In common usage, the term rosewood has been applied to quite a number of different tree species in two or three different genera. Woodworkers, however, seem to have a more specific meaning, sometimes referring to “true” rosewood or the like. So, what exactly are we taking about. How far away from Brazilian rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia) or East Indian rosewood (Dalbergia indicus) can we get before its no longer “true”. How about Narra (New Guinea rosewood, Pterocarpus indicus)? I need some opinions. I seem to remember seeing something in print but don;t know where to find it.
Edited 5/9/2007 12:57 am ET by Troost Avenue
Edited 5/9/2007 12:58 am ET by Troost Avenue
Edited 5/9/2007 12:59 am ET by Troost Avenue
Replies
Well, you can look it all up on the internet, but to answer the question of how far away....
"anything that is not Dalbergia is not proper rosewood". There are several hundred types of Rosewood, but all are Dalbergia.
PNG "rosewood" is not a rosewood as it belongs to Pterocarpus, but East Indian Rosewood is because it is a Dalbergia....The really fancy Rosewoods come from Madagascar, and the best of all, Dalbergia Melanoxylon, is at present being looted from Mozambique.
I might stand to be corrected, being a dumb old country boy, but that is my take on the subject. That is what is good about wood-no two pieces are the same.
http://www.hobbithouseinc.com/personal/woodpics/indextotal.htm#letterJ- that link leads to good info on woods, if you have not seen it.Philip Marcou
Edited 5/9/2007 6:47 am by philip
Edited 5/9/2007 6:51 am by philip
Basically, you're talking about any species of Dalbergia. They are beautiful when finished. They work well, too, albeit mildly toxic, sort of along the lines with poison ivies/oaks (Rhus/Sumac genus). Some get a pretty wild rash from it; some don't. Warm humid conditions tend to exacerbate skin reactions. When I work with Dalbergia, I limit skin exposure with nitrile gloves and a full plastic disposable apron.
Thanks. I'm familiar with the web site and I probably agree that only the Dalbergias are "true" rosewoods. However, I've not found that to be officially stated in the botanical literature and that gives some suppliers the right to include woods from genus Pterocarpus (e.g. Narra, bloodwood) and even Tipuana. Buyer beware, and customers too, but does it really make a big difference. Is someone being cheated?
Being cheated? Not really I guess.
I come from the plant world, and where consumers often speak in common language tongue, the industry speaks in botanical language because it's the only form of communication that unequivocally has no inaccuracies.
Do you know how many plants wear the common name "lily"? Now, using that common word, I can name a hundred unrelated genuses that ride on that term. A true lily is a Lilium. A day lily is not a lily: it's a Hemerocallis. A calla lily is not a lily: it's a Zantedeschia. See what I mean?
Same goes for a lot of industries. There are common names and words; then there are the technical ones used when accuracy is needed.
I'm impressed. Should we be talking about the Tribe Dalbergieae? That would include the genera Dalbergia, Pterocarpus, and Tipukana and would thus cover all bets for practically everything commonly referred to as rosewood. But that does seem like cheating. Although this discussion has probably floated far above the interest of most woodworkers, do you think the question of proper wood identification is important enough for an artical in FW. All of these woods are expensive but some names seem to demand a higher value and thus a higher cost to the customer for what might in fact be a "lesser" wood.
Guides are already available that explain all this stuff. The ones that get specific are the size of bibles.
Further, the complexity doesn't stop at species. We run into subspecies. There are huge variations in growth habits of the same exact plant differing by the geographic growing zone. Was it drought stressed, overwatered, native forest harvested or cultivated, etc. Even nutritional variations can create huge differences in the look and handling qualities of the wood. Old forest wood will yield much tighter rings and harder working properties than cultivated (fed and watered) trees that were grown faster.
I think what all this comes down to is to settle in and get familiar with what you can get your hands on on a reliable basis from the same supplier; one that will give you a repeat order to match the first based on the same words, learn how it looks and acts, then you're able to reasonably predict your outcome.
Enough said. End the end, I guess that both the woodworker and the customer will buy the prettiest boards regardless of what you name them.
Ok. Great talking with you.
"The ones that get specific are the size of bibles." Blewcrowe, that reminded me of a segment I heard on NPR yesterday about an upcoming web site, The Encyclopedia of Life which will (eventually) "serve as an online reference source and database for every one of the 1.8 million species that are named and known on this planet..." It was but a pipe dream 15 or so years ago, but with the state of the internet today, can become a reality.
