^* For previous instalments in this series of articles see ‘SIMW—I’ in BSOAS, xiv, 3; II, BSOAS, xv, 1; III, BSOAS, xv, 2; IV, BSOAS, xv, 3. My thanks are due to the Central Research Fund of the University of London for a grant in aid of my work in European collections and to the Freer Fund for a grant in aid of the work done in American collections. I am specially grateful to Mr. F. Anderegg, Head of the Photographic Services of the University of Michigan, for allowing me to use his laboratory.

^{page 206 note 1} The list was compiled from the items given in the appendix to Wiet, G., Objets en cuivre, Cairo, 1930, the RCEA, and other publications.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 2} cf. Diakonov, M. M., ‘Ob odnoi rannei arabskoi nadpisi’, in Epigrafika Vostoka, I, Moscow, 1947, pp. 5–8.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 3} cf. Ettinghausen, R., ‘The Bobrinski “kettle”, Patron and Style of an Islamic Bronze’, in Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1943, pp. 193–208. For the inscription see RCEA, ix, No. 3260.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 4} cf. RCEA, xi, No. 4046.

^{page 206 note 5} ibid., xii, No. 4439.

^{page 206 note 6} ibid., xii, No. 4609.

^{page 206 note 7} ibid., xii, No. 4705.

^{page 206 note 8} ibid., xiii, No. 4807.

^{page 206 note 9} ibid., xiii, No. 4864.

^{page 207 note 1} For a complete list of Lu'lu's brasses see Rice, D. S., ‘The Brasses of Badr al-Din Lu'lu'’, in BSOAS, xiii, 3, 1950, pp. 627–634, pls. 13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 207 note 2} I am deeply indebted to Dr. Hamit Z. Kosay, Director of the Etnografya Müzesi and to the then Director-General of Antiquities in Turkey, Bay Hayrullah Örz, for the facilities put at my disposal during my visits to Ankara.

^{page 207 note 3} On this famous mosque see Sarre, Fr., Reise in Kleinasien, Berlin, 1896, p. 126 f.;Google ScholarErdmann, K.,‘Beobachtungen auf einer Beise in Zentralanatolien im Juli 1953’, Archäologischer Anzeiger lies Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, 1954, p. 190 f.Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 1} cf. art. Kaikhusraw, in EI, ii, p. 780.

^{page 208 note 2} cf. J. H. Kramers, in EI, iii, pp. 752–3.

^{page 208 note 3} M. van Berchem, and H. Edhem, CIA, Asie Mineure, index, p. 120 s.v. 'Ali; Gabriel, A., Monuments turcs d'Anatolie, II, Paris, 1934, p. 161;Google ScholarLoytved, J. H., Konia, Inschriften der Sddschukischen Baulen, Berlin, 1907, pp. 50, 65.Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 4} Maryon, H., ‘Metal Working in the Ancient World’, in American Journal of Archæology, LIII, 1949, pp. 120 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 5} For examples see Glück, H. and Diez, E., Die Kunst des Islam, Berlin, 1925, pl. 455; Société des Amis de l'Art, Album de l'exposition d'artpersan, Cairo, 1935, pl. 45;Google ScholarHarari, R. A. in A Survey of Persian Art, London, 1939, vi, pls. 1321–1326;Google ScholarMigeon, G., L'Orient musulman, Paris, 1922, pl. 24,Google Scholar no. 69; Dimand, M. S.,‘Near Eastern Metalwork’, in Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, xxi, 1926, p. 195, fig. 2; idem, ‘Saljuq Bronzes from Khurasan’,Google Scholaribid., 1945, pp. 87–92;Kühnel, E., in Meisterwerke muhammedanischer Kunst, Munich, 1912, n, pls. 141–3Google Scholar. The attribution of this group of bronzes to Nakhchevan is denied by M. Aga Oglu in his review of Pope, A. U., ‘Masterpieces of Persian Art’, published in the Art Bulletin, xxix, p. 56.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 1} Another example of a bronze in which a large element of the décor is worked in repoussé is a candlestick base in the Musée des Arts, Lyons. For a reproduction of this see van Leeuwen Waller, P. A. and Dunlop, H., Gatalogus: Tentoonstelling van Islamische Kunst, 15 mei–1927–3 Juli Gemeente Museum 'sGravenhage. The Lyons candlestick, however, does not show an overall pattern of repoussé work, only a somewhat more extensive use of animal figures than is encountered on the ‘Nakhchevan’ bronzes.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 1} cf. Sarre, Fr., Seldschukische Kleinkunst, Leipzig, 1909, p. 30 f. and pl. x;Google ScholarKuhnel, E., Die SamnUungen turkischer und islamischer Kunst im Tschinili Koschk, Berlin-Leipzig, 1938, p. 19, pl. 17;Google ScholarRiefstahl, R. M., ‘A Seljuq Koran Stand with Lacquer-painted Decoration’, in Art Bulletin, xv, 1933, pp. 361 ff., esp. the inscription and commentary by P. Wittek, ib., pp. 372–3. This Coran stand was first in Konya, then at the pinili Kosk, and is now at the TIE Museum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 210 note 2} This method of roughening backgrounds is well known from Persia both before and during the early Islamic period. It spread from there far afield into Northern and Western Europe and into the Far East; cf. the examples collected by Alföldi, A., ‘Die Goldkanne von St. Maurice d'Agaune’, in Zeitschr. fur Schweitzerische Archaologie und Kunstgeschichte, x, 1948, p. 9.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 1} H. Maryon, op. cit., pp. 100–1.

