Asian and African studies blog

Frederick S. Harrop was one of the first foreign art teachers hired by the Thai government in the early twentieth century. He lived in Bangkok from 1913-30 and helped to reform Thai art education and graphic design in his role as Art Master, and later Headmaster, of Poh-Chang School of Art and Crafts, the first modern art school in Thailand. It was founded in 1913 by King Vajiravudh (Rama VI), who – like many other Thai royals - received his education in the UK and continued the modernisation efforts of his father, King Chulalongkorn (Rama V). When Harrop arrived in Bangkok, he must have been fascinated by the richness of colours and brilliant light of the tropics. He immediately took great interest in traditional Thai art, design and decorative styles and blended these with Western techniques. His preferred subjects were the traditional architecture of Thai temples, people and street scenes, as well as boats and river views.

Left: Wat Benchamabophit, Bangkok, watercolour, signed F. S. Harrop, c. 1925. British Library, FSHA 1165. Right: Doorway, Wat Pho, Bangkok, pencil, pen and ink on paper, signed F. S. Harrop, c.1920. British Library, FSHA 1338. ©William R. Harrop

Frederick Samuel Harrop, born on 27 March 1887 in Batsford, Stoke-on-Trent, started his career as an apprentice to Grimwades pottery manufacturers in Stoke-on-Trent. Aged 17 he was attending evening classes at Stoke School of Art, and two years later he was awarded an Applied Arts Scholarship to study at Hanley Municipal School of Art, Science and Technology. In 1909 he won a scholarship to the Royal College of Art in London. Harrop developed his skills as a modeller draughtsman and designer through researching in the British Museum and the V&A, with its close relationship to the RCA. He explored various aspects of art education and took a Teacher’s Training course at the RCA. Study trips took him to the Netherlands, where he spent two months working with three other students of the RCA at the Palace of Peace in The Hague designing wall tiling that was fired in Delft.

F.S. Harrop (front row, 5th from right) with staff and students in front of Poh-Chang School, c. 1920. British Library, B 24.

In 1913, Harrop left the RCA without the full qualification certificate in order to take up a position as Assistant Art Teacher in Bangkok, and soon he rose to the position of Art Master at the School of Arts and Crafts (now known as Poh-Chang Academy of Arts, Rajamangala University of Technology Rattanakosin). In this role, he introduced Thai students to Western art forms and techniques, such as watercolour sketching and painting, drawing, printing, book design, graphic and letterform design, while at the same time adopting traditional Thai art styles and techniques in his own works. In turn, his students often blended European and Thai art styles in their works.

Life study, pencil and watercolour on paper, signed F. S. Harrop, 1924. British Library, FSHA 1346. ©William R. Harrop

In 1917 Harrop married Edith Florence Keyes in Singapore and they had two sons, Roger born in Bangkok in 1918 and James born during a home visit to England in 1920. Edith Harrop produced water colours herself, and both were active members of the expatriate community in Bangkok.
From 1921 on Harrop was also Organising Art Master to the Ministry of Public Instruction in Bangkok, where his duties included the training of drawing teachers for schools under the Ministry. In the School of Arts and Crafts, Harrop initiated and ran classes in applied design for metal and woodworkers, process reproduction (including line, half-tone and three-colour work), lettering, woodcut and lino-block printing, and modelling. He became Headmaster of the School of Arts and Crafts in 1922, and in the following years more courses were added, including photography, mother-of-pearl inlay, and gold-on-lacquer design.

Designs for posters by F. S. Harrop, c.1920, pencil, pen and ink on paper. Left: British Library, FSHA1181; right: British Library, FSHA1184. ©William R. Harrop

Harrop organised exhibitions at local, national and international levels, including a display and exhibition book for the planned Siamese Kingdom Exhibition 1926, which was cancelled due to King Vajiravudh’s death the previous year. In 1930 the family moved back to London where Harrop found teaching appointments with Willesden Polytechnic, the Paddington Art Institute and the Hammersmith School of Building and Arts and Craft. After his retirement in 1952, he launched a late career as a master studio potter that lasted until his death on 26 February 1969. Even in his later pottery works traces of Asian influences and Thai motifs intermingle with traditional English and Mediterranean motifs.

Plates produced for an exhibition book, edited by F. S. Harrop, on the occasion of the planned Siamese Kingdom Exhibition 1926. British Library, FSHA 0704.

A particularly strong sense of hybridity is visible in the commercial work Harrop produced during his time in Bangkok. As an established artist he was approached for various advertising commissions and for designing book covers, specifically for King Vajiravudh’s own publications. Harrop produced designs inspired by traditional Thai motifs, overlaid with an RCA-trained sense of layout, colouring and lettering. Harrop signed hand-drawn designs for printed works and art prints with “F.S. Harrop”, “F. Harrop”, “Harrop”, “FSH”, “FH”, “แฮรัป” (Haerap), “ฮ” (H), as well as “เพาะช่าง” (Pho-Chang) and “พ.ช.” (Pho. Cho., short for Pho-Chang). The latter two, if used as stand-alone signatures (not in combination with Harrop’s other signatures) may have been used for collaborative works with colleagues that involved larger passages of Thai and/or Chinese text, for commercial works that were formally ordered from the School of Arts and Crafts, or prints of photographs by other artists, e.g. as book illustrations.

