USD
GBP
EUR
Introduction
As people gain a deeper understanding of the rosewood industry, many wood enthusiasts ask these two questions:
1. Many rosewood appraisal institutions only identify the "class" in their appraisal reports. Why don't they identify the specific tree species?
2. Some tree species are not listed in the national standard for rosewood, but they meet the standards for a certain "category" of rosewood as stipulated in the national standard for rosewood in terms of family, density, pore size, and color. Can they be considered rosewood?
These two issues are not only controversial in academia, but also frequently encountered by rosewood merchants and consumers.
For example, the first question:
Both are classified as rosewood in the national standard for red sandalwood. The price of Dalbergia cochinchinensis (Siamese rosewood) is over 300,000 yuan per ton, while that of Dalbergia bariensis (Bariensis) is around 50,000 yuan per ton.
If unscrupulous merchants sell Dalbergia bariensis as Dalbergia cochinchinensis to consumers, even if consumers and experts discover the discrepancy and have it tested, the testing agency, based on its methods for identifying wood cell structure, can only classify it as a type of rosewood. With this identification report, the merchant might not necessarily lose a lawsuit.
Extended drawing of the national standard for rosewood, to be implemented on July 1, 2018.
According to existing identification methods based on the cellular structure of wood, rosewood can only be identified to the class level, not the specific species. This situation has been criticized by rosewood furniture manufacturers and consumers, and has caused a lot of confusion for consumers.
how so?
The second question has also sparked considerable controversy:
The national standard for rosewood, formulated in 2000, clearly identifies 33 species in 8 categories across 5 genera (this number will be changed to 29 species on July 1, 2018).
There is no problem in identifying these 33 types of wood as rosewood. The problem is that the national standard for rosewood states in its definition of rosewood species: "In addition, the heartwood of other tree species not listed in this standard among the above five genera, whose density, structure and color meet the requirements of this standard, may also be called rosewood."
So, if the heartwood of a tree species from one of the five genera whose density, structure, and color meet the requirements of this standard is not considered rosewood, does it count as rosewood?
If it doesn't count, why not? If it does count, does an organization need to issue a "rosewood certificate" for these materials? Or can the seller simply determine it based on density, structure, and color?
In fact, these two issues not only frequently spark debate among professionals in the rosewood industry, but have also been the subject of ongoing debate in academic circles, with no consensus reached.
Below is a transcript of an interview with Mr. Yang Jiaju, the first drafter of the national standard for rosewood, originally published in the magazine "Chinese Rosewood Classical Furniture," in which he answered a reporter's questions about wood identification. This interview is shared with fellow wood enthusiasts.
Although these are just Mr. Yang's personal views, it is hoped that through his discussion, everyone can gain a deeper understanding of the identification of rosewood species and the national standards for rosewood, and perhaps even find the root cause and answer to these two questions.
Reporter: Mr. Yang, with current technology, is it possible to accurately identify the species of timber?
Mr. Yang: Impossible, impossible now, and unlikely in the future.
Reporter: Why are you so sure?
Mr. Yang: The reasoning is simple. Trees are plants, and their natural growth is independent of human will; they are constantly evolving. Classifying trees into different species is essentially an act of human intervention. Humans cannot accurately track the complex evolutionary process of nature. Unlike industrial products, plants are not like our industrial products, whose composition, proportions, weight, and color can be artificially set. Plants have cells and are influenced by nature to varying degrees. To insist on identifying trees as species is as ridiculous as turning plants into industrial products.
Reporter: Why can Dalbergia louvelii be classified as a tree species in the national standard for rosewood?
Mr. Yang: That's because the species *Dalbergia louvelii* has very distinct characteristics, so it was possible to identify it as a species back then. But that would be impossible now, because other species similar to *Dalbergia louvelii* have been discovered.
Reporter: How should we understand the terms "class" and "species"?
Mr. Yang: In commercial circulation, timber is called commercial timber or market timber. The names of commercial timber and timber are distinct from, yet related to, or consistent with, tree species names. In dendrology, the unit is "species," while commercial timber is categorized as a "class" based on genus or family. Timber names have a broad scope, referring to one species within a genus, several species, all species within a genus, several genera, or all species within a family. Tree names, on the other hand, have a narrow scope, specifically referring to only one tree species.
Reporter: If I can provide a complete sample of a tree, from its leaves and fruit to the wood, can I identify the species?
