The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 68 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
The Problem of Identifying Mudan and the Tree Peony in Early China
Open accessAbstract
<section class="abstract">Abstract The tree peony is a flowering plant found in China, and well-known in Britain. Its root cortex is often used in Chinese traditional prescriptions, such as Dahuang mudan tang, Liuwei dihuang wan, and Jiawei shaoyao san. In contemporary Chinese, the tree peony is called ‘Mudan’, and although its beauty was largely ignored until the Kaiyuan era (713‐41 CE), a drug of the same name is mentioned in medical texts of the Eastern Han period (25‐220 CE). The early authoritative materia medica, Xinxiu bencao (659 CE), also describes a plant called ‘Mudan’, but it is different from the tree peony in form. Curiously, although the tree peony is not considered to be native to Japan, it is described as a specialty plant in the early Japanese gazetteer, Izumonokuni Fudoki (733 CE).This study demonstrates that in early texts ‘mudan’ referred to a different plant from the tree peony, and that ‘mudan’ had two remarkable aliases, ‘bailiangjin’ in China and ‘yamatachihana’ in Japan. Today, both aliases are used to refer to Ardisia species. Furthermore, I will demonstrate that the Xinxiu bencao’s description of the Mudan closely matches that of the Ardisia, especially the A. japonica species. My investigations therefore suggest that early prescriptions may have used the Ardisia species, not the tree peony. This raises further questions: when and how did the tree peony come to replace the Ardisia? This paper presents the most likely progression of this transition by tracing the expansion of cultivation of Mudan for ornamental purposes. </section>
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper argues that early Chinese and Japanese references to mudan/môgtan did not mean the tree peony but most likely an Ardisia species, especially Ardisia japonica. It traces how the tree peony later took over the name mudan after being cultivated as an ornamental plant around the High Tang.
Key findings
- Descriptions in the Xinxiu bencao (659 CE) conflict with the tree peony: the mudan there flowers white in summer, bears round green autumn fruits that turn red in winter, stays evergreen, and has a root like herbaceous peony with white flesh and red cortex. By contrast, the Tujing bencao (1061/1062 CE) describes tree-peony features such as third-lunar-month flowers and black seeds.
- The Xinxiu bencao gives mudan the aliases bailiangjin and wu-mudan; Japanese sources such as the Honzô Wamyô (918 CE) give yamatachibana. The paper notes that bailiangjin is now the standard Chinese name for Ardisia crispa, and that yamatachibana now refers to Ardisia japonica.
- The tree peony was first cultivated ornamentally as mu-shaoyao in the Kaiyuan period (713–741 CE) in the inner court; after the An Lushan rebellion and Xuanzong’s withdrawal in 756 CE, capital residents saw it, and it became popular in the Zhongtang era (766–835 CE) and spread to Jiangnan by the Wantang era (836–907 CE).
- Kariya Ekisai (1775–1835) had already challenged the tree-peony identification in 1827, but his view was largely ignored; the paper supports his claim and suggests early prescriptions may have used Ardisia rather than tree peony.
Methods
- Historical philology and botanical comparison of Chinese and Japanese texts from the Eastern Han through the Song and Edo periods, including the Wuwei Han medical slips (25–220 CE), Shennong bencao jing, Mingyi bielu, Xinxiu bencao (659 CE), Tujing bencao (1061/1062 CE), Izumonokuni fudoki (733 CE), Honzô Wamyô (918 CE), Engi shiki (927 CE), poetry, and art.
- The analysis compares morphology, distribution, flowering and fruiting seasons, etymology, and climate, using Halda’s Paeonia classification and treating the tree peony as Paeonia suffruticosa; it also traces how bailiangjin and yamatachibana were later separated from mudan.
Limitations
- The paper states that too few historical materials survive from the Han, Wei Jin, and possibly Northern dynasties to show which plant was used medicinally, and that the exact identity of the early Japanese botan remains unknown.
- It also states that identifying ingredients in traditional Chinese drugs is difficult because early identification did not rely on modern taxonomic specimens, and that the wild origin of Paeonia suffruticosa is still obscure.