Left: Front cover design for a magazine “Asia” with blank fields for date and price, c.1920. British Library, FSHA1198; right: front cover design for an exhibition catalogue of the Siam Art Club, c.1920. British Library, FSHA1217. ©William R. Harrop

Among the earlier commercial print designs by Frederick S. Harrop are programmes for events and theatre performances. Some of these are completely in the English language, others completely in Thai, but there are also bilingual Thai and English programmes, depending on which audiences were expected for such events.

Left: Programme front cover for a “Miniature Naval Engagement” at Dusit Park, 1917, print on paper. British Library, GMS310; right: Programme cover for “The Willow Pattern”, an operetta on 21st February 1920 in aid of the Bangkok Nursing Home, print on paper. British Library, FSHA0740. ©William R. Harrop

A significant part of Harrop’s print collection consists of commercial poster designs and printed posters which were commissioned by organisations and enterprises to advertise their products and services. Though often undated, they appear to have been created mainly from 1920 onwards, showing a significant development in Harrop’s artistic and linguistic approach. The earlier designs for programmes were mostly executed in a Western style, possibly because audiences were primarily members of the expatriate community and the Thai elite. The posters, however, were meant to attract the attention of wider, general audiences, and Harrop included traditional Thai patterns as well as bilingual or even trilingual text passages, combining English, Thai and Chinese texts.

Examples of Harrop’s poster designs. Left: design for Solar Eclipse event, dated 9 May 1929. British Library, FSHA1206; right: Poster design for the Red Cross with text in Thai and Chinese, first proof dated B.E. 2568 (1925). British Library, FSHA 1193. ©William R. Harrop

Harrop produced numerous cover designs for a variety of publications, especially books written and translated by King Vajiravudh who was keen to introduce modern, creative book designs of high quality that would help popularise reading as a leisure activity as well as book collecting. Harrop understood that book design had to be adapted to the needs of the emerging Thai book market as more books were produced in the Thai language. Front covers with colourful, extra-ordinary designs and intricate patterns that appealed to the Thai taste aimed to give potential readers an idea of the contents of books, but also to emphasize the high quality of the books and the status of the authors and publishing agencies. Harrop’s book designs often included text, either in one language or multiple languages. By 1922 he had developed a Thai letterform that could be seen as his “signature” letterform as it was used for books featuring his book cover designs, as well as plates and illustrations in books.

Left: Front cover design for “Lilit nitthra chakhrit” by King Chulalongkorn. British Library, FSHA 1722; right: printed front cover of the book “Lilit nitthra chakhrit”, published in 1922. British Library, Siam.200. ©William R. Harrop

Among Harrop’s most impressive commercial designs are some for business calendars that were popular annual gifts for customers. It was a smart way to make business brands visible to customers throughout the year, and lucky symbols or signs of the Thai zodiac were integrated. Harrop created calendars for Buddhist and Chinese calendar systems. The most remarkable designs are Harrop’s Buddhist calendars printed on silk. There are four altogether in the Harrop collection now held in the British Library, each of them combining intricate decorative Thai patterns, stunning letterform designs, painted scenes depicting Buddhist deities, animals of the zodiac, and additional images chosen by the patrons who commissioned the calendars.

Left: Printed calendar on silk for the year B.E. 2465 (1922) and detail on the right. British Library Or 17132/2. ©William R. Harrop

Harrop’s notes, invitations, photographs and handwritten dedications in book gifts indicate that he had contacts with King Vajiravudh (Rama VI), Prince Chakrabongse, Prince Damrong Rajanubhab as well as other European professionals who worked for the Siamese government: French archaeologist and historian George Cœdès (Chief Librarian of the National Library of Thailand), Welsh linguist Herbert Stanley O’Neill (Lecturer of English at Chulalongkorn University), German architect Karl Siegfried Döhring, Swiss artist Michael Rudolph Wening (court sculptor for King Vajiravudh), and possibly also Italian artist Carlo Rigoli and British Vice-Consul in Bangkok, Reginald Le May.

Phra Samut Chedi, Chao Phraya River, Samut Prakan. Oil painting, signed F. S. Harrop, 1929. British Library, FSHA 1362. ©William R. Harrop

Frederick S. Harrop’s collection was given to the British Library in 2023 (books and one manuscript) and 2024 (artworks and archive). It is a collection of great diversity and consists of Harrop’s own artworks and designs, works of students at the School of Arts and Crafts in Bangkok, research materials, books and archival files. 592 photographs, 81 watercolours and 55 oil paintings by Frederick S. Harrop, one watercolour by Edith Harrop, 11 sketchbooks, as well as 153 prints, drawings, blueprints, stencils and printing blocks are now held in the Library’s Visual Art collections. In addition, 38 books and periodicals, one palm leaf manuscript, commercial designs, printed works on silk and paper, drafts for speeches and publications, and numerous other archival files documenting Harrop’s work in Bangkok were added to the Thai collection. These materials will be made accessible (by appointment) in the Library’s Prints and Drawings Room as soon as cataloguing and conservation treatment (where necessary) have been completed.

