Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures
in Asia and Africa
The “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa” (EMCAA) is an ambitious project
aiming to fill a long existing gap in manuscript studies. Dealing comprehensively with the diversity of
manuscript cultures in Asia and Africa, it will not only describe the state of research in the relevant
fields but establish for the first time a reliable foundation for systematic, historical and comparative
research in manuscript studies.
EMCAA Background
Manuscripts – books written by hand – have been one of the most influential manifestations of writing. For thousands of years, manuscripts have had a fundamental influence on many cultures. In the extensive period between the
adoption of writing and the invention of mechanical and digital techniques of reproduction – in some cases spanning
several millennia – manuscripts were the most important means of transmitting knowledge in a written form. Such
widespread and long-term use gave rise to a great variety of developments regarding the production, function and
reception of manuscripts in their respective social and cultural environments, thus resulting in distinct manuscript
cultures. In both Asia and Africa, manuscript cultures have furthermore played a significant role in the transmission
of knowledge up to the recent past, and some are still alive even today. In order to properly understand Asian and
African societies and their histories, it is crucial that the impact of manuscript cultures is taken into account.
In the West, scholarly interest in manuscripts has increased significantly over the last decades. This was certainly influenced by the rise of electronic media, which has stimulated historical and systematic inquiry in both the humanities
and cultural studies. At the same time, manuscripts were rediscovered in Asia and Africa as part of cultural heritage,
and vast quantities of extant manuscripts (conservatively estimated at approximately 10 million) have begun to be
catalogued and made accessible. However, for some manuscript cultures there has not even been an introductory
survey so far. A work which fills this gap and serves as a foundation for further research is still a desideratum.
EMCAA Aims
With the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa”, an historic and systematic overview will be presented for the first time. It allows for both a comparison with Western European book culture and the introduction of
Asian and African manuscript cultures to current discussions in the fields of media, art and literary studies. However,
this encyclopaedia is not conceived as a mere summary of existing research, but will in many respects provide a yet
non-existing foundation for exactly this type of research. It will serve as a handbook for students of manuscript studies
and as a reference tool for experts, who want to broaden their view by comparison with other manuscript cultures. The
great variety of manuscript cultures examined will ensure that questionable approaches, e.g. deducing universal laws
from European developments, or taking dichotomies such as East vs. West as a starting point, will be put to the test.
The Chief and Area Editors were able to engage renowned scholars to act as Sub-Editors for their respective region of
expertise, find experts for each lemma and ensure currentness of the contributions. The Advisory Board consists of
eminent scholars mainly from European manuscript studies whose expertise will largely benefit the “Encyclopaedia
of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa”.
Furthermore, the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa” will raise awareness of Asian and African manuscripts as cultural heritage. In some regions, colonial administrations and modernist governments had
considered manuscripts and the specific culture they represent as archaic and outdated leading to loss and neglect.
Knowledge about the significance of manuscripts and their cultural value will enhance the preservation and study of
this unique type of artifacts.
2
EMCAA Content
Volume I: Introduction. Histories of Manuscript Cultures
The first volume of the encyclopaedia introduces the subject and methodological considerations (definitions, etc.) as
well as the layout of the work. It also contains an outline of the histories of manuscript cultures and provides a summary of the state of research for each major manuscript culture, including current, local discussions. These macroarticles are accessible to non-specialists and include suggestions for further reading in Western languages.
Volume II: Manuscript Cultures in Comparison
The second volume comprises articles on the systematic categories of “production”, “usage and function” and “reflexion”,
e.g. “writing support”, “writing substance”, “textual” and “non-textual functions”, “textual scholarship” and “knowledge”,
with sections on each manuscript culture. The contributions are written by specialists for the respective manuscript culture to avoid any over-simplification or neglect of culture-specific characteristics. References to entries are included in
Volume III.
Volume III: Dictionary of Manuscript Cultures
The entries in the third volume provide short definitions of key terms and specialist information, but also include important persons, manuscripts and libraries for each manuscript culture. Cross-references to vols. I and II are integrated.
Chief Imam of Borno translating a biography of the Prophet Muhammad (Kitāb-al-Shifāʿ composed in the 12th century by Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ) into Old Kanembu. Maiduguri, Nigeria.