Mr. Yang: If we could do that, what would be the point of identification? This would be a standard method for specimen collection in botany. But could our merchants possibly do that? We import logs and planks, not leaves or fruits. Even if we did, how could we definitively prove that a particular fruit or leaf came from a particular plank?
Reporter: Then why do some appraisal agencies claim they can identify wood down to the species level?
Old Yang: (Laughs) You should ask them that!
Reporter: Is there any existing technology that can identify species close to the actual species level?
Professor Yang: This is precisely the scientific research challenge that botanists and wood researchers worldwide are working together to tackle.
Reporter: Is identifying a species really that difficult?
Professor Yang: As the old saying goes, science cannot tolerate any falsehoods. The theory of plant evolution dictates the error rate of human intervention. Our standards for identifying wood are based on relevant data from international herbariums and botanical theories. However, sometimes the botanical basis itself is wrong or has changed. How can your identification still be accurate? For example, in botanical works, you often see a tree species name next to a name in parentheses, with another name written in parentheses. This name in parentheses is a name that was used before, and it may be wrong or inaccurate. Why is it wrong and inaccurate? Because tree species evolve, leading to numerous loopholes in human intervention. For instance, before 1963, there was no name for the tree species *Dalbergia odorifera* (fragrant rosewood); there was only *Dalbergia hainanensis* (Hainan rosewood). But later research showed that *Dalbergia hainanensis* is not a single species, but rather a collection of species. Therefore, we extracted *Dalbergia odorifera* from this list.
Reporter: The identification of rosewood should be based on four standards, right?
Mr. Yang: That's right. First, we look at its family and genus; second, we look at the size of its pores; third, we look at its density; and fourth, we look at its color. We classify rosewood according to these four criteria.
Reporter: It's common knowledge in the industry that different types of rosewood can have vastly different prices on the market; red sandalwood is a typical example. If our appraisal agency can only identify the type, isn't that a loss for some companies?
Mr. Yang: Just like a 30-year-old white man, some are tall, some are short; some are strong, some are weak. Timber is the same. Different growing environments result in different development and different quality. Although timber from plains and mountains belongs to the same category, their quality is vastly different. In fact, everyone understands this principle. Manufacturers understand it, and consumers understand it now. Some issues still need to be addressed by the market.
Reporter: Why can't the national standard for "Rosewood" be further refined to avoid such market conflicts?
Mr. Yang: It's impossible to break it down any further, because I can't list the price based on the size of the pores or the grade of the timber based on the size of the pores. The internal structure of the same tree can change depending on where it's taken. The national standard for "rosewood" cannot be so detailed. The more detailed it is, the less scientific it becomes, which violates scientific principles.
Reporter: What is your opinion on the issue of different origins, different qualities, and different prices for the same type of timber?
Mr. Yang: Actually, it's still the same issue. The quality of trees cannot be determined by their place of origin. Timber has no national boundaries. This is another example of human intervention. Some people say that Lao rosewood is good, but Laos also has weak rosewood. Even the same tree can have good and bad parts. You could say that there is high-quality and low-quality timber everywhere. The industry's use of place of origin to classify timber is just using nationality to determine the quality of the same type of timber.
Reporter: Are the tree species collected in the national standard for "Rosewood" the best materials in the plant kingdom for making furniture?
Mr. Yang: No, we can't say that all the wood species in the national standard for rosewood are the best in the world, nor can we say that there are no better wood species for making furniture than those in the national standard for rosewood.
Reporter: Why don't you introduce more of the currently qualified timber into the national standard according to the four criteria?
Mr. Yang: The national standard "Rosewood" was created during a certain historical period. Its biggest feature is to restore history. The collected wood species are based on slices of traditional furniture materials used in my country's history, and are compiled by comparing them with international standard tree species specimens.
Apart from Dalbergia louvelii, the woods listed in the national standard reflect the types and standards of traditional woods used in my country during the Ming and Qing dynasties. If a new wood species is to be included, it must be able to provide evidence that it is a traditional wood used in history, and it must also meet the four criteria for the identification of rosewood before it can be considered.
Reporter: Do you think it's possible for us to one day overcome the difficulty of identifying timber species?
Professor Yang: It's difficult for me to give you a precise answer. This is a contradictory relationship between humans and nature. I can only say that our future research direction is to strive to identify wood down to the species level.