Jana Igunma (Henry Ginsburg Curator for Thai, Lao and Cambodian) and William R. Harrop (London) 

This is a short version of the full article “Frederick S. Harrop (1887 – 1969) and the modernisation of Thai book and graphic design” in the SEALG Newsletter, Dec. 2024; pp. 87-116.
More posts in the series “Exploring Thai art”:
Exploring Thai art: James Low (published 2016) 
Exploring Thai art: Doris Duke (published 2016) 

The opening page of the Mir'at featuring a richly decorated unvan with gold floral decorations and a description, in Ottoman (in Osman Reşer's hand?) of the name, date and authorship of the work. (Mekkî Ali, Mir'atü'l-hubûş. Cairo?, 1020 AH/1611-12 CE). (Or 11226, f 1v)

It’s not uncommon to find texts within our Ottoman holdings that speak to the history and culture of regions across Eurasia, and even the Americas. Whether translations of Arabic and Persian texts, or original Ottoman compositions, the manuscripts attest a keen interest in West Asia, South-East Europe, North Africa, the Hejaz, and Iran. And, of course, among the first printed books produced in the Ottoman Empire was the Tarihü’l-Hindü’l-garbî, a guide to the Americas cobbled together from Spanish and Italian sources. One volume that we hold, however, provides a different view to a particular Ottoman’s interest in a neighbouring Empire not often featured in other Ottoman works.

Or 11226, known as the Mir’atü’l-hubûş (Mirror of the Ethiopians), is a rare text in both Arabic and Ottoman Turkish that explores the origins, culture, religion, and relations of the Ethiopians (hubûş). Copied by Mekkî Ali İbn-i Mustafa İbn-i Ali el-Müderris in 1020 AH (1611-12 CE), the volume collates information gathered from myriad Arabic sources, including collections of aḥādīth. The British Museum purchased it from the well-known Istanbul-based dealer Osman Reşer né Oskar Rescher on 10 May 1930. To date, I have found only one other copy of the Mir’at, a manuscript from 1020 AH held at the Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi (Esat Efendi 484) in İstanbul. The microfilm of the manuscript is described in an article in Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi by Dr. Metin Demirci of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi. An English-language description of the work and its creator, fully contextualized among the other Ottoman texts about Ethiopians, was authored by Dr. Baki Tezcan in 2018 as part of the volume Disliking Others: Loathing, Hostility, Distrust in Premodern Ottoman Lands.

The title of the work, identifying Mekkî Ali in the same fashion as the Süleymaniye copy, and an ownership seal from Şeyh Ahmet Nehir (?) dated 1169 AH/1755-56 CE. (Mekkî Ali, Mir'atü'l-hubûş. Cairo?, 1020 AH/1611-12 CE). (Or 11226, f 1r)

Both the microfilm and the original manuscript are available on the Türkiye Yazma Eserler Kurumu Başkanlığı’s Database of Manuscripts. This provides us with the lucky opportunity to compare the manuscripts, despite their homes being at either end of Europe.

The Arabic-language start of the Mir'at including an explanation of the motivation for its authorship. (Mekkî Ali, Mir'atü'l-hubûş. Cairo?, 1020 AH/1611-12 CE). (Or 11226, ff 4r-v)

To start, the organization of the text is not quite the same in both copies. Both begin with a lengthy preamble glorifying Allah and his division of the peoples of the world into different races and ethnic groups, as well as describing the author’s motivations and praise for Sultan Ahmet I (reigned 1603-17 CE). Mekkî Ali does this first in Arabic and then in Ottoman, with the Ottoman providing occasional commentary on difficult words. From this section, we learn that Mekkî Ali travelled throughout Makkah, Madinah and other Arab lands between 980 and 995 AH (1572-86 CE; according to my reading of the Arabic text) and then, struck by a longing to return to them, he decided to uproot his family from Bursa, where he was a religious scholar or professor (müderris) and relocate to Makkah. While there, he was wowed by the diversity of people he met. He continued to be in awe of them after returning to “diyâr-i Rûm” (Anatolia) in 1007 AH (1598-99 CE), pushed by unfortunate and unfavourable occurrences to leave the Holy Cities. Tezcan clarifies that these circumstances were likely his refusal of a post in Madinah. After his return, Mekkî Ali decided to convert this wonder into a textual account of the Ethiopians, to pay tribute to those whose qualities he had admired.

The end of Mekkî Ali's explanation of the contents of the work including a marginal note. (Mekkî Ali, Mir'atü'l-hubûş. Cairo?, 1020 AH/1611-12 CE). (Or 11226, f 11r)

The alternation of Arabic and Ottoman Turkish with explanations continues through a Mukaddime, and then four ebvâp, each of which contains five fusûl. The first bap describes the merits of the Ethiopians; the second tackles the origins and characteristics of Najashi, the Aksumite King who gave refuge to early Muslims fleeing Makkah; the third, the Ethiopian Companions of the Prophet Muhammad (الصحابة); the fourth explores cultured Muslim notables of Ethiopian extraction (اهل الآداب في اصل الحبوش), before a very brief ending (but not a hatime). A brief marginal note on f 11r explains that fasleyn 4 and 5 of bâp 3 have been merged. This is because of the author’s inability to distinguish between various notables springing from Ethiopian mothers and the men of the Quraysh and the ṣaḥābah on the one hand and those springing from the Bayt al-ṭāhirīn and the ‘abbasī Caliphs on the other. In general, the sections aimed to provide readers with an understanding of the early history of the Ethiopians; their social and political divisions; and their importance in the early history of Islam.

Demirci describes the Arabic sections as explanations of the Ottoman parts, but, in fact, the Arabic text (overlined in red in the British Library copy only) always precedes the Ottoman. Indeed, a closer look at the two versions of the Mir’at shows that it is the British Library one, rather than the Sülemaniye copy, that is the more complete version, as the latter awkwardly skips a large section of Arabic text found on BL Or 11226 ff 4v-5r where Mekkî Ali explains he has gathered Arabic-language sources “translating them into Turkish so that their benefits are generalized and their comprehension easy.” (“ومترجما بعده باللسان التركي ليعم نفعه ويسهل فهمه”) The Ottoman sections, then, are translations replete with additional glosses to assist readers in understanding complex words and phrasing. As Tezcan points out, the Mir’at is part of a longer Arabic-language tradition of writing about Africans. Indeed, the Arabic texts include a marginal مطلب explaining the content, present throughout the BL text and at the front of the Süleymaniye copy, but absent from the Ottoman translations in both, which is why I assume the Arabic is original rather than a ta‘rīb of the Turkic text.