- Evident limitations include reliance on fragmentary, edited, or reconstructed texts; disputed authorship and copies of paintings; ongoing pronunciation reconstructions; and a controversial Paeonia taxonomy.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
64 Own interpretation · 49 Sources not found · 36 No basis given · 12 Not checked yet · 1 Own result
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fu 杜甫 (712-770 CE), who was praised as a poet sage (Shi Sheng 詩聖), but could not work in the court during the Xuanzong's reign, does not mention the mudan in his poetry.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Though the herbaceous peony (shaoyao 芍藥) figured prominently in early Chinese literature, the mudan was largely ignored before the Tang dynasty (618-907 CE) except for its medicinal applications.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Li Jun 李濬, left in Songchuang zalu 松牕雜錄 a significant account of the beginning of the cultivation of the plant, in which he confirms that the plant that came to be known as 'mudan' later, was called 'mu-shaoyao' when it was first cultivated as an ornamental plant.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Jun 1991 [c. 800]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In the Kaiyuan 開元 period, the mu-shaoyao 木芍藥 was first respected in the inner court.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Jun 1991 [c. 800]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This poem is one of the earliest poems in existence that contains the word 'mudan'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chen Tiemin 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“[The mushaoyao is] namely the present-day mudan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Jun 1991 [c. 800]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In the Zhongtang era, it was not only in the inner court that the mudan was eulogized: even common people in the capital Chang'an went out each spring to appreciate its flowers.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Zhongtang 中唐 era (766-835 CE): cultivation popularised
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bai Juyi
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The following spring, capital citizens were, for the first time, able to see the flowers in the gardens of the inner court and executives.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The mother of Fujiwara-no Michitsuna 藤原道綱 mentioned tree peonies in her diary, Kagerô nikki 蜻蛉日記 (Kagero Diary).She wrote that she saw flagging 'boutan sou ぼうたん草' in the sixth lunar month of 984 CE.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of the tree peony in Japan
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“At least two poems written in the Wantang era do mention mudan: Hangzhou Kaiyuan Si Mudan 杭州開元寺牡丹 (Tree Peonies at the Temple Kaiyuansi in Hangzhou) by Zhang Hu 張祜 (792-852 CE) 54 and Guan Jiangnan mudan 觀江南牡丹 (Viewing Tree Peonies in Jiangnan) by Zhang Bin 張蠙 (c. the Wantang era).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Wantang 晚唐 era (836-907 CE): cultivation spreads into the southeast
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zhang Hu
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Zhang Bin
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- It may state two separate claims as one. 68
- Probably not a substantial claim. 36
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the summer of 756 CE, the emperor Xuanzong had to withdraw to Shu 蜀 (present-day Sichuan province) with his family and entourage, and the palace in Chang'an fell empty.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Four mudan, red, violet, light-red and translucent white were delivered.The emperor [Xuanzong] instructed these to be planted in front of Chenxiang Ting 沈香亭, which was located to the east of Xingqing Chi 興慶池.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Jun 1991 [c. 800]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“However, Li Bai did not use the word 'mudan', but depicted it with the character 'hua 花' (a flower) and a phrase 'yizhi hongyan 一枝紅艷' (a branch with a flush [blossom]).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Jun 1991 [c. 800]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Since the Zhongtang era, people in Chang'an had been trading tree peonies for high prices as commercial products and some people were cultivating tree peonies for the purposes of speculation.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Zhongtang 中唐 era (766-835 CE): cultivation popularised
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the rule of Xuanzong 玄宗, mudan (môgtan) suddenly became ubiquitous in Chinese literature, and was cultivated for ornamental purposes.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These species bloom with white or pinkish-white petals in May and June, and have round, red fruit which ripen between October and December.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chen Jie 1979, pp. 34-79.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Wild tree peonies are not found south of the Yangtze (except Anhui province), because they grow badly in moist soil and such hot conditions.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“During the Ming dynasty in China, a western mission was sent by the Dutch East India Company, who saw mudan.They introduced it to the West in 1656 CE along with the report below:”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Introduction of the tree peony in western countries
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Smrž 1925
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Izumonokuni fudoki 出雲國風土記 (Gazetteer of the Province of Izumo) is one of the early Japanese gazetteers, and was compiled in 733 CE.In this book, botan was recorded as a plant native of the province of Izumo (the eastern part of Shimane 島根 Prefecture).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Li's home city was Wuxi 無錫, Jiangnan; he therefore would have known whether tree peonies were cultivated in Jiangnan, and he retuned there as Zhedong guancha shi 浙東觀察使 (the governor of Zhedong) in the leap month (Run Qiyue 潤七月) of that year.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Wantang 晚唐 era (836-907 CE): cultivation spreads into the southeast