© Dmitry Bondarev, 2005.
3
EMCAA Content
Lemmata for Volume II of the Encyclopaedia (sample selection)
Category
Preparation
Production
Sub-sections
Lemmata
Writing support
Papyrus, Parchment,
Paper, Tree bark, Palmleaf,
Bamboo
Book formats
Codex, Scroll, Quires
Writing substance
Ink, Pigments, Blood
Instruments
Brush, Calamus, Ruler,
Penbox
Producers
Scribe, Copyist, Illuminator,
Painter
Writing process
Copying techniques, Marks,
Script styles
Layout
Divisions, Frame, Justification
Embellishment
Illumination, Painting
Binding
Page ordering systems,
Catchwords
Finalizing
Usage and function
Textual functions
Reading process
(reading aloud/silent)
Non-textual functions
Symbolic uses (ritual),
Calligraphy
Distribution
Transmission, Book-trade,
Borrowing
Storage
Library, Collection, Catalogue
Destruction, Recycling, Disposal
Geniza-like practices
Textual scholarship
Palaeography, Codicology,
Philology
Knowledge
Canonization, Teaching,
Commentaries
Reflexion
The above list shows the general layout of volume II of the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa”,
from the main categories on the left to the sub-sections and, finally, the individual lemmata on the right. As there are
many more topics to be dealt with and not each of them is equally relevant for every manuscript culture, the lemmata
included in the above list are a sample selection for the purpose of illustration only.
4
EMCAA Model Article I
Writing Systems: Tibet
Sam van Schaik, The British Library
Overview
Origins and early development
The Tibetan writing system is a syllabic alphabet, created or standardized in the first half of the seventh
century based on the Indic Brahmi scripts of that period. The alphabet contains thirty consonants, each of
which contains the inherent vowel -a. Vowel modifiers for the sounds -i, -u, -e and -o are written above
or below the consonants. In addition, letters may be
‘stacked’ vertically, and there are special forms for
some letters in these stacks. The basic unit is the syllable, and syllables are separated with a small dot called
tsheg. Larger semantic units are separated with a vertical stroke called shad. Tibetan is written horizontally
from left to right.
The Tibetan tradition distinguishes two basic
types of Tibetan script, the ‘headed’ (dbu can) and the
‘headless’ (dbu med). The first script is characterized
by short horizontal lines (the ‘heads’) along the tops
of many letters, similar to the serifs of the Latin script,
while the second script dispenses with these lines.
There are numerous different styles within the headless script, including a simple style for teaching children, ornamental styles for official edicts, and a highly
cursive style for handwriting.
Tibet's historical traditions are almost unanimous in
attributing the invention of the Tibetan script to a figure known as Tönmi Sambhota. It is difficult, if not
impossible, to determine whether such a person existed – let alone whether he really did invent a script.
Nevertheless, it is quite clear that Tibetan writing as
we know it appeared alongside other cultural innovations during the first rapid expansion of the Tibetan
Empire in the first half of the seventh century. Analogues for most Tibetan letters can be found in the
North Indian Brahmi scripts known as “Late Gupta”
which flourished from the fifth to seventh centuries.
Tibetan letters for sounds not found in Indian languages were generally created by altering existing
forms. (Thomas 1951; van Schaik 2011a.)
The earliest sources of Tibetan writing available to
us are inscriptions carved on stone pillars and rocks
(as well as a few cast in metal) dating from the mideighth to mid-ninth centuries. As with other epigraphic scripts, the writing style of the Tibetan rock
inscriptions tends to prefer straight lines, and does
not extend lines any further than necessary. In a similar fashion to Roman Capitals, the letters are evenly
proportioned so that most would fit within the shape
Dunhuang manuscript
of a commentary on the
Upāyapāśa-tantra from
the 10th century ad written in ‘headless’ script,
IOL Tib J 321.
© The British Library
5
EMCAA Model Article I
of a square (though the need to vertically stack Tibetan letters requires a more flexible model).
Manuscripts from the same period show the gradual development of this square form. While certain official manuscripts emulate it, many show an increased
cursivity, with a reduction in strokes and a curvature
of sharp angles. The development of the headless
script from the headed script is clearly seen in these
manuscripts as a process of cursivization (Gendun
Chophel 1983; van Schaik 2011c). In this early period there is a clear correspondence between writing
styles and genres of manuscript. For example, different styles can be identified for official documents,
Buddhist scriptures, and the personal manuscripts of
Buddhist monks. After the fall of the Tibetan empire
in the mid-ninth century, these styles were no longer
taught, and a number of different calligraphic styles
appeared. (van Schaik 2011b.)
Some form of ornamentation is seen in the earliest Tibetan manuscripts. The ‘head letter’ (mgo yig)
is a curl which is used to denote the beginning of the
recto of a pothi folio in Buddhist / literary texts. It is
derived from the Indian manuscript tradition. Other
early forms of ornamentation include Buddhist symbols such as the lotus flower, wheel and vajra. In the
manuscript tradition (as opposed to the later printed
book tradition), ornamental forms of the shad, and
small designs composed of circles are sometimes used
to mark divisions in the text. (Scherrer-Schaub and
Bonami 2002.)
Traditional categories
The Tibetan historical tradition records that the
writing system was revised and standardized several
times. The most important of these revisions occurred
in the year 812/3 and is recorded in an imperial edict.
Though this reform, and later ones, were mainly
aimed at translation vocabulary, they also seem to
have affected orthography, with a number of archaic
features in the script gradually disappearing from the
early ninth century onward. These include the ‘strong
6
da’ (da drag) and ‘supporting a’ (a rten). (Ribur Ngawang Gyatso 1984; Scherrer-Schaub 2002.)
Tibetan literature includes classifications and descriptions of different styles of writing (e.g. Bkras lhun
dgon 2003). These styles are mainly classified as subdivisions of the headless script. Such styles include the
Drutsa ('bru tsha) the Book Form (dpe tshugs), which
are mainly found in Buddhist / literary manuscripts,
and the Running Script (’khyug yig), which is a highly
cursive style mainly used in letters and notes.
A number of variations on the Running Script are
recognized, including the Long Form (tshugs ring), the
Short Form (tshugs thung) and the Small Form (tshugs
chung). In the modern period, the headed script came
to be used primarily in printed books, with the headless script being used in manuscripts. However, this is
less true outside of Central Tibet. In Bhutan and Tibetan cultural areas to the East and West, the headed
script continued to be used in manuscripts.
Modern palaeographical studies
The palaeographical study of Tibetan writing is still
in its infancy. A periodization developed by Cristina
Scherrer-Schaub and Georges Bonami using both
codicology and palaeographical analysis, divides
Tibetan writing styles into three phases: 950–1250,
1250–1430, and 1430 onwards (though the dates are
only approximate). The authors used radiocarbon
dating on a sample of manuscripts to confirm their
hypothesis (Scherrer-Schaub and Bonami 2002).
A study of the imperial Tibetan epigraphic writing
(which influenced manuscript styles) has been published by Helga Uebach (2010). Studies by Sam van
Schaik based on the manuscripts from the Dunhuang
cave have identified a number of different writing
styles in use during the Tibetan imperial period (seventh to mid-ninth century) and argued that a paradigm shift in Tibetan writing followed the end of the
empire (van Schaik 2011a,b,c).
EMCAA Model Article I
Select Bibliography
Bkras lhun dgon. 2003. Yig rigs gsum ldan gyi gzungs sngags. Lanzhou: Kan su'i mi rigs gyi dpe skrun khang.
Gendun Chophel. 1983. “The Evolution of U'med from
U'chen Script.” Tibet Journal 8.1: 56–57.
Ribur Ngawang Gyatso. 1984. “A Short History of Tibetan
Script.” Tibet Journal 9.2: 28–30.
Scherrer-Schaub, C.A. 2002. “Enacting Words: A Diplomatic Analysis of the Imperial Decrees (bkas bcad) and
Their Application in the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa Tradition.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25.1–2: 263–340.
Scherrer-Schaub, C.A. and G. Bonani. 2002. “Establishing
a typology of the old Tibetan manuscripts: a multidisciplinary approach.” In Susan Whitfield (ed.), Dunhuang
Manuscript Forgeries. London: The British Library. 184–
215.