Apart from the missing sections of the Arabic text, the Süleymaniye copy follows much the same structure as the British Library one, but there are obvious differences in calligraphy and embellishment. While the Süleymaniye copy has lovely, even nesih that sits very firmly on a lower line, the BL’s holding is more cursive, a bit quicker and even occasionally sloppier, contrasting with its gold text frames and elaborate unvan. Moreover, despite a few marginal notes in the Süleymaniye copy, it is largely a clean one, while the Ottoman, and occasionally the Arabic, texts in the British Library copy have interlinear additions and corrections.

The Mir'at's colophon, including the name of the copyist and his profession, as well as the date. (Mekkî Ali, Mir'atü'l-hubûş. Cairo?, 1020 AH/1611-12 CE). (Or 11226, f 115v)

The colophon for the British Library copy appears to have been added after the completion of the volume. When compared to the Sülemaniye copy, which has only the simple statement that the work was completed by the grace of God, our holding is far more verbose and eloquent. The author of the Süleymaniye copy is only identified by a brief inscription on the top-left of the first folio where the author’s name is only given as Mekkî Alî el-Mes’ûl, possibly in a similar hand to the colophon of Or 11226. A similar note is found on f 1r of Or 11226. But in our copy's colophon, in contrast, in an almost-nestalik hand, the scribe identifies himself as Makkī ‘alī bin Muṣṭafá bin ‘alī al-mudarris of the Medrese-yi Valide-yi Sultan Mehmet Han İbn-i Murat Han at that time. The use of the Arabic adverb يومئذ (on that day) indicates that either he or his grandfather was a teacher when the text was copied, but I think it most likely that the epithet relates to Ali the grandson and not the grandfather. The school that he refers to might be the Safiya Mosque Complex in Cairo, constructed in 1019 AH (1610-11 CE) and dedicated to the Safiye Sultan, mother of III. Mehmet Sultan. The complex was initially under the supervision of the former Chief Eunuch of the Court Osman Ağa, loyal to Safiye Sultan throughout decades of Palace intrigues.

But this does not quite accord with Tezcan’s estimation of the author. He identifies Mekkî Ali as Ali Habî, “a professor of law from Bursa who is known to have held an appointment in Mecca in 1005/1596-97.” Tezcan has made use of considerable external resources to match the biography provided at the start of the Mir’at, coming up with a jurist who might fit the bill. In both copies, Mekkî Ali makes reference to a patron or protector, Mustafa Ağa, whom, based on the Ottoman Turkish description on f 7v of the Süleymaniye copy, Tezcan identifies as the Chief Eunuch, an Ethiopian himself. There are only minor changes in the honourifics found in the same passage of the British Library copy, but Or 11226’s Arabic text describes this patron as Muṣṭafá Aghā bin ‘abd al-Mannān. I’ve yet to find a source with the name of Mustafa Ağa’s father, but, of course, such information might help us to determine a bit more about Mekkî Ali’s identity and allegiances.

There are plenty of unanswered questions around Mir’atü’l-hubûş. For some time, scholars have sought to answer these making use of only one copy of the work. The comparison of the Süleymaniye and British Library copies will undoubtedly help to clarify some of these mysteries, perhaps creating new ones along the way.

Dr. Michael Erdman, Head, Middle East and Central Asia

I'd like to thank Shalom Njoki of Queen Mary's University for pointing me to Dr. Baki Tezcan's chapter. 

Further Reading

Demirci, M. (2020) ‘Fakîr Mekkî Ali’nin Hāẕā Mir’ātu’l-hubūş fi’l-uṣūl Adlı Elyazma Eseri.’ Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi , 13, 34: 50-91.

Hathaway, J. (2018) The Chief Eunuch of the Ottoman Harem: From African Slave to Power Broker (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press) (YC.2019.a.10249)

Junne, G. (2016) The Black Eunuchs of the Ottoman Empire: Networks of Power in the Court of the Sultan (London: I.B. Tauris). (YC.2017.a.9466)

Tezcan, B. (2018) “Dispelling the Darknessof the Halberdier’s Treatise : A Comparative Look at Black Africans in Ottoman Letters in the Early Modern Period.” Karateke, H., Çıpa, H., Anetshofer, H., Disliking Others: Loathing, Hostility, Distrust in Premodern Ottoman Lands (Boston: Academic Studies Press): 43-74. (YC.2019.a.4967)

The colophon of the Kitāb al-Dalīl featuring decoration common through the manuscript grouping. (Kitāb al-Dalīl. Oman, 17 Shawwāl 1312 AH/12 April 1895 CE). (Or 6564, f 177r).

In early 2024, preparing for a visit by an Omani guest, I set out to find what Omani manuscripts we might hold. Not satisfied with the idea that we didn’t have any, I started to pick my way through the listings and stumbled on Or 6568, identified as a 19^th-century Tar’īkh ‘umān with no author provided. Like a string that would unravel the veil of my ignorance, I pulled on it and found myself with a treasure trove of Omani cultural production.