They have a demonstration site up now. Sample pages, FAQ's, list of partners (officers, sponsers, contributors, etc.). A corresponding effort that will feed into the EOL is the Biodiversity Heritage Library.forestgirl -- you can take the girl out of the forest, but you can't take the forest out of the girl ;-)
The internet is a window to the world. One that has never before existed. We are surrounded and immersed in it without fathoming its greatness. Few could have imagined twenty years ago that we could exchange thoughts with peeps all over the world all day long on a moment by moment basis. The internet is a gift. As with all things, it's strength is its weakness, and it is used for bad as well as good.
All the technical literature in the world still doesn't give me an answer to the origbinal question "what is rosewood" Blewcrowe and I may be confortable with scientific classifications and their definitive identifications of woods (and every other thing biological) but the averaage buyer of fine furniture, and perhaps even the average woodworker, probably is not and will accept at face value a common name for a wood regardless of how many different species it might be applied to. That's okey I guess, but if you are told you're buying a Cadillac, and are paying the price for a Cadallac, the dealer has some obligation to actually provide the Cadillac. Is it enough to say the car is one of the General Motors types and then suggest that all such types have the same value? If we're honest, and don't really know the make and model, the emphasis should be on the beauty and quality, not the common or scientific name. And yes, I have been stung in the past by paying a premium price for "rosewood" that, when cleaned up and examined more carefully, was actually of a spieces that usually would be of less value. That was my mistake. What I made of the wood was not sold as "rosewood" or at the price some might expect for "real rosewood".
I'm not 100% sure I follow exactly what you mean TroostAvenue. You ask, what is rosewood? The answer to that as you indicate is that rosewood is of the genus Dalbergia. Therefore the following Dalbergia spp., are rosewood as identified by the precise Latin binomial scientific system of General and specific names, D. cearensis (kingwood), D. spp., latifolia, javanica, marginita, and sissoo(all Indian rosewoods), D. melanoxylon (african blackwood), D. retusa (cocobolo), D. spruceana (jacaranda do Para), D. stevensonii (Honduras rosewood), and D. spp., fructescens, nigra, variabilis and tomentosa (all four sold as Brazilian tulipwood.)
Scientific precision dictates that if the wood does not come from a tree of the Dalbergia genus, it's strictly speaking not a rosewood. It's also true that the Latin binomial system is constantly under review and taxonomists reclassify species due to the weight of new evidence.
Certainly if I want to buy mahogany and I'm fussy I will write on the purchase order Swietenia macrophylla, or the related Khaya ivorensis, etc.. Such a description is unambiguous and leaves the seller in no doubt about what wood to supply.
In the end, as you point out, wood is wood and it's usually what's made of it that matters. Sometimes lookalikes and similar woods just will not do, e.g., exact replacement of parts on valuable antiques-- I suppose this is another time when exact Latin naming of the species at purchase might be imperative. Slainte. Richard Jones Furniture
What I mean is that nowhere in the binomial system does one find the name rosewood and nowhere in the other botanical literature have I found it stated that "true" rosewood must be of the genus Dalbergia. Woodworkers may have strong opinions but the term rosewood will continue to be applied to woods of other genera, e.g. Burmese or New Guinea rosewood (genus Pterocarpus), and no one can say that that's wrong or misleading.
All that is correct as far as I know TroostAvenue. The common names of woods is often a bit hit and miss. Sometimes it's accidental. For instance many trees native to north America were given names based on their similarity to trees found in the immigrant's home continent, Europe most frequently.
And some merchants try to sell the Shorea's as Phillipine mahogany, ha, ha. Slainte.Richard Jones Furniture
I've read on this board and in magazines that Cocobolo is consider rosewood as well. Don't know what the scientific name of Cocobolo is or if it's considered a Dalbergia.
mike
Cocobolo is Dalbergia retusa. I've heard it said that all "true" rosewoods are of the genus Dalbergia, but I don't know if the reverse is true, i.e. that all Dalbergias are "true" rosewood.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalbergia
I personally don't consider any wood not of the Dalbergia genus to be a legitimate Rosewood. But I don't necessarily think that all Dalbergias should be referred to as Rosewood. My favorite member of the genus is Cocobolo and I never refer to it as anything other than Cocobolo, although it is sometimes useful to describe it to the uninitiated as a member of the Rosewood family just to give them a point of reference that they've heard of.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled