to be the main perspective foundation, not the specific details being discussed.  A couple of comments made that explicit:  people said they didn't even need to hear the details, or click a link, to know where they stood, that a few short phrases of description already painted enough picture for them.

And what?, one might ask.  It's just an observation, and one that ties back to the "cha qi" theme clearly enough that it seems unnecessary to flesh that out.  Plenty of pu'er enthusiasts would be open to cha qi experience as valid without embracing ceremonial aspects of tea drinking.  But without actually trying this particular tea it seems impossible to critique what experience should have resulted, if any one description is well-grounded or based partly in imagination.  It gets a bit far into philosophy but I'd interpret all our life experience as based partly in preconceptions, which isn't far from a claim that our own ideas (/ framing) are a main experiential input along with external "raw data."

At any rate it was cool trying an older sheng version.  I haven't tried many 30 year old sheng versions at all (maybe only one?) so I'm really not the right person to place it, related to any of the experience aspect range.  I found it interesting and quite pleasant.

slightly creepy science museum display

on a green screen effect background (with Kalani representing Penn State that day)

Legos did come up