In truth, it should have been obvious that the Library holds Omani manuscripts, and not just one or two. Charles Rieu’s Supplement to the Catalogue of the Arabic Manuscripts in the British Museum clearly states on page viii that “The most important accession after the above-mentioned collections was due to the liberality of Col. S. B. Miles, late political agent in Muscat, who at various times between the years 1875 and 1891 presented to the Trustees no fewer than fifty rare and valuable Arabic MSS. (Or. 1382-3, 2328-33, 2424-38, 2896-2920, 4518, 4529)…” Samuel Barrett Miles was a diplomat, ethnographer and historian who came to be one of the leading British authorities on the Gulf region. He was present in Oman at a time of considerable social, political and religious turmoil and it should not be a surprise that the manuscripts he deposited with the Museum are exceptionally eclectic. Some were copied in Yemen, such as Or 7776, a collection of poetry and historical texts. Others were probably copied for Miles, such as a copy of Wahhabi texts (Or 7778). This volume also clarifies that Or 7718 should be described as only one of the British Library’s Wahhabi manuscripts, not the British Library Wahhabi manuscript. But a fair number of the others were likely produced in Oman for Omanis. Many of these volumes, as well as those acquired from Miles' widow, are in disarray and will take long hours of hard work before they are understood in their entirety.

The first colophon of the Ta'rīkh 'umān providing the name of the copyist. (Ta'rīkh 'umān. Wādī Banī Kharūṣ, Oman, 20 Jumādá al-awwal 1038 AH/14 January 1629 CE). (Or 6568, f 47r)

But let’s get back to Or 6568. It’s one of three volumes labelled Ta’rīkh ‘umān , the other two being Add MS 23343 (containing two histories of the country, the first by ‘Abd Allāh ibn Khalfān ibn Qayṣar, ff 1v-50r; and the second without an author, ff 50v-173v) and Or 8076. All three of these manuscripts are clearly different texts. The latter one (Or 8076) is in a chronicle format and was donated to the Library by Miles’ widow in 1914. It highlights the slightly more ambiguous nature of the text in Or 6568, which begins with explanations of the departure of the Persians from Oman. But Or 6568 and Or 8076 have very similar hands, as well as usages of a lovely purple ink in addition to main black ink, which might firm up Or 8076’s connection to the country.

When I first called up Or 6568, our very helpful automated ordering system made sure that it came directly to the Asian and African Reading Room. But the next time I wanted to see it, after the cyber attack we suffered in October 2023, was slightly more complicated. The temporary blockage on retrievals meant that I had to go the basement to view the volume, to pull it off the shelf myself; not a common occurrence in normal times. Down in the basement, I decided to pull the volumes to its left and right. The lightbulb above my head gradually grew brighter, and I soon realized that I was looking at a small collection of 10 manuscripts, all likely from Oman, all deposited at the British Museum by the same man: Colonel Jayakar.

Who was this Colonel? Atmaram Sadashiva Grandin Jayakar was a Marathi speaker born in 1844 in India. He studied medicine in India and England and, after his posting to Muscat in 1873, eventually rose to the post of Agency Surgeon, even attending to Sultan Turkī bin Sa‘īd, until 1900. He therefore overlapped with Miles, who was in Oman in the 1870s and 80s, and likely would have worked with him personally. Jayakar has been the subject of a number of studies and blogs already, including Mark Hobb’s post on the British Library’s Untold Lives page , and Charlie Sammut’s detailed reckoning of Jayakar’s life. He is well-known for his exploration of Oman’s flora and fauna (some of it now named after him), as well as his study of Omani dialects and oral literature (translated into Arabic in 1980) and Arabic medical terminology, as well as his occasional intervention in Omani-British affairs. Pratap Velkar, a descendant of Jayakar’s, published a collection of his zoological research in 2004. But, for all the focus on Jayakar’s intellectual and scientific pursuits, his activities as a collector have largely been overlooked.

A folio of the Dīwān Ibn al-Mu'tazz featuring some of the creative uses of text direction to embellish the work. (Dīwān ibn al-Mu'tazz. Oman, Rabī‘ al-awwal 946 AH/August 1539 CE). (Or 6561, f 152v)

Jayakar passed away in 1911, but before he died, he presented (i.e. donated) 10 Arabic-language manuscripts to the British Museum on 12 December 1903: Or 6560 (ديوان موسى بن حسين المحلي); Or 6561 (ديوان ابن المعتز); Or 6562 (عين الحياة); Or 6563 (سبائك اللجين); Or 6564 (كتاب الدليل يوسف بن إبراهيم السدرابي); Or 6565 (القصيدة القدسية النورانية); Or 6566 (ديوان الحبسي); Or 6567 (ديوان الستالي); Or 6568 (تأريخ عمان); and Or 6569 (الصحيفة العدنانية).

The handlist of the manuscripts provided by Colonel Jayakar himself. (Dīwān Mūsá bin Ḥusayn al-Maḥallī. Oman, 19 Sha‘bān 1308 AH/30 March 1891 CE). (Or 6560)

We know that these were part of a cohesive whole because of a handwritten note in English at the end of Or 6560 in which Jayakar provides the titles of each of the manuscripts along with occasional notes about their importance. Or 6560, for example, is the collected works of the poet Mūsá bin Ḥusayn al-Shawwāl from the region of Wādī Banī Ruwāḥah Jayakar claims was known locally as... The Local (al-Maḥallī). Ḥumayd bin Muḥammad bin Ruzayq, author of the texts in Or 6563 and Or 6565, is also the author of the text underlying George Percy Badger’s History of the Imams and Seyyids of Oman. Or 6567, the Diwan of the Omani poet Sitālī, contains laudatory poetry about various Nabhanī Sultans. It is from Jayakar himself that we learn Or 6568 actually contains extracts from Bahā’ al-dīn ‘alī bin ‘īsá al-Irbilī ’s كشف الغمة في معرفة الائمة. Finally, the doctor’s notes tell us that Or 6562 is Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr al-Makhzūmī al-Damāmīnī ’s “compendium” of the حياة الحيوان الكبرى by Kamāl al-dīn Muḥammad ibn Mūsá al-Damīrī . Al-Damāmīnī, also known by the laqab Badr al-dīn, was a 13^th-14 ^th century CE South Asian scholar from the Punjab, highlighting the transmission of texts from South Asia to Oman.