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This is a remarkable entry because bailiangjin was originally an alias of môgtan in Xinxiu bencao, but the editors of Tujing bencao separated it from mudan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Five Dynasties onward
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“in 833 CE, when he met his colleague Li Shen 李紳 in Luoyang 洛陽, Bai told him: '. . .You had better see well the last [mudan, i.e. tree peonies] after the people leave.Back in Jiangnan, there is no flower like this yet'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Wantang 晚唐 era (836-907 CE): cultivation spreads into the southeast
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zhu Jincheng 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These species bloom with white or pinkish-white petals in May and June, and have round, red fruit which ripen between October and December.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chen Jie 1979, pp. 34-79.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“first entered bencao books in Tujing bencao.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Thus, Japanese historians, K. Gôto, Y. Katô and R. Hashimoto, thought that the text was referring to a different plant, but were unable to identify the most likely candidate.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“According to an account from the book, her colleague told her, 'botan in front of the terrace have a delightful Chinese art'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of the tree peony in Japan
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No wild variety of tree peony has been discovered in Japan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“People have said that mudan (the tree peony) appeared recently.That is because neither a song nor a poem about tree peonies survives in the works of intellectuals of this [early] present empire.[Yet] Mr Zhang 張 said Yang Zihua 楊子華 has already captured a tree peony in his painting.[The existence of such painting] is clear proof.[Yang] Zihua was living in the Beiqi 北齊 dynasty.That is to say actually”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li Chao 1936
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, the word 'botan' never appeared in early Chinese poetry composed by Japanese, such as Kaifûsô 懐風藻 (751 CE), Ryôun Shû 凌雲集 (814 CE) and the Bunka shûrei shû 文華秀麗集 (818 CE), though the tree peony is an exotic flower from China and was highly priased in this period of China.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As shown in above, Su Jing et al. mentioned 'bailiangjin 百兩金' as an synonym for 'môgtan' in Xinxiu bencao, but in the Song dynasty, Su Song et al. separated it from 'mudan' in Tujing bencao.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Uzue 卯杖, as it appears in Makurano Soshi, remains a traditional Japanese decoration for the New Year and sprigs of A. japonica are commonly combined with it.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, wild tree peonies, as well as A. japonica, can grow in these areas.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Today, A. japonica is known as 'zijinniu 紫金牛' in China and is used as a drug ingredient there (figure 9).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Yabukauji ( yabukôji) now generally refers to the Ardisia species, specifically the A. japonica Thunb.(figure 8).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly in Japan, S. Fukane used 'yamatachibana 山橘' as an alias, but later 'yamatachibana' was separated from 'môgtan'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These features actually closely resemble those, which are shown in table 1 (above).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Moreover, the root cortex of the A. crenata Sims (called zhushagen 朱砂根) often gets mingled with that of the tree peony by present-day Chinese drug retailers, because of their similarity of appearance.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zeng Jiang 2003, p. 53.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the word botan (môgtan) first makes an appearance in a Japanese book written in 733 CE, at precisely the same time that the tree peony was first cultivated as an ornamental plant in China.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, this tree peony painting was not recorded in of Zhang Yanyuan's 張彥遠 early book about history of Chinese art, Lidai minghua ji 歷代名畫 記 (the Famous Painters of all Dynasties, 854 CE), 65 although he did introduce various paintings and artists including Luoshen fu tu by Gu Kaizhi, as well as Mudan hua 牡丹畵 (Painting of Tree Peonies) by Bian Luan 邊鸞, an artist during the Zhongtang era.He also”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zhang Yanyuan 1963
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the original painting of Gu Kaizhi is already lost, and moreover, the three copies attributed to the Song dynasty survive.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The bajitian, mentioned by Tao Hongjing as a plant resembling the môgtan, looks similar to the Ardisia japonica as well.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, too few historical materials remain from the Han 漢 and Wei Jin 魏晉 dynasties (and maybe the Northern dynasties, or Bei chao 北朝) to demonstrate which plant was used in medicine.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“According to Halda, the wild P. suffruticosa grows in Anhui, Gansu, Hunan, Shanxi, Sichuan, and Yunnan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Halda
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Curiously, although the tree peony is not considered to be native to Japan, it is described as a specialty plant in the early Japanese gazetteer, Izumonokuni Fudoki (733 CE).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The tree peony is not native to Japan.