Uebach, Helga. 2010. “Notes on the Palaeography of Old
Tibetan Inscriptions: Zhol and bSam yas.” In Anne Chayet et al (eds.), Edition, éditions: l’écrit au Tibet, évolution et
devenir. München: Indus Verlag. 411–428.
van Schaik, Sam. 2011a. “A New Look at the Invention of
the Tibetan Script.” In Yoshiro Imaeda, Matthew Kapstein
and Tsuguhito Takeuchi (eds.), Old Tibetan Documents
Monograph Series, vol. III. Tokyo: Tokyo University of
Foreign Studies. 45–96.
van Schaik, Sam. 2011b. “Towards a Tibetan Paleography: A Preliminary Typology of Writing Styles in Early
Tibet.” In Jan-Ulrich Sobisch, Jörg Quenzer and Dmitry
Bondarev (eds.), Manuscript Cultures: Mapping the Field.
Berlin: de Gruyter.
van Schaik, Sam. 2011c. “The Origin of the Headless Style
(dbu med) in Tibet.” In Nathan Hill (ed.), Tibeto-Burman
Linguistics. Leiden: Brill.
Thomas, Frederick William. 1951. “The Tibetan Alphabet.” In Festschrift zur Feier des 200jährigen Bestehens der
Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen (II Philologische-historische Klasse), Göttingen. 146–165.
7
EMCAA Model Article II
Book Format: Arabic, Persian and Turkish
Tilman Seidensticker, University of Jena
The most common book form in the world of Arabic,
Persian and Turkish manuscripts is without doubt the
bound codex consisting of several quires. The writing
was usually at right angles to the spine. Manuscripts
produced in the Maghrib sometimes consisted of unbound loose leaves or quires, while those from subSaharan Africa were predominantly characterised by
loose unconnected leaves (Déroche 2006: 88f.). Books
from the Indian subcontinent were sometimes composed of a single quire of huge amounts of folios or bifolia (ibid.: 69, where a ‘monobible’ with 280 bifolia in a
single gathering is mentioned).
The scroll was used for specific purposes such as diplomas or calligraphic copies of the Qur’an.
Another special form was the accordion-fold book
(Ar. muraqqaʿ ‘patched’), composed of pieces of cardboard held together by cloth hinges. From c. 1500 onwards, such books were used in Turkey, Iran and India for collections of calligraphy samples or miniature
paintings.
Monumental Qur’an, ascribed to Ḥusayn Ibn ʿAlī, from Déroche
2004: 28, ill. 4.
The size of a book has natural limits based on the
maximum size of the writing support, a fact that is
particularly evident for parchment manuscripts. The
techniques employed for manufacturing paper were
another reason for limitations. Other factors determin-
8
ing size include the need of being impressive, portability, and, in the case of small books, the legibility of script
(if considered necessary). The importance of these factors varied according to the content of the manuscript,
the total amount of text to be copied, the purpose of the
individual copy, the time and the region.
On the whole, the standard size of Arabic, Persian
or Turkish Islamic manuscripts is not significantly different from the common size of modern printed books.
However, from early times, the Qur’an, the starting
point of the Islamic bookmaking tradition, was produced not only in average-sized volumes, but also in
volumes both extremely large and extremely small. One
of the best-known examples of a large early Qur’an is
the oblong square in plano parchment codex from the
ʿAmr Mosque in Fusṭāṭ (Old Cairo), written in the 8th
century, which measures 540 × 620 mm. It is possible
that the pre-Islamic Egyptian tradition of producing
large Bibles influenced the emergence of such impressive copies: the 5th-century Codex Alexandrinus measures 316 × 264 mm, and the Codex Sinaiticus is even
larger, measuring approximately 400 × 350 mm. Huge
Qur’ans were created in all periods, but the Mamlūk era
(1250–1517) witnessed a particular flourishing in the
production of colossal manuscripts, not only in Egypt
and Syria, but also elsewhere. The size of the so-called
Baysunqur Qur’an, probably commissioned by Timur
around the year 1400 and produced in Central Asia,
exceeds all others: it is 177 cm tall and 101 cm wide
(Déroche/Gladiss 1999: 38 and 42).