The colophon of Or 6567 showing the second al-Baḥrī-penned inscription. (Dīwān al-Sitālī. Oman, 22 Ramaḍān 1039 AH/4 May 1639 CE). (Or 6567, f 89r)

The manuscripts that came to the Museum via Colonel Jayakar are fascinating for the view they provide us on Oman, its history and its culture. Some of this information can be gleaned from the content of the volumes, whether the main text or the marginalia and later inscriptions. Indeed, a number of the volumes are collections of Omani poetry, and Or 6560 contains verses in a metre particular to Oman. Most of the manuscripts have the names of their copyist somewhere in the text. These differ from volume to volume. The oldest of the manuscripts is Or 6561, which contains the date Rabī‘ al-awwal 946 AH (August 1539 CE) in a small marginal note against a colophon on f 249r, although it is not clear how much of the manuscript forms part of the oldest text. After this, a group of 10^th century AH/17^th century CE works appear to have similar creators. Or 6568 (20 Jumādá al-awwal 1038 AH/14 January 1629 CE) was penned by Ja‘far bin Sālmīn bin ‘abd Allāh al-Nakhlī belonging to the children of Muḥammad bin Bashīr bin Muḥammad bin Bashīr bin Baḥrī from the highlands beside Wādī Banī Kharūṣ (جعفر بن سالمين بن عبد الله النخلي تابع أولاد محمد بن بشير بن محمد بن بشير البحري الذي هو من بلد العليا من ناحية وادي بني خروص). I would bet that a relative (maybe even his father) copied Or 6567, where the colophon states that the manuscript was written by Sālmīn bin ‘abd Allāh a member of the Banū al-(Ba)ḥrī (سالمين بن عبد الله التابع بنو ال(ب)حري) on 22 Ramaḍān 1039 AH (4 May 1639 CE) and that the owner is the Doctor Agent of the Christian state (Portugal?), the Exalted State may God grant his intention (“مو ملك الصاحب الدختر عامل الدولة النصرانية الدولة العلوية رزقه الله النية”). The hand is similar between the two, as is the use of the bright purple ink instead of red for highlighting, overlining and titles. Arabic Wikipedia’s listing of the tribes of Oman is great help in identifying social groups in the manuscripts. But so too is the geographical designation in the colophon of Or 6568, as it is a simple affair to pinpoint Ja‘far bin Sālmīn’s hometown to the Wādī Banī Kharūṣ in the mountains south-west of Musqaṭ, about two-thirds of the way to Nizwa.

Other manuscripts are more modern. Or 6560 was copied by Sa‘īd bin Ḥamīd bin Sa‘īd on “Monday, the 11^th day remaining from Sha‘bān 1308 AH” (30 March 1891 CE) for Shaykh ‘alī al-Furqad (?) al-Taqqah al-Raḍmī (?) bin Hurrān bin Muḥsin bin Sa‘īd al-Siyānī, likely referring to a Shaykh originally from the Siyānī region of Ibb Governorate, Yemen . Or 6564, copied on 17 Shawwāl 1312 AH (12 April 1895 CE), is in the hand of Sa‘īd bin Ḥammād bin Ḥamad bin Salmān bin Muḥammad al-Riyāmī al-Azkawī. Or 6563 was organized and edited by Ḥamīd bin Muḥammad bin Razīq (?) bin Naḥīt bin Sa‘īd bin Ghassān al-Nakhlī. The manuscript is incomplete and lacks a proper colophon, but at the end of the volume, an additional madḥ or laudatory poem penned in a different hand on paper that looks to be the same as the main text is dated 1234 AH (1818-19 CE), giving us an upper bound for the date of the main work. This is probably roughly the time the manuscript was copied, as the same man signed his name to Or 6569, alongside the date of 14 Dhū al-Ḥijjah 1248 AH (3 May 1833 CE).

This is quite the collection of names and might be a bit of patronymic overload. But from the variety of scribes and dates, we can see that Jayakar collected from a variety of different periods, largely focusing on output that either spoke to the history of the land or to the literary output of its peoples. Some, of course, go back far before his time in Oman, or even the presence of British forces. Or 6567 and Or 6568, for example, are from a period of Portuguese control over Muscat during a century of fierce competition between them, the Ottomans, and an Indigenous dynasty, the Ya‘āribah. Others, such as Or 6560 and Or 6564, are from the end of his time in the country, begging the question of whether he might have known their copyists or their patrons. None of this is surprising, given Jayakar’s outstanding career documenting Omani flora, fauna and language over a quarter of a century. The considerable marginalia in some of these volumes indicates that he was not the only one to make use of these volumes; potentially a point of attraction for the Colonel and his curiosity about life in Oman.