In the paper
“He concluded that the name 'baishu' simply referred to white root core of any peony, and that 'môgtan' referred to red cortex of peony roots.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wang Niansun 2004 [1796]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Môgtan, is also called lujiu or 鹿韭 and shugu 鼠姑, it has a piquant taste; [it has a] cold [attribute] and is nonpoisonous.The main curable symptoms are Zhongfeng 中風 with shiver and fever; Chizongjing (瘈瘲痙, infantile convulsion); epilepsy induced by terror; evil qi.[It] eliminates a hard lump, and stagnated blood remaining (liushe 留舎) in the stomach and intestine.[Again, it can] calm the five areas”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ma Jixing, 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Moreover, Tao notes that the bajitian 巴戟天 looks like môgtan but is smaller, 32 yet, bajitian is very different in form from the tree peony (Figure 2).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Southern dynasties to the Sui dynasty (420-618 CE)
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1957 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With increasing commerce, the appearance of feiqian 飛錢 (flying cash) facilitated 'big-ticket' deals and some people attempted to make their fortunes in the tree peony trade.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Zhongtang 中唐 era (766-835 CE): cultivation popularised
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, wild tree peonies grow badly in moist soil and hot climates and therefore they hardly grow at all in inhospitable southeastern areas such as Wenzhou.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Southern dynasties to the Sui dynasty (420-618 CE)
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chen Ranglian 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The indigenous people of Jiannan 劔南 call [it] 'mudan' and [it is] also named 'bailiangjin 百兩金.'The people in Chang'an call [the] genuine [môgtan] 'wumôgtan 吳牡丹.'The [counterfeit] mudan used in folk remedies nowadays is different; it has bad smell.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Chutang 初唐 era (619-712 CE): genuine and counterfeit môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1957 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was a remarkable social phenomenon: no other flower in Chinese history has matched the popularity of the tree peony.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Zhongtang 中唐 era (766-835 CE): cultivation popularised
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, one plant name could refer to two or more plants in different regions, and such regional differences apply for the môgtan as well.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Aim of this paper
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: One plant name could refer to two or more plants in different regions.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Remarkably, môgtan was not mentioned in mainstream Chinese literature in this period, which confirms that the plant was used mainly for medical purposes.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This implies that in the Shengtang era the tree peony was only cultivated in a few gardens of the inner court and its executives, and had not yet been popularised among the majority of people.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The following evidence shows that mudan only came to refer to the tree peony in this era, but since then the word has never referred to any other type of plant, including that described in Xinxiu bencao.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the last phrase of the poem, he uses the word 'chunse 春色' (spring scenery), implying that the plant bloomed in spring, whereas it was said in Xinxiu bencao that môgtan bloomed in summer.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the inner court of the Shengtang 盛唐 (High Tang) era (713-765 CE), the mudan was praised by the emperor Xuanzong 玄宗 (reigned 712-756 CE), and became fashionable in the Zhongtang 中唐 era (766-835 CE).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“'Mu 木' refers to wood or trees and 'shaoyao 芍藥' refers to herbaceous peonies, so there is no doubt that 'mu-shaoyao' is the early Chinese term for the tree peony and that it was only later that people began to call it 'mudan'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“[Môgtan has a] bitter taste and [a] slightly cold [attribute].[It] cures epidemic disease, headache with fever caused by [external factors], the wulao 五勞 (five strains), laoqi 勞氣 (hyperhidrosis), headache, lumbar pain, tetanus neonatorum, and epilepsy.They grow in Bajun's 巴郡 mountain valleys and in Hanzhong 漢中.[Its roots] should be gathered in February and August and should be dried in the shade.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1957 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Secondly, a fragment of Gujin zhu 古今注, records that 'there are two kinds of shaoyao: herbaceous and woody.The latter has larger, more deeply coloured flowers and is commonly, but wrongly, called môgtan'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1957 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Xinxiu bencao states that it flowers in the summer, but Tujing bencao states the third lunar month, and the tree peony does indeed bloom in the spring.The seeds of the môgtan described in Xinxiu bencao are green in autumn and then turn red in winter, but Tujing bencao states that the seeds are black, which is, again, true of the tree peony.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Chutang 初唐 era (619-712 CE): genuine and counterfeit môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1957 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The tree peony blooms in spring.