^{page 211 note 2} cf. van Berchem, M. and Strzygowski, J., Amida, Heidelberg, 1910Google Scholar, pls. x, 1, XIII, 2. In a later period even reliefs, including human figures, were tolerated in a mosque, cf. Eiefstahl, R. M., ‘Vier syrische Marmorkapitale mit figuralen Darstellungen in der Moschee zu Boz Üjük’, in Der Islam, xx, 1932, pp. 186 ff., also K. Erdmann, op. cit., p. 202, fig. 28.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 3} It should be noted that the element also appears in Egypt, but in secular architecture, in the decoration of the Bab al-Futuh built in 1087 by an architect from Diyarbakr. cf. Creswell, K. A. C., Muslim Architecture in Egypt, i, Oxford, 1953, pl. 66.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 4} A. Gabriel, op. cit., i, pi. xx (Kayseri, Döner Künbed), pis. XLVI, 1 (Niğde, Khudavend T7rbesi); n, pi. Lvni (Sivas, Gök Medrese), pi. LXX (Divrik, Great Mosque).

^{page 211 note 5} cf. Lane, A., Early Islamic Pottery, London, 1947, pl, 45a. The owner of this lamp is still unknown.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 1} I am indebted to Mr. Ch. Fabens Kelley, Curator of Oriental Art, and to Mr. J. Sewell, the Assistant Curator, for the facilities given to me at the Art Institute.

^{page 214 note 1} cf. the tombstones dated 274/887–278/891 in Wiet, G., Stèles funéraires(Catalogue général du Musée Arabe du Caire), Cairo, 1947, v, Nos. 1273, 1284, 1285, 1317.Google Scholar Also an early example dated 244/858 in Hassan, Zaky M., Moslem Art in the Fouad I University Museum, Cairo, 1950, I, pl. 113.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 2} Marçais, G. and Poinssot, L., Objets kairouanais, Tunis, 1952, I, pp. 411Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 1} ibid., pi. LXV.

^{page 215 note 2} cf. Marçais, G., La Berbérie musulmane et l'orient au moyen âge, Paris, 1946, pp. 193 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 3} A reconciliation between the Ztrids and the Fatimids, however, took place. This is shown by numismatic evidence, cf. Hazard, H. W., The Numismatic History of Late Medieval North Africa, New York, 1952, p. 55,Google Scholarand also by a.recently published text. cf. Idris, H. R., ‘Sur le retour des Zirides à l'obédience Fatimide’, in AnnaUs de l'Institut d'études orientales, Faculté des lettres de l'Université d'Alger, xi, Algiers, 1953, pp. 25–39.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 4} See Marçais and Poinssot, op. cit., I, p. 423.

^{page 215 note 5} cf. RCEA, vii, No. 2557.