A brief poem attributed to Shaykh Nāṣr bin Khamīs al-Salīmī in the additional texts following the Dīwān al-Ḥabsī. (Dīwān al-Ḥabsī. Oman, 11 Muḥarra, 1247 AH/21 June 1831 CE). (Or 6566, f 280v)

The manuscripts can be divided according to criteria other than ages. While the split between histories, poetry and zoological texts seems to speak to Jayakar’s own interests, the physical construction of the works also deserves some attention. Or 6560, Or 6567 and Or 6568 all feature a delightfully bold purple ink for titles, overlines and general decoration. The spread of ages makes it unlikely that the ink was time-bound, but it might be a fascinating regional trait. Additional folios appended to the end of Or 6566 also feature it. These are obviously in a hand different from that of the main text and are likely from another Omani scribe or writer. They reference the poetry of Omani Shaykh Nāṣr bin Khamīs al-Salīmī (a clearer copy of one of his poems is here on X), but also the North African poet al-Tilimshānī.

An example of the alternating use of red and yellow inks to highlight words and titles. (Sabā'ik al-lujayn. Oman, early 19th century CE). (Or 6563, f 335r)

This purple is quite distinct from the other manuscripts (and the main text of Or 6566), where a bright red is used in the same functions (except in Or 6562), often filling in the empty interiors of larger letters as seen in some of the Yemeni manuscripts that form part of the Miles acquisitions. Or 6563 also includes a lovely pale yellow, not too far off from the same ink used in Or 7718, a Najdi manuscript from the mid-19 ^th century CE.

The 'unwān of the 'ayn al-Ḥayāh likely copied in South Asia, featuring a mellow and distinct (compared to the other manuscripts in Jayakar's holdings) colour palette. ('ayn al-Ḥayāh. South Asia?, 1200 AH/1785-86 CE). (Or 6562, f 3v)

The single outlier is Or 6562, which has a more intricate ‘unwān of deep yellow, light green, brown and navy that incorporates floral motifs and a fleur-de-lys type element in addition to deep yellow cloudbands. The hand of this work is quite different from the other volumes and, although the colophon is clearly copied from an earlier work of the ‘ayn al- ḥayāh, right at the bottom of f 428v the copyist has put that the volume was produced by Aḥqar ‘abbād Allāh in 1200 AH (1785-86 CE). That might be a name or laqab, or it might just be formulaic. However, the coloration and calligraphy probably indicate that this is a South Asian manuscript, highlighted by the presence of occasional Persian glosses. A brief ownership note at the start of the volume identifies it as belonging to al-Sayyid Ibrāhīm bin al-Sayyid ‘abd Allāh bin al-Sayyid Muḥammad al-Qādirī al-Baghdādī. Does the Qādirī appellation indicate a member of the Qadiriyyah Sufi order? If so, this might strengthen the idea that the work is an import to Oman, where Qādirī orders are not common. After all, it is likely the content of the work, and its focus on the animal world, that is likely to have attracted Jayakar, rather than any potential links to Oman.

Atmaram Sadashiva Grandin Jayakar’s fame precedes him in the realms of zoology, medicine and Arabic dialectology. Greater study of the ten manuscripts he presented to the British Museum in 1903 might help extend this renown to the world of archives and library studies. Whatever the next few years may bring, we can be sure that this fascinating group of manuscripts will be of great value in piecing apart the far more complex, and convoluted, holdings of Omani and Yemeni manuscript traditions throughout the rest of the collection.

Dr. Michael Erdman, Head Middle East and Central Asia
With thanks to Dr. Şeyma Benli, Dr. Walid Saleh, Hussam Hussein and M. Ali Kara for their assistance.

The British Library’s Ottoman Turkish manuscript holdings include nearly 2000 volumes. Many of these are notable for the contents of the texts that they contain, such as the Divan-i Kadi Burhaneddin, or the lavish artistic efforts they attest, such as the Nusretname. Others hold the reader’s attention less, at least on first sight. These, of course, can be just as interesting as the more famous, more luxurious volumes with whom they share the Library’s stacks. Some even hold little treats waiting to be recovered. Or 7745, the Divan-i Bîçâre, is one such volume.

A page of poetry from the Divan-i Bîçâre. (Divan-i Bîçâre, Istanbul?, 18th-early 19th century. Or 7745, f 41r)

An 18^th- or early 19^th-century volume, the Divan is a collection of the poetry of a 17^th century Ottoman poet named Abdullah ibn-i Şaban who went by the mahlas Abdî before settling on Bîçâre (Helpless, Without Remedy). From a quick look through the book, it is a collection of largely religious or Sufi poetry copied in a talik hand.

The acquisition slip, including brief description of the Divan-i Bîçâre. (Acquisition slip for Divan-i Bîçâre, London, 1960s?). 

The acquisition slip attached to the volume notes that Bursalı Mehmet Tahir’s Osmanlı Müellifleri describes Bîçâre as being the “halife of Dizdarzade Ahmet Efendi of Balıkesir, the successor of the well-known Celveti saint Hüdayi Mehmet Efendi [Aziz Mahmud Hüdayi] of Üsküdar ... and was murşid to Atpazarı Osman Efendi and to Selami Ali Efendi.” The Türk Edebiyatı İsimler Sözlüğü of Ahmet Yesevî Üniversitesi quoted above (the hyperlink for his biography) provides more information on Bîçâre, relying largely on the famed late Ottoman biographer and chronicler Mehmet Süreyya’s research. It explains that his father, Şaban Dede, was the Zakirbaşı (the Sufi order member leading the congregation in zikir or dhikr, ذكر) to Hüdayi’s Celvetî Order and a great scholar of Ottoman music. He set Hüdayi’s ilahiler to music (“bestelenmiş”) while also writing poetry of his own under the mahlas Zakiri. Bîçâre also had a sister, but we have no information about her name or the path her life took.