- Rests on an assumption: The seeds of the tree peony are black.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Môgtan from Shanjiang 山江 and Jiannan 劍南 has a miao 苗 looking like yangtao 羊桃 and blooms white flowers in summer; it bears round and green fruits in autumn; the fruits ripen and turn red in winter; [the plant] endures winter without withering (lingdong budiao 凌冬不凋).The root looks like a herbaceous peony's and its core is white; [its] cortex is red.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Chutang 初唐 era (619-712 CE): genuine and counterfeit môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1992 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Tang Shenwei 1970 [1108]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and that 'mudan' had two remarkable aliases, 'bailiangjin' in China and 'yamatachihana' in Japan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Shennong 神農 and Qibo 岐伯 affirm that its sapidity is acrid.Mr Ji (季) considers it slightly algogenic (cooling).Leigong 雷公 and Tongjun 桐君 say that the sapidity is acerbic with no dangerous active principle, but (the) Huangdi 黃帝 (book) says that though [it is] acerbic it does have [has] a dangerous active principle.The leaves are like those of the peng 蓬 set opposite each other mutually.The colour (”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Han to the Wei Jin dynasty (25-420 CE): the early descriptions
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shang Zhijun 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Needham 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The medicinal mudan must be the same plant that is called the yabutachibana 藪 立花 in the west of the empire [of Japan], and is called yabukōji 藪柑子 in the east . . .You must use this [herb].It is wrong that people today use tree peonies instead of the mudan's cortex in prescriptions.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Karia 1981 [1827]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A shrub up to 2 m (6.5 ft.) tall, with glabrous branches and bipinnate leaves, usually with nine or sometimes more leaflets, ovate to broadly ovate, terminal leaflets usually deeply three-lobed, often with a few additional shallow lobes.Very rarely entire, tips of lobes acute, rachis and petiole more or less glabrous.Flowers single or double; petals white, pink, red, purple, or lilac, immaculate (”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Halda
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During this period, many Chinese extolled the tree peony as 'the king of flowers' (Huawang 花王).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The problem of identification
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, it can be assumed that tree peonies had been grown successfully by the Wantang era.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Wantang 晚唐 era (836-907 CE): cultivation spreads into the southeast
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sound of 'meutang' is close to 'mə̯ utan', the middle Chinese pronunciation of 'mudan'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Introduction of the tree peony in western countries
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The middle Chinese pronunciation of mudan was mə̯ utan.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, Yûjiro Tanaka, a Japanese scholar, threw doubt on the existence of that painting, and has already concluded that the comment by Mr. Zhang is insufficient to prove that the tree peony was praised by Chinese people in the Southern dynasties.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, southeast China and central Japan belong to the Humid Subtropical Climate (Cfa) category in the Köppen Climate Classification, and cultivation of the tree peony would have been as difficult in Japan as in the south-eastern parts of China.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Southeast China and central Japan share a climate that makes tree peony cultivation equally difficult.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the miao 苗 of the môgtan resembles that of the yangtao 羊桃.The môgtan would seem, thus, to be a creeper.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, 'botan' in Izumonokuni fudoki and other early Japanese texts is unlikely to refer to the tree peony, however, the exact nature of the plant to which they refer remains unknown.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, thus far I have demonstrated that Chinese people have appreciated the tree peony since the Xuanzong's reign, while cultivating it as an ornamental plant in their gardens, but in the Chutang era and pre-Tang dynasty, mudan had referred to a different plant.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree peony In Chinese art from Shengtang to the Five Dynasties
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“pre-modifiers in Chinese names of drug ingredients.Most of these names, for example danshen 丹參, qinghao 青蒿, huangqin 黃芩, follow this regulation, though dahuang 大黃 is a notable exception.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Qianxian is located near Chang'an where tree peonies were possibly used instead of the genuine mudan which came from the Chutang era as discussed above.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These three Ardisia species look similar to each other and grow commonly in south China, as Xie Lingyun and Tao Hongjing both mention.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown below, the features of mudan described in Tujing bencao are almost completely consistent with those of the tree peony, and its illustration of mudan closely resenbles the tree peony (figure 3).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Five Dynasties onward
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While yamatachibana was a common plant well known among the Japanese intellects, they had probably not yet seen tree peonies.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which indicates that since the eleventh century, yamatachibana has been considered to be a different plant from the tree peony, and the word was never used as the synonym of botan, except by modern scholars talking about classical literature.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Separation of yamatachibana from mudan
