National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
Digital Archive of Toyo Bunko Rare Books

> > > >
Color New!IIIF Color HighRes Gray HighRes PDF   Japanese English
0016 Sino-Iranica : vol.1
Sino-Iranica : vol.1 / Page 16 (Grayscale High Resolution Image)

New!Citation Information

doi: 10.20676/00000248
Citation Format: Chicago | APA | Harvard | IEEE

OCR Text

 

190   SING-IRANICA

number of additional species as compared with its predecessor. The introduction of foreign plants begins from the latter part of the second century B.c., and it was two plants of Iranian origin, the alfalfa and the grape-vine, which were the first exotic guests in the land of Han. These were followed by a long line of other Iranian and Central-Asiatic plants, and this great movement continued down to the fourteenth century in the Yûan period. The introduction of American species in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries denotes the last phase in this economic development, which I hope to set forth in a special monograph. Aside from Iran, it was Indo-China, the Malayan region, and India which contributed a large quota to Chinese cultivations. It is essential to realize that the great Iranian plant-movement extends over a period of a millennium and a half; for a learned legend has been spread broadcast that most of these plants were acclimatized during the Han period, and even simultaneously by a single man, the well-known general, Can Ktien. It is one of my objects to destroy this myth. Can Kien, as a matter of fact, brought to China solely two plants,—alfalfa and the grape-vine. No other plant is attributed to him in the contemporaneous annals. Only late and untrustworthy (chiefly Taoist) authors credit him also with the introduction of other Iranian plants. As time advanced, he was made the centre of legendary fabrication, and almost any plant hailing from Central Asia and of doubtful or obscure history was passed off under his name: thus he was ultimately canonized as the great plant-introducer. Such types will spring up everywhere under similar conditions. A detailed discussion of this point will be found under the heading of each plant which by dint of mere fantasy or misunderstanding has been connected with Can Ktien by Chinese or European writers. In the case of the spinach I have furnished proof that this vegetable cannot have been cultivated in Persia before the sixth century A.D., so that Can Kien could not have had any knowledge of it. All the alleged Can-K`ien plants were introduced into China from the third or fourth century A.D. down to the Tang period inclusively (618-906) . The erroneous reconstruction alluded to above was chiefly championed by Bretschneider and Hirth; and A. de Candolle, the father of the science of historical botany, who, as far as China is concerned, depended exclusively on Bretschneider, fell victim to the same error.

F. V. RICHTHOFEN,1 reproducing the long list of Bretschneider's Can-K`ien plants, observes, "It cannot be assumed that Can K`ien himself brought along all these plants and seeds, for he had to travel

1 China, Vol. I, P. 459.