^{page 217 note 1} cf. Roy, B. and Poinssot, P., Inscriptions arabes de Kairmian, Paris, 1950, I, pp. 27 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 2} (sic)(op. cit., I, p. 27)

^{page 216 note 3} (op. cit., I, p. 30).

^{page 216 note 4} (op. cit., I, 32). I read the name of the katiba Hurra not Durra, as did Roy and Poinssot; the text shows no other dalof this shape (cf. the photograph reproduced, ibid., p. 33, fig. 8).

^{page 217 note 1} Marçais and Poinssot, op. cit., i, figs. 87–8 on p. 420 f.

^{page 217 note 2} Communication to the Intern. Congress of Orientalists in Leiden, 1931; quoted by G. Wiet, Objets en cuivre, p. 164; RCEA, VII, No. 2781 bis, and Marçais and Poinssot, op. cit., i, p. 426.

^{page 217 note 3} My grateful thanks are due to Bay Elif Naci, then Director of the TIE Museum, for allowing me to study this exhibit.

^{page 218 note 1} cf. M. Th. Houtsma, ‘Tutush’, in EI, iv, p. 1034 f.

^{page 218 note 2} cf. Sauvaget, J., ‘Inventaire des monuments musulmans de la ville d'Alep’, in REI, 1931, p. 73, No. 10.Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 3} This is also found in the cenotaph of Fatima bint Ahmad at Damascus, dated 439/1048, cf. Sourdel-Thomine, J., Les monuments ayyoubides de Damns, IV, Paris, 1950, p. 148, fig. 90, and p. 151, fig. 93, 9.Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 4} cf. the 'ayn in the inscription of Badr ad-din al-Jamali on the wall of Bab al-Futuh dated 480/1087 in Wiet, G., ‘Nouvelles inscriptions Fatimides’, in Bulletin de Vlnstiiut d'figypte, xxiv, 1942, e.g. pl. iii.Google Scholar

^{page 219 note 1} Made in Toledo—RCEA, VII, No. 2658.

^{page 219 note 2} Made in Toledo—RCEA, VII, No. 2663.

^{page 219 note 3} Made in Valencia—RCEA, VII, No. 2751.

^{page 219 note 4} cf. Dubois de Montpéreux, Voyage autour du Caucase, Atlas 4ème série, pi. xxix b, fig. 3; also RCEA, VII, No. 2649, where the reference to Fraehn's study should be corrected to read Mém. de Sciences de St. Pétersbourg, vi, sér. III, 1836, p. 538.

^{page 220 note 1} First reproduction in an engraving made by de Lièvre, E., Les collections célèbres d'ceuvres d'art dessinées et gravés d'après les originaux, Paris, 1866, pl. 37. The best photographic reproduction is to be found in G. Migeon, op. cit., pi. 20.Google Scholar

^{page 220 note 2} Marçais and Poinssot, op. cit., p. 428, n. 45.

^{page 221 note 1} A. Prévost de Longpérier in his explanatory text to Lièvre's engraving. Also Œuvres, Paris, 1883, I, pp. 456 ff.

^{page 221 note 2} van Berchem, M., CIA, Jerusalem, II, Haram, p. 309, n. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 221 note 3} cf. Schmidt, Erich, ‘Excavations at Rayy’, in Ars Islamica, II, 1935, pp. 139–141.Google Scholar

^{page 221 note 4} My thanks are due to Miss G. Bruckner, Registrar of the University Museum, Philadelphia, for permission to photograph these fragments, and to Dr. Erich F. Schmidt for permission to I publish them.

^{page 222 note 1} A similar use of two parallel bands, but this time to enclose a vegetal décor can be seen on the neck of the lamp dated 483/1090 in the TIE Museum, pl. xi a-b.

^{page 222 note 2} On the significance of the formula lillah, cf. Sauvaget, J., ‘Remarques sur les monuments omeyyades’, in JA, ccxxxi, 1939, p. 8 f.Google Scholar

^{page 223 note 1} A rather poor photographic reproduction may be seen in the Sale Catalogue of Schefer, Charles, Collection de feu M.Ch.S. objets d'art et de curiosité, Paris, 8–11 juin, 1898, p. 16, No. 97, where the lamp is correctly identified as having been made for the mausoleum of Baybars I. Its height is given as 33 cm. A splendid drawing appeared in Prisse d'Avesnes, L'art arabe, Paris, 1873–5, pl. CLVIII.Google Scholar

^{page 223 note 2} G. Wiet, Objets en cuivre, appendix No. 89.