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, based on Guangyun 廣韻 (1008 CE), 'mu' (male) was pronounced with shangsheng 上聲, but 'mu' (wood) was pronounced with rusheng 入聲 during the Sui and Tang dynasty.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Guangyun 廣韻 (1008 CE)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Chen Pengnian et al. 1976 [1008]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Around that time botan 75 could be supplied internally in Japan.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Botan (môgtan) 牡丹 in Japan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both mu 牡 (male) and mu 木 (wood) are now pronounced with the same sound 'mu' but with different tones, and it is also presumed that both initial consonants were also pronounced 'm' in the past.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The background of Luoshen Fu Tu was, therefore, supposed to be drawn from the headwaters, which is close to the home place of wide tree peonies.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Tree Peony in Early Chinese Art
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This plant hardly has any similarities to the mudan described in Tujing bencao, but there are a few common features with môgtan in Xinxiu bencao, such as the fruit and its endurance of winter without withering.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Five Dynasties onward
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The turning point for the Ardisia and the tree peony was during the Shengtang era, when the tree peony was first praised in the inner court, though people of the court did not call it 'mu-shaoyao'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chinese physicians have accumulated clinical experience of using tree peonies medicinally over twelve centuries.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rebellious troops, however, did not reach Chang'an.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ancient physicians accepted without question the medical benefits of the môgtan, so they may not have realized the difference.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 755 CE, the Chinese emperor Xuanzong faced the rebellion and withdrew to Shu 蜀 (present-day Sichuan province) with his family and entourage.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both sounds were clearly distinguished by the differences on the post-codas; accordingly the sounds were hardly interchangable with each other during Sui-Tang dynasties.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Besides, Mayanagi has concluded that 'mugui' 木桂 in Eryazhu 爾雅注 and 'mugui' 牡桂 in Shennong bencao jing 神農本草經 are the same.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mayanagi 1995
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In Xinxiu bencao, the genuine môgtan was called 'wu-môgtan' in Chang'an, although wild tree peonies grow near Chang'an and can be easily supplied to Chang'an.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Xinxiu bencao
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Yet, the both sounds in the old Chinese of the Han and the earlier dynasties are presumed as: '*môg' (male) and '*muk' (wood) by Karlgren; and '*m(r)uʔ'' and '*mok' by Baxter.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Karlgren
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Baxter
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The above discussion has traced the story of the môgtan and determined that it was called 'bailiangjin' in the Chutang era in China and 'yama-tachibana' in early Japan, and that both these aliases in fact referred to the Ardisia species.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“'Mu' (male) was pronounced as 'mə̯ u' (Karlgren) or 'muwX ' (Baxter, 'X ' represents Shangsheng), and 'mu' (male) was pronounced as 'muk' (Karlgren) or 'muwk' (Baxter).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Karlgren
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Baxter
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, it can be concluded that 'môgtan' from the Southern dynasties to the Chutang era referred to a plant different from the tree peony, which most likely is a member of Ardisia species, specifically the A. Japonica, even though the tree peony came to be referred to as môgtan around the Chang'an region.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Some traditional Chinese prescriptions contain root cortex of tree peonies.
“Some traditional Chinese prescriptions, such as Dahuang mudanpi tang 大黄牡丹皮湯, Liuwei dihuang wan 六味地黄丸, Jiawei shaoyao san 加 味逍遙散, and Guizhi fuling wan 桂枝茯苓丸 contain root cortex of tree peonies.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The tree peony is not native to Japan.
“although the tree peony is not considered to be native to Japan, it is described as a specialty plant in the early Japanese gazetteer, Izumonokuni Fudoki (733 CE).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The aliases bailiangjin and yamatachihana are used today to refer to Ardisia species.
“Today, both aliases are used to refer to Ardisia species.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The tree peony blooms in spring.
“the tree peony does indeed bloom in the spring.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The seeds of the tree peony are black.
“the seeds are black, which is, again, true of the tree peony.”
The paper relies on this without support.
One plant name could refer to two or more plants in different regions.
“Furthermore, one plant name could refer to two or more plants in different regions”
The paper relies on this without support.
The middle Chinese pronunciation of mudan was mə̯ utan.
“the middle Chinese pronunciation of 'mudan'”
The paper relies on this without support.
The sixth lunar month is close to the end of the tree peony's flowering season.
“As the sixth month is close to the end of the peony's flowering season”
The paper relies on this without support.
Southeast China and central Japan share a climate that makes tree peony cultivation equally difficult.
“southeast China and central Japan belong to the Humid Subtropical Climate (Cfa) category in the Köppen Climate Classification, and cultivation of the tree peony would have been as difficult in Japan as in the south-eastern parts of China”
The paper relies on this without support.
The distinctive smell of the tree peony root cortex is a reliable marker for identifying it in historical counterfeit môgtan.