An extremely small, oblong-shaped copy of the
Qur’an on parchment (Paris, BN Arabe 399) has an estimated date not much later than the Qur’an of the ʿAmr
Mosque mentioned above (towards the end of the 9th
century). The leaves measure as little as 42 × 73 mm.
Pre-Islamic models also exist for such small Qur’ans,
in the form of small-scale Bible copies in Greek and
Coptic. Miniature Qur’ans continued to be produced
into the 20th century. As Islam’s holy book, the Qur’an
EMCAA Model Article II
is found in large-formatted volumes much more often
than any other Islamic book, whether in Arabic, Persian or Turkish. Although extremely large or small copies of other texts are sometimes also found, such texts
are usually in smaller formats, and do not show the dimensional extremes of the Qur’an. A general tendency
towards larger leaves, even for non-religious texts, is
discernible in the 13th and 14th centuries (Bloom 2001:
52 and 184).
With regard to the material format, it is important to
note that in the Islamic world (just as in classical antiquity and the early Western medieval period) it was unusual to fold writing material to make quires; instead,
“bifolia were cut to the desired dimension in advance,
then gathered, usually in groups of four or five, and
folded in half ” (Déroche 2006: 85). Thus, equivalents
of terms like folio, quarto or octavo (the result of one,
two or three folds) are not commonly used to designate
the bibliographical or library formats of pre-modern periods. Instead, descriptions of format are based on the
manner in which the raw bifolia were cut (Arabic qaṭʿ,
cf. Gacek 2001: 117). There is evidence that standardized bifolia sizes existed. The Arab bookseller and bibliographer Ibn al-Nadīm, who lived in Baghdad towards
the end of the 10th century, mentions Sulaymāniyya
leaves (containing 20 lines per page) to define a standard unit with regard to the number of words in a certain text. “The Egyptian historian al-Qalqashandi (d.
1418) enumerated nine sizes of paper, of which the two
largest were the standard, full-sized Baghdadi sheet,
measuring one [...] cubit (approximately [...] 73 centimeters) high by one and a half cubits (approximately
[...] 110 centimeters) wide, and the reduced Baghdadi
sheet ([...] 65 by 98 centimeters).” (Bloom 2001: 53)
The most common shape for Islamic books in Asia and
North Africa was without doubt vertical. The dominance of this shape possibly dates from the beginnings
of Islamic book production; in any case, more Qur’ans
written in the Ḥijāzī script are vertical than oblong. For
reasons still unknown, from the middle of the 8th to the
10th century, Qur’ans were almost exclusively oblong.
But after this time, this shape seems to have gone out
of fashion for Qur’ans, and although oblong copies of
other texts existed, even they are quite exceptional. In
the Maghrib, square Qur’ans, as well as other texts of
religious importance, are frequently found, although
the square shape is neither exclusively reserved for religious books nor limited to that area.
A very special Qur’an shape, found in later periods,
is the small octagonal, especially found in Persia and
Turkey. Such Qur’ans were often stored in octagonal
boxes or caskets and were purportedly fixed to the
shafts of Muslim armies’ flags for apotropaic purposes;
hence they are called Sanjaq (‘flag’) Qur’ans. Another
special format is the slim oblong book, with the script
usually running parallel, although sometimes diagonally, to the spine. Such manuscripts are called Safīna
(‘ship’); it is a shape that seems to have been particularly
wide-spread in Persia.
Small octagonal Qur’an from Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (Ms.
orient. Octav 81, fol. 196a).
See also Gacek 2009, s.v. “Atlas books” (14); “Folding of sheets” (104-5); “Paper” (especially “Appellations and sizes”, 191-3); on the accordion-fold albums
“Muraḳḳaʿ”, The Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed., VII:
602-3 (B. W. Robinson).
9
EMCAA Model Article II
Select Bibliography
Bloom, Jonathan M. 2001. Paper before print. The history
and impact of paper in the Islamic world. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
Gacek, Adam. 2001. The Arabic manuscript tradition. A
glossary of technical terms and bibliography. Leiden/Boston/Köln: Brill.
Déroche, François et al. 2006. Islamic codicology. An introduction to the study of manuscripts in Arabic script. London: Al-Furqān Islamic Heritage Foundation.