^{page 223 note 3} Lane Poole, S., The Art of the Saracens in Egypt, London, 1886, p. 162, fig. 76. It is the figure given in this work which is reproduced here in fig. 15.Google Scholar

^{page 223 note 4} van Berchem, M., ‘Notes d'archéologie arabe’, in JA, 1904, p. 35.Google Scholar

^{page 223 note 5} cf. CBEA, XII, No. 4726.

^{page 223 note 6} CREA, XIV, No. 5531.

^{page 224 note 1} I owe the photographs from which this line drawing was prepared to the kindness of Dr. J. Sabeh, Director of the National Museum in Damascus. Another object in the same museum, bearing inscriptions in the name of al-Malik al-Ashraf Sha'ban (d. 778/1377) is described by Wiet, Objets en cuivre, p. 275, No. 279A, as lampe. It is really of the lustre type very similar to that in the Cairo Museum (Wiet, op. cit., pi. xxiv a).

^{page 225 note 1} Reproduced in Migeon, G., L'Exposition d'art musulman a Alexandrie en 1925, Alexandria, 1925, pl. 11, 3.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 2} See G. Wiet, Objets en cuivre, pp. 12–13, No. 130, where the object is called incorrectly ‘vase‘, but pl. xxvi, correctly ‘lampe ’, height 44 cm., diam. 22 cm.

^{page 225 note 3} An excellent list is to be found in Lamm, C. J., Mittelalterliche Gläser, Berlin, 1930, I, pp. 424–483.Google Scholar

^{page 225 note 4} Quibell, J. E., Excavations at Saqqara, Cairo, 1907, I, p. 30, pl. 32; Lamm, op. cit., i, p. 93, and H, pi. 28, No. 16.Google Scholarx For the Byzantine prototypes, cf. Crowfoot, G. M. and Harden, D. B., ‘Early Byzantine and Later Glass Lamps’, in Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 1931, pp. 196 ss.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note 1} Lamm, C. J., Das Glas von Samarra, Berlin, 1928, p. 36, fig. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note 2} Department of Antiquities, Iraq Government, Excavations at Samarra, 1936–9, Baghdad, 1940, II, pl. 106.

^{page 226 note 3} Similarly fixed chains can be noted on lamps (which were probably imported from the East) in the miniatures of the Bible of Charles the Bald and in other Carolingian manuscripts, cf. d'Allemagne, H. R., Histoire du luminaire, Paris, 1891, figure on p. 70.Google Scholarcf. also Robins, F. W., The Story of the Lamp, London, 1939, pp. 75–9.Google Scholar

^{page 227 note 1} Flinders Petrie, W. M., Gizeh and Eifeh, London, 1907, p. 24. The lamp was found together with Kufic dirhams dating from A.D. 719–808. It is now in the Victoria and Albert Museum (No. 507–1908).Google Scholar

^{page 227 note 2} Unpublished. Height 20 em., circular aperture diam. 15 cm.

^{page 227 note 3} Wiet, Objets en cuivre, pil xxvi.

^{page 227 note 4} For some examples, cf. ,Dimand, M. S., Handbook of Muhammadan Art, New York, 1944, p. 221, fig. 146;Google ScholarHobson, R. L., A Guide to the Islamic Pottery of the Near East, London, 1932, fig. 100 (in frontispiece), p. 80, fig. 93; G. Migeon, Exposition d'Alexandria, 1925, pl. 42 (a maghribi example).Google Scholar

^{page 228 note 1} cf. C. J. Lamm, MitteMterliche Gläser, II, pl. 193, Nos. 2–4.

^{page 228 note 2} cf. G.Wiet, Lampes et bouteilles en verre émaillé, Cairo, 1929, pls. v, xxii, XXIII.