“the evidence being the tell-tale smell of the tree peony's root cortex.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
“the tree peony was first praised in the inner court, though people of the court did not call it 'mu-shaoyao'.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
“In the Kaiyuan 開元 period, the mu-shaoyao 木芍藥 was first respected in the inner court.[The mushaoyao is] namely the present-day mudan.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > From the Five Dynasties onward
“In 1062 CE, the emperor ordered Su Song 蘇頌 et al. to edit another illustrated bencao book, i.e.Tujing bencao 圖經本草.”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
“the Illustration originated in Tujing bencao 圖經本草 (1061 CE), printed in 1211 CE”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
“In the summer of 756 CE, the emperor Xuanzong had to withdraw to Shu 蜀 (present-day Sichuan province) with his family and entourage”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Conclusion
“In 755 CE, the Chinese emperor Xuanzong faced the rebellion and withdrew to Shu 蜀 (present-day Sichuan province) with his family and entourage.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
“'Mu' (male) was pronounced as 'mə̯ u' (Karlgren) or 'muwX ' (Baxter, 'X ' represents Shangsheng), and 'mu' (male) was pronounced as 'muk' (Karlgren) or 'muwk' (Baxter).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Etymology of the name môgtan
“both initial consonants were also pronounced 'm' in the past.However, based on Guangyun 廣韻 (1008 CE), 'mu' (male) was pronounced with shangsheng 上聲, but 'mu' (wood) was pronounced with rusheng 入聲 during the Sui and Tang dynasty.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > The Wantang 晚唐 era (836-907 CE): cultivation spreads into the southeast
“Bai had been to Hangzhou 杭州 and Suzhou 蘇州 in the years 822 to 826 CE (during the Shengtang era), as a Cishi 刺史 (Regional Inspector).”
§ The Problem of Identifying Mudan 牡丹 and the Tree Peony in Early China > Cultivation of mudan as ornamental plants
“The Shengtang 盛唐 era (713-765 CE): the beginning of cultivation”
Citations
Cites
(1985) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 663
A Handbook of Old Chinese Phonology
Baxter, W. H. (1992) · doi:10.1515/9783110857085 · Cited by 514
Karlgren, B. (1957) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 235
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- Fan Shu 1957, p. 31. The story is recorded in Yunxi youyi 雲溪友議 by Fan Shu, in the Wantang era. In the Sikuquanshu tiyao 四庫全書提要, it was established that the contents of that book were founded on rumour and are not reliable ('皆委巷流傳, 失於考證,' Yu Jiaxi 1958, pp. 1023-31). References
- Arichi, Shigeru, Michinori Kubo, Hideaki Matsuda, Tadao Tani, Tadahito Tani, Kayoko Tsunaga, Masayuki Yoshikawa and Isao Kitagawa 1979, 'Studies on MOUTAN CORTEX (III) On Anti-inflammatory Activities (Part 1)', Shoyakugaku zasshi 生藥學雜誌, 33(3): pp. 178-84 (in Japanese).
- Guo Shaolin 郭紹林 1997, 'Guanyu Luoyang lailide liangze cuowufa '關于洛陽牡丹來歷的兩 則錯誤法 (Two wrong conceptions concerning the origin of mudan)', Luoyang daxue xuebao 洛陽大學學報 (Journal of Luoyang University), 12(1): 6-9.
- Halda, Josef J. and Jaems Waddick 2004, The Genus Paeonia, Porland: Timber Press.
- Hong Tao 洪濤, Zhang Jiaxun 張家勳, Li Jiajue 李嘉珏, Zhao Wenzhong 趙文忠, Li Mingduan 李明瑞 1992, 'Study on the Chinese Wild Woody Peonies II. New Taxa of Paeonia L. Sect. Moutan' Zhiwu yanjiu 植物研究 (Bulletin of botanical research, Harbin) 12 (3): pp. 223-234 (in Chinese).
- Hong Tao and Gian L. Osti 1994, Zhiwu yanjiu 植物研究 14(3): pp. 237-240 (in Chinese).
- Hong Tao and Dai Zhenlun 戴振倫 1997, Zhiwu yanjiu 植物研究 17(1): 1-5 (in Chinese).
- Ishida, Mikinosuke 石田幹之助 1967 [1941], Chôanno haru 長安の春 (Chang'an in spring), Tokyo: Heibonsha. Jiangsu meishu chubanshe 江蘇美術出版社 (ed.) 2000a, Gu kaizhi xiao yi huihua changjuan sikuan changjuan zhi yi 顧愷之蕭繹繪畫長卷四款 長卷之一, Nanjing: Jiangsu meishu chu- banshe. Jiangsu meishu chubanshe 江蘇美術出版社 (ed) 2000b, Zhongguo lidai renwuhua jingdian 中國 歷代人物畫經典, Nanjing: Jiangsu meishu chubanshe 江蘇美術出版社. Jiangsu xinyi xueyuan 江蘇新醫學院 1997, Zhongyao dacidian 中藥大辭典 (Encyclopedia of Chinese materia medica), Shanghai: Shanghai kexuejishu chubanshe 上海科學技術出版社.