Gacek, Adam. 2009. Arabic manuscripts. A vademecum
for readers. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Déroche, François, and Almut von Gladiss. 1999. Der
Prachtkoran im Museum für Islamische Kunst. Berlin: Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin
Preußischer Kulturbesitz.
10
EMCAA Model Article III
Manuscript Layout: Medieval China
Imre Galambos, University of Cambridge
Overview
The layout of medieval Chinese manuscripts can vary
enormously according to their type, function, content, time period, etc. Since the surviving material
ranges from random notes with no apparent attention to visual presentation to court-sanctioned copies
of Buddhist sutras and Daoist scriptures maintaining
a highly consistent visual arrangement, it is perhaps
more useful to look at this latter group for describing
layout features. Although these regular texts constitute only part of the total number of manuscripts that
survived from the medieval period, they represent in
many ways a basic format emulated or approximated
by many other manuscripts. At the same time, it is
important to note that this layout largely pertains to
copies of texts in the strict sense of the word, i.e. literary, philosophical or religious compositions, rather
than writings of an administrative nature (correspondence, contracts, etc.).
Physically, this basic type of manuscripts consists
of rectangular sheets of paper joined together into
a long continuous surface rolled up into a scroll.
This format is thought to have originated in Han
and earlier times when texts were written on slips of
bamboo and wood, which were tied together with a
thread and kept as a roll, albeit a much bulkier one
than the paper scroll used later. This was the juan
(scroll, roll), originally a codicological unit that was
used in later times to signify a unit of text larger than
a chapter (pian), usually translated into English as
‘volume’ or ‘fascicle’. For medieval manuscripts, the
paper sheets that were glued together were called
zhang (sheet), and there are examples where a colophon at the end of a text records how many zhang
were used in the production of that particular copy.
In the regular layout of copies of canonical texts,
each sheet contains 27 or 28 lines of text, with 17
characters per line. There are numerous examples
where the copyist realized that he had run out of
space at the end of the line and crammed the last
few characters together in order to fit them on that
line. But other than these impromptu efforts to
maintain the standard line length, characters are
evenly spaced, more or less occupying a square of
equal size. Grid lines are drawn using thinner ink
and a type of ruler to determine the boundaries of
the text in advance. Generally speaking, there are
two horizontal grid lines, one across the top and
Manuscript Or.8210/S.13, an undated copy of the Lotus sūtra. The illustration shows the end of the manuscript with the end title
indicating the number of the juan. The grid lines are also fairly visible, dividing the paper into evenly spaced lines (i.e. columns).
© The British Library Or.8210/S.13.
11
EMCAA Model Article III
the other across the bottom part of the paper, delineating the circa 2.5–3 cm top and bottom margins.
Often vertical grid lines 1.8–1.9 cm apart are also
drawn for each line, ensuring that the text is copied in straight lines. At the same time, the characters
are not aligned horizontally, as it became customary in epigraphic material, where characters were
commonly written in strict vertical and horizontal
alignment. Gridlines are usually observed but there
are also contrary cases when the text runs onto the
margin.
The text runs continuously with very few unfinished lines. While in most cases the logical structure
of the text is not reflected in its visual segmentation on the manuscript (i.e. the text in general is not
segmented), sometimes a new line is introduced at
the beginning of a new logical sequence. While the
function of such new lines is apparent, most similar
breaks within the text are not marked with a new
line and thus this segmentation seems arbitrary
from our modern perspective and only partially
coincides with our understanding of how the text
should be divided. At times a break is expressed not
through starting a new line but by inserting a hooklike punctuation mark, signifying that a new section
is about to begin.
The title of the text is written in a separate line
before (shouti) and after (weiti) the text, in full-size
characters squeezed tightly together with no space
between them. This makes the title stand apart
from the rest of the text where characters are evenly
spaced. As a general rule, the title of the text and
chapter (pian) number is written at the beginning
of chapters, whereas the volume (juan) number appears at the end of each volume.
Commentaries transmitted as part of the copied
text are written inline, using double lines and smaller, typically half-size, characters; thus they do not
disrupt the general spatial arrangement. In courtcommissioned sutras, corrections, such as the insertion of characters, deletion or reversal marks, etc.,
are also done in a small script so that they do not interfere with the visual appearance of the manuscript;
12
therefore, they are often not immediately visible, unless one actually reads through the text.