^{page 228 note 3} For examples of thurayya and tannur, cf. Franz-, Pascha, Die Bauhunst des Islam, Darmstadt, 1887, p. 102 f., and photographs in G. Wiet, Objets en cuivre, pls. xiv-xx.Google Scholar

^{page 228 note 4} The text translated here is taken from Maqrizi, Khitat, ed. Bulaq, 1270/1858, II, p. 105. See above, p. 206. Maqrizi was born in Cairo in 766/1364. He held several posts including, for a brief period (801–2/1399), that of market inspector (muhtasib), which doubtless afforded him especial insight into the practices of the craftsmen. In 820/1417 he retired to devote himself entirely to his literary activities. He died during a pilgrimage to Mecca in 845/1442 (cf. C. Brockelmann, GAL, n, p. 38).

^{page 228 note 5} Dozy is surely wrong (Supplemént, n, p. 476) in following Quatremère's interpretation (Maml., II, 1, p. 114) of pl. or by ‘le plaque, la couche de metal plus precieux dont on recouvre un autre metal’, and of as ‘celui quifabrique ou vend du plaque ’. Habib Zayyat, al-Khizana ash-sharqiya, II, Beirut, 1937, p. 150, points out that takfit means ‘inlay’, ‘incrustation of a precious metal in a baser one’;. He gives tat'im and takfit as practically synonymous, the former being used mainly to describe the inlaying of wood with ivory or ebony, while the latter was more commonly used in connexion with metal inlays. The person executing inlays is called . TWO poetical references are quoted by Zayyat (loc. cit.). The same verses (but without references) are also given by A. Taymur, at-taswir fi l-islam, Cairo, 1942, p. 27, note. The historical text of Ibn Habib, tadhkirat an-nabih fi ayyam al-mansur wa-banih (on the Qala'unid dynasty) (B.M. MS. Add. 7335, fo. 119v), has the vocalization when referring to a fire which destroyed the ‘market of the inlayers’ in Damascus. I have therefore given preference to this vocalization over , which I have not seen in an old manuscript. The verses are those of another historian Ibn al-Wardi and the fire referred to occurred in 740/1339: Qazwini, athar al-bilad, ed. Wüstenfeld, Göttingen, 1848, p. 323, has as goods exported from Herat. cf. also the remarks of M. M., Ziyada in his edition of Maqrizi, Kitdb as-Suluk, Cairo, 1939, I, 3, p. 758, nn. 1–2;Google ScholarHasan, Z., Kunuz al-Fatimiyin, Cairo, 1937, p. 20, and idem in his notes to A. Taymur, op. cit., p. 166. The more usual forms are kaffata, takfit, and mukaffat rather than kuft.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note 1} The use of the term nuhas in Arabic sources is often ambiguous. It is applied to ‘copper’, ‘bronze’, and ‘brass’ with little discrimination. In this passage I have rendered it consistently as ‘bronze’ because MaqrizI himself mentions nuhas asfar ‘yellow nuhas’, which can only mean ‘brass’. It would not have been admissible to translate nuhas as copper because no copper vessels with inlay are known from the 14th century. It is doubtful, however, whether Maqrizi can be credited with scrupulous terminological exactitude in this technical matter. Most of the wares of the Mamluk period are of brass rather than bronze.

^{page 229 note 2} cf. Dozy, Suppl., I, p. 565, quoting The Arabian Nights, ‘marchandise d"un bon débit’, ‘de bonne dé'faite’.

^{page 229 note 3} cf. ibid., I, p. 799 (shura). Also Lane, E. W., An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, London, 1871 (5th ed.), I, p. 205, ‘these articles which were called gahaz are property of the bride… The furniture is sent commonly borne by a train of camels to the bridegroom's house’.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note 4} Dakka, dikka has also a number of other connotations. Architecturally it signifies ‘platform’, ‘bench’. Dozy, Suppl., I, 453, has ‘plancher’, ‘brancard’, ‘chantier’. Here it is clearly some kind of bier-shaped affair probably with handles so that it may be carried aloft in the bridal procession.

^{page 229 note 5} On the much laboured Persian loanword dast see Lane's Dictionary, s.v. also Dozy, Suppl., i, p. 440 f., who quotes examples in which dast refers to a single plate or dish. In this passage Maqrizi clearly applies the term to a whole group of objects—a ‘set’ or ‘service’.