- Kano, Y., T. Kubo, N. Yoshino 2003, 'A Study of Pi-ya 埤雅, Part V, Plants (1)' Bulletin of the College of Humanities Ibaraki University 39: 138-115 (in Japanese).
- Kubo, Michinori, Tadao Tani, Hiroshi Kosoto, Yoshiyuki Kimura and Shigeru Arichi 1979, 'Studies on MOUTAN CORTEX (I) Historical Analysis', Shoyakugaku zasshi 生藥學雜誌, 33(3):155-65 (in Japanese).
- Mayanagi, Makoto 真柳誠 1995, 'The names of drugs in the cassia-bark family in China prior to the 11th century', Yakugaku zasshi 藥史學雜誌 (The Japanese Journal for History of Phar- macy), 30(2): 96-115 (in Japanese).
- McCullough, Helen C. 1985, Kokin wakashû, California: Stanford University Press.
- McKinney, Meredith 2006, The Pillow Book, London, UK: Penguin Books.
- Nakao, Manzô 中尾萬三 and Kôichi Kimura 木村康一 1930, 'Photographic catalogue of Chi- nese drugs II', Bulletin of the Shanghai Science Institute, 1(5). (in Japanese)
- Needham, Joseph 1986, Science and Civilisation In China vol. 6: 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Shanxisheng Bowuguan 陜西省博物館 (ed.) 1981, Yongtai gongzhu mu shiguixianhua 永泰公主 石椁線畵, Xi'an: Shanxi renmin meishu chubanshe 陜西人民美術出版社.
- Shi Weile 史為樂 et al. (eds.) 2005, Zhongguo lishi diming dacidian 中國歷史地名大辭典 (Dic- tionary of Chinese Historical Toponyms), Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe.
- Tanaka, Yûjirô 田中勇次郎 1962, Bunbô seigan 文房清玩 vol. 3, Tokyo: Nigensha 二玄社.
- Tang Shenwei 唐慎微 1992 [1108], Jingshi zhenglei beiyong bencao 經史證類備急本草 (Tôyô Yigaku Zenpon Sôsho 東洋醫學善本叢書 vol. 30-34), revised by Ai Sheng 艾晟 et al. in 1108 and printed by Liu Jia 劉甲 in 1211, Osaka: Oriento shuppansha オリエント出版社 (facsimile).
- Watson, Burton 2000, PO CHU-I: selected poems, New York: Columbia University Press.
- Yu Jiaxi 余嘉錫 1958, Siku quanshu tiyao bianzheng 四庫全書提要辨証, Beijing: Kexue chubanshe 科學出版社, pp. 853-863.
- Zeng Jiang 曾江 2003, 'Mudanpi yu Zhushagen, Baixianpi de jianbie bijiao 牡丹皮與朱砂根, 白鮮皮的鑒別比較 (Comparative identification between Moutan cortex, Radix Ardisiae Crenata and Dictamni Cortex)', Hufbei zhongyi zazhi 湖北中醫雜志 25(11): 53.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
May, B. H., Zhang, A. L., Lu, Y., et al. (2014) · The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine · doi:10.1089/acm.2013.0372 · Cited by 21
“For example, the herb mu dan pi is now derived from the tree peony, but before the Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) this name probably referred to Ardisia species.(32) The dating of books and citations is also complex.”
Ethnography, Environment, and Empire
Sloane, J. (2013)
Metadata
- Authors
- Kubo, T.
- Corresponding author
- Kubo, Teruyuki
- ORCID
- Kubo, Teruyuki
- Venue
- Asian Medicine
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 108-145
- ISSN
- 1573-420X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-4218
- OpenAlex
- W2046094227
- Semantic Scholar
- 342ab2d721ee4ae23d63b04340a7e16730836f15
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Asian Medicine (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
- Chinese Academy of Sciences
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Names and Ethnobotany
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Natural History
- Keywords
- Paeonia suffruticosa, Paeonia, Ardisia, Ardisia japonica, Chinese materia medica, plant identification, medicinal plant names, Liuwei Dihuang Wan, ornamental plant cultivation, ancient China
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-04, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-04 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Problem of Identifying Mudan and the Tree Peony in Early China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/157342109x568964
- The paper
- Kubo, T. (2009). The Problem of Identifying Mudan and the Tree Peony in Early China. Asian Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1163/157342109x568964