Recent scholarship
Research on the layout of medieval Chinese manuscripts is scarce. This is a subject that has primarily been studied by Jean-Pierre Drège, in a number
of articles regarding the material aspects of manuscripts (paper, layout, binding, etc). In English, we
have Akira Fujieda’s general description of the Dunhuang corpus from the perspective of manuscript
studies, and in this context layout is also discussed.
Select Bibliography
Drège, Jean-Pierre. 1989. “Du rouleau manuscrit au livre
imprimé.” In Roger Laufer (ed.), Le Texte et son inscription. Paris: CNRS. 43–48.
Drège, Jean-Pierre. 1991. Les bibliothèques en Chine au
temps des manuscrits. Paris: École française d'ExtrêmeOrient.
Drège, Jean-Pierre. 1979. “Les cahiers des manuscrits de
Touen-houang.” In Contributions aux études sur Touenhouang. Genève/Paris: Droz. 17–28.
Drège, Jean-Pierre. 1997. “La matérialité du texte: Préliminaires à une étude de la mise en page du livre chinois.” In
Viviane Alleton (ed.), Paroles à dire, paroles à écrire: Inde,
Chine, Japon. Paris: Éditions de l'École des hautes études
en sciences sociales. 241–252.
Fujieda, Akira. 1996. “The Tunhuang manuscripts: a general description.” Zinbun IX: 1–32.
EMCAA Infrastructure
The Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures (CSMC)
The initiation of the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa” in October 2007 was one of the outcomes
of a long tradition of manuscript studies in Hamburg, which further led to the founding of the Research Group “Manuscript
Cultures in Asia and Africa” (2008–2011). Since its establishment in July 2011, the Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures (CSMC) became the new institutional home of the encyclopaedia. The CSMC can be regarded as an extended followup of the Research Group and like its predecessor is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).
The CSMC consists of around 50 scholars who are working in 21 projects. 17 research projects are focussing on three
key aspects of manuscript cultures: paratexts, visual organization and manuscript collections/manuscripts as collections. Three scientific service projects are developing and applying methods of script recovery, material analysis and
image processing for manuscript studies. Finally, a service project provides a data repository to ensure sustainability
of the project data. The projects cover a wide geographic area, including not only Asian and African but also European
manuscript cultures.
All three Chief Editors as well as many of the Area- and Sub-Editors of the encyclopaedia are members of the CSMC,
which directly benefits work on the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa”. Affiliation with the
CSMC not only facilitates incorporation of the state of research but also greatly enhances the encyclopaedia through
the extensive infrastructure of the centre as well as its network of international relations.
Members affiliated to EMCAA:
Alessandro Bausi (Principal investigator)
Dmitry Bondarev (Principal investigator)
Michael Friedrich (Director, Principal investigator)
Volker Grabowsky (Pincipal investigator)
Harunaga Isaacson (Principal investigator)
Jörg B. Quenzer (Vice-Director, Principal investigator)
Tilman Seidensticker (Principal investigator)
Kai Vogelsang (Principal investigator)
http://www.manuscript-cultures.uni-hamburg.de/
Thai leporello manuscript containing the Phra Malai Kham Luang, a poetic version of a Buddhist legend (dated 1874, Sig.: Cod. orient. 509, ©
Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg)
13
EMCAA Network
The editors of the “Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa” cooperate with various other research
projects and institutions in Hamburg and worldwide:
Nepalese-German Manuscript Cataloguing Project (NGMCP)
The Nepalese-German Manuscript Cataloguing Project (NGMCP) is the successor of the well-known and widely renowned Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project (NGMPP) which thirty-one years after its inception in 1970
was brought to an end in March 2001. A first preliminary title list of the manuscripts prepared under the NGMPP
forms the basis of the new project. The main purpose of the project is to produce a descriptive catalogue of a significant part of about 160,000 manuscripts photographed by the NGMPP (it is expected that all manuscripts will be
catalogued in the long term).
