IIIF Color HighRes
National Institute of Informatics - Digital Silk Road Project
| |||||||||
|
| IIIF Color HighRes |
| Sino-Iranica : vol.1 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Citation Information
310 SING-IRANICA
that our genus Curcuma has nothing whatever to do with Crocus or saffron.
As regards Chinese knowledge of saffron, we must distinguish two long periods,— first, from the third century to the Tang dynasty inclusive, in which the Chinese received some information about the plant and its product, and occasionally tribute-gifts of it; and, second, the Mongol period (126o-1367), when saffron as a product was actually imported into China by Mohammedan peoples and commonly used. This second period is here considered first.
Of no foreign product are the notions of the Chinese vaguer than of saffron. This is chiefly accounted for by the fact that Crocus sativus was hardly ever transplanted into their country,' and that, although the early Buddhist travellers to India caught a glimpse of the plant in Kashmir, their knowledge of it always remained rather imperfect. First of all, they confounded saffron with safflower (Carthamus tinctorius), as the products of both plants were colloquially styled "red flower" (huh hwa *IC 4E). Li Si-6en2 annotates, "The foreign (fan 1) or Tibetan red flower [saffron] comes from Tibet (Si-fan), the places of the Mohammedans, and from Arabia (T`ien-fan 3C). It is the hun-lan [Carthamus] of those localities. At the time of the Yüan (126o-1367) it was used as an ingredient in food-stuffs. According to the Po wu ci of Can Hwa, Can Kien obtained the seeds of the hun-lan [Carthamus] in the Western Countries (Si yü), which is the same species as that in question [saffron], although, of course, there is some difference caused by the different climatic conditions." It is hence erroneous to state, as asserted by F. P. SMITx,3 that "the story of Can Kien is repeated for the saffron as well as for the safflower;" and it is due to the utmost confusion that STUART4 writes, "According to the Pen-ts'ao, Crocus was brought from Arabia by Can Kien at the same time that he brought the safflower and other Western plants and drugs." Can Kien in Arabia! The Po wu ci speaks merely of safflower (Carthamus), not of saffron (Crocus),—two absolutely distinct plants, which even belong to different families; and there is no Chinese text whatever that would link the saffron with Can Kien. In fact, the Chinese have nothing to say re-
1 It is curious that the Armenian historian Moses of Khorene, who wrote about the middle of the fifth century, attributes to China musk, saffron, and cotton (YULE, Cathay, Vol. I, p. 93). Cotton was then not manufactured in China; likewise is saffron cultivation out of the question for the China of that period.
2 Pen ts'ao knit mu, Ch. 15, p. 14 b.
a Contributions towards the Materia Medica of China, p. 189. 4 Chinese Materia Medica, p. 131.
~~.
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright (C) 2003-2019 National Institute of Informatics and The Toyo Bunko. All Rights Reserved.