Botanical Provenance of Historical Chinese Dye Plants

Abstract

Botanical Provenance of Historical Chinese Dye Plants. Dye plants are an essential part of historical dyeing activities for textiles. Their correct botanical provenance is an important basis for understanding the sources mentioned in dyeing instructions and for chemical identification of the dyes on the textiles themselves. This paper describes a combined study of dyeing recipes in four historical manuscripts of the Ming (1368–1644 C.E.) and Qing Dynasties (1644–1911 C.E.). Within the context of historical plant medicine and botanical classification, this study resolves uncertainties about the names, provenance, and preferences for the significant dyes in Chinese textile history for the first time, namely safflower, sappanwood, smoketree, pagoda bud, Amur cork tree, indigo, Chinese gallnut, acorn cup, dark plum, munjeet, gromwell, gardenia, and turmeric. Most dye plants in the historical manuscripts refer to one or two major species or variants, with ambiguity arising mainly from non-uniform naming conventions and conversion between different taxonomies. It is now clear that saffron was confused with safflower in Ming Dynasty herbal plants instructions, that Su mu 蘇木 meant sappanwood (Caesalpinia sappan L.), and occasionally foreign redwoods from genera Caesalpinia and Haematoxylum, and that huang lu mu 黃櫨木, huang lu黃蘆 and lu mu 蘆/櫨木 were all variants of Cotinus coggygria Scop. Pagoda bud can be identified by huai hua 槐花, huai mi 槐米, huai hua mi 槐花米, and huai zi 槐子, while jiang huang 薑黃 and yv jin 郁金, recorded for dyeing, both referred to the rhizome of Curcuma longa L. Of the various zhi zi 梔子 available, zhi zi for dyeing was Gardenia jasminoindes Ellis f. longicarpa Z·W·Xie et M. Okada, although whether this preference was widely recognized or practiced is not clear. This research promotes a better understanding of historical Chinese dye plants. It also complements existing research results of historical herbal medicine in the aspect of dyeing.