Members affiliated to EMCAA:
Harunaga Isaacson (Director)
http://www.uni-hamburg.de/ngmcp/
Comparative Oriental Manuscript Studies (COMSt)
The program scheduled for the period from 2009 to 2014 aims at facilitating cross-cultural academic dialogue and active
exchange in the field of Oriental manuscript studies focused on the Mediterranean and North African cultural areas.
Oriental studies are considerably lagging behind Occidental manuscript studies, where e.g. Greek and Latin philology
have reached a high standard. Since some regional and linguistic cultures have been studied more intensely than others in different aspects, an exchange within the framework of Oriental philology will enable Europe-wide development
through network activities. The coordination will on the one hand enable a high degree of standardization between the
cultural and language areas and on the other hand facilitate the explication of culture-specific methodologies.
Members affiliated to EMCAA:
Alessandro Bausi (Chair)
Jost Gippert (Team leader)
Paola Buzi (Team leader)
Marilena Maniaci (Team leader)
http://www1.uni-hamburg.de/COMST/
Other Partners:
Cultural Heritage of Christian Ethiopia: Salvation, Preservation, Research (Ethio-SPARE)
http://www1.uni-hamburg.de/ethiostudies/ETHIOSPARE/
Union Catalogue of Oriental Manuscripts in German Collections (KOHD)
http://kohd.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/
Sanskrit Manuscripts Project, Cambridge
http://sanskrit.lib.cam.ac.uk/
Tombouctou Manuscripts Project, Cape Town
http://www.tombouctoumanuscripts.org/
École Française d'Extrême-Orient (EFEO)
http://www.efeo.fr/
14
EMCAA People
Chief Editors:
Michael Friedrich, Harunaga Isaacson, Jörg B. Quenzer
Area Editors:
Michael Friedrich, Jörg B. Quenzer (East Asia)
Harunaga Isaacson, Volker Grabowsky (Central, South and South East Asia)
Dmitry Bondarev, FranÇois Déroche, Philip Jaggar, Tilman Seidensticker (West Asia and Africa)
Sub-Editors:
East Asia:
William Boltz (University of Washington, Seattle)
George Dutton (University of California, Los Angeles)
Michael Friedrich (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Imre Galambos (University of Cambridge)
Beatrix Mecsi (Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest)
Nathalie Monnet (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris)
Constantino Moretti (École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris)
Jörg B. Quenzer (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Kai Vogelsang (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Central, South and South East Asia:
Dominic Goodall (École FranÇaise d'Extrême-Orient, Paris)
Volker Grabowsky (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Harunaga Isaacson (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Ulrich Kratz (Emeritus School of Oriental and African Studies, London)
Sam van Schaik (British Library, London)
West Asia and Africa:
Alessandro Bausi (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Dmitry Bondarev (Universität Hamburg, CSMC)
Paola Buzi (Università di Roma La Sapienza)
FranÇois Déroche (École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris)
Jost Gippert (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main)
Alessandro Gori (Università degli Studi di Firenze)
Philip Jaggar (School of Oriental and African Studies, London)
Graziano Krätli (Yale University, New Haven)
Tilman Seidensticker (Friedrich-Schiller Universität Jena, CSMC)
Board of Advisors:
J.P. Gumbert (Emeritus Universiteit Leiden)
Marilena Maniaci (Università degli Studi di Cassino e del Lazio Meridionale)
Jan-Dirk Müller (Emeritus Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München)
Richard Salomon (University of Washington)
Avihai Shivtiel (Emeritus University of Leeds)
Publisher:
de Gruyter, Berlin. Articles to be collected in 2013, appearance scheduled for 2015.
15
EMCAA Contact
Address:
Encyclopaedia of Manuscript Cultures in Asia and Africa
Centre for the Study of Manuscript Cultures
Warburgstraße 26
20354 Hamburg
Germany
Email:
[email protected]
Cover images copyright (from top left to bottom right):
Dmitry Bondarev; Collection Moh'd S. Idris (Photo: Ridder Samsom); National Book Trust, India; Hunan Provincial Museum, PR
China; Linda Lane, Seattle (U.S.); bpk/Museum für Islamische Kunst, SMB/Petra Stüning; Hunan Provincial Museum, PR China;
Universität Hamburg, Asien-Afrika-Institut.
Typesetting and layout: Thies Staack.