^{page 229 note 6} cf. Aga Oglu, M., ‘A Brief Note on Islamic Terminology for Bronze and Brass’, in JAOS, LXV, 1945, p. 223.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note 7} One irdabb is the equivalent of c. 2½ pounds.

^{page 229 note 8} If we assume the cubit under reference to be the dhira' al-'amal it would be equivalent of 51·8 cm. The diameter of the largest bowl would be therefore just under half a metre, which tallies well with the measurements of the larger bowls extant.

^{page 230 note 1} cf. Dozy, Suppl., II, p. 736 f.

^{page 230 note 2} Ahqaq, sing, huqq (cf. Dozy, Suppl., I, 307), appears to describe the cylindrical boxes which are available in fair number. For a list of dated specimens, cf. G. Wiet, Objets en cuivre, pp. 79–80. This type of receptacle was also called ushnandan. Ushnan or ushnan al-qassarin is the Herba alkali, chiefly species of Salsola (B. Laufer, Sino-Iranica, Chicago, 1919, p. 582). These alkafiable plants were reduced to ashes and used as soap (cf. M. Meyerhof's edition of Maimonides' Sharh asma' al-'uqqar (Mém. Inst. d'Egypte, vol. XLI), Cairo, 1940, p. 15, No. 24. There existed a great many varieties of ushnan, ranging from the coarse washermen's type (ushnan al-qassarin) to complicated aromatic compounds which served for ablutions after a meal. ‘The ushnan of kings and great personages,’ writes Ghuzuli (matali'-l budur, Cairo, A.H. 1299, vol. n, p. 66) ‘is a perfume (tib) and classed among perfumes. It should be placed in an ushnandan with a lid on so that its fragrance might be preserved. There should be a spoon (mil'aqa) for the servant (ghulam) to serve the ushnan with. It must not be touched by any hand except that of the person performing the ablution’.

^{page 230 note 3} Ewers were matched with basins. For an example see Kuhnel, E., ‘Zwei Mosulbronzen und ihr Meister’, in Jahrb. d. Preuss. Kunstsamml., LX, 1939, pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 230 note 4} cf. Aga Oglu, M., ‘About a Type of Islamic Incense Burner’, in Art Bulletin, XXVII, 1945, pp. 28–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 230 note 5} Nuhas abyad, lit. ‘white copper’, has been explained by Aga Oglu (JAOS, LXV, 1945, p. 219 f.) as equivalent to Persian sepid ruy, a rendering of (aes candidum). He suggests plausibly that nuhas abyad ‘was applied to bronze with a high percentage of tin or ostensibly to an alloy’.

^{page 230 note 6} I have failed to find this word in the dictionaries which I have consulted. This passage in Maqrizi's Khitat had already intrigued J. von Karabacek, who in his Zur orientalischen Altertumskunde. IV. Muhammedanische Kunststudien (Sitzungsberichte d. Kais. Akademie d. Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse, vol. 172), Vienna, 1913, p. 53, rather daringly translated by ‘Objekte aus lackiertem Papiermaché’ and added ‘Die Bezeichnung ist gewiss verschrieben, vielleicht Kjazehi zu lesen was in ungefährer Übertragung nach dem Gehör das chin. Kiáu Ts'ih gäbe… W. Lobscheid, English and Chinese Dictionary, 1868, m, p. 1083 erklärt, “Lacquering, mixing bright colours with the lacquer”. Es ist das arabische . Karabacek was content, however, to leave the solution of this problem to the sinologists, and I join him in this. Dr. Otto Kurz kindly informs me that although the earliest example of papier-maché work known is Japanese—a 87 cm.-tall portrait statue of the priest Ganjin in the Tōshōdaiji, dating from the 8th century A.D.—the technique of papier-mache is probably a Chinese invention.

^{page 231 note 1} This deplorable practice—which indicates a disastrous scarcity of silver—may account for the disappearance of the inlay in some of the pieces, but wear and tear, due to constant use, must account for the loss in most instances.

^{page 231 note 2} viz. about 820/1417.