Şaban Dede took great care with his son Abdullah’s education, instructing him in or ensuring his tuition of Arabic, Persian, and the Islamic sciences. Bîçâre made a name for himself as a Sufi poet of great skill in rhetoric, oratory and preaching. He first worked in Manisa before returning to Istanbul as the Şeyh of the Ali Paşa Dergahı. He remained in the Celveti order and composed poetry throughout his life, but the only work he is known to have left is his Divan. Bîçâre passed away in Üsküdar in 1068 AH (1657 CE) and his grave can be found in the Karacaahmet Cemetery in this district of the city.

Or 7745 might seem like one of the hundreds of divavin and other collections of poetry that the Library holds, one penned by a poet with an interesting history. But the Sözlüğü immediately points us to why it is important, noting that only two copies of Bîçâre’s Divan are known: one in Bursa’s İnebey Yazma Eserleri Kütüphanesi, and the other in Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi’s Yazma Bağışlar Bölmü. This, then, is a third, long-lost cousin to the two documented volumes, an important addition to the corpus of extent work from which we can learn more about Bîçâre’s oeuvre.

The opening of the Divan along with an additional introductory note. (Divan-i Bîçâre, Istanbul?, 18th-early 19th century. Or 7745, f 1v)

The text of Or 7745 makes it clear that this was far from a luxury copy. It is bereft of the sort of illuminated, colourful unvan that we would expect from a more expensive copy. The 45 folios have no small number of additional du-beyitler, likely the copyist themselves correcting the work. The lack of a colophon means that we don’t know who that might have been, when they worked, or where. A small note at the start of the text, likely also by the copyist, provides some biographical information about Bîçâre that largely accords with what we see in the Sözlüğü, but adds that “Sultan Mehmet vaiziyken vefat etmiştir rahmet Allah aleyhi” (“He died while the preacher of Sultan Mehmet, may God have mercy on him”). This indicates that the copy is from after 1657 CE, year of Bîçâre’s death. There is no indication from the sources at hand that this final attributed profession of his is true. Indeed, the notice is slightly tortuous in describing Bîçâre’s appointments and those of his father, which might indicate that the author of this information might have got things a bit mixed up.

Acquisition note recording the date of purchase of the manuscript from Ibrahim Elias Géjou on 11 May 1912. (Divan-i Bîçâre, Istanbul?, 18th-early 19th century. Or 7745, fly-leaf)

A more pressing question, however, comes to my mind: where has this volume been hiding? Well, since 11 May 1912 it is has been in the collection of the British Museum, and then British Library. It was purchased on this date from I. Elias Géjou, a well-known Paris-based supplier of manuscripts to the British Museum. Géjou, according to the British Museum’s website, was an Iraqi-Armenian dealer with French citizenship who dealt largely in Mesopotamian antiquities pre-1914. The Museum claims he only dealt in Mesopotamian materials before this date, but Or 7745 makes it clear that his gaze went beyond Iraq earlier than that when it came to manuscripts.

How did Géjou get hold of this volume? Most of the work conducted on Géjou’s life and work focus on his trade in ancient Mesopotamian works, especially those featuring Cuneiform. Dr. Nadia Ait Said-Ghanem of the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study has explored this aspect of Géjou’s legacy in much detail (see both her blog and a recently published paper). We, however, will need to turn to the manuscript itself for clues.

Two inscriptions at the start of the Divan including the ownership statement of Abdülhak. (Divan-i Bîçâre, Istanbul?, 18th-early 19th century. Or 7745, f 1r)

Or 7745 contains a number of inscriptions, two which start our search on f 1r. They are in hands that differ from one another and that of the main text. One that goes parallel to the spine of the work, in rık’a, appears to be a short poem addressed to “Beyrut Valisi Nasuhî Bey.” I had originally read it as "Mutassarıfı," but Prof. Jun Akiba kindly corrected me with a more appropriate interpretation. It is undated, but we know that Abdülhalik Nasuhî Bey was the Vali of Beirut between August 1894 and March 1897, which makes it likely that the poem was written in the 1890s. It seems probably that Nasuhî Bey, himself a poet, would have seen this, but did it mean that the book itself was in his possession?

A second inscription on the bottom left corner of the page, in unpointed Divani script, is indeed dated. I find much of the inscription quite difficult to read, but thanks to the very generous support of Dr. Mykhaylo Yakubovych, Dr. Şeyma Benli and Prof. Jun Akiba, who responded quickly to my Facebook post, we know what it says. The text reads “Min e’azzu mümtelekâti’l-fakîr Abdülhakk el-kadî bi-askeri Anadolu bâ-pâye-i Rumeli 55,” an inscription indicating that this book is the property of Abdulhak, Kazasker of Anatolia and Rumelia in (12)55 AH, or 1839-40 CE. This likely refers to Abdülhak Molla, who held a dizzying array of titles relating to both hekimbaşlık (the post of Chief Physician) and kazaskerlik (Chief Judge) for various cities and administrative units up to and including Anatolia and Rumelia throughout the 1830s to 50s, until his death in 1854 CE.

The two birth notices for es-Seyyit Mehmet Arif and Fatime. (Divan-i Bîçâre, Istanbul?, 18th-early 19th century. Or 7745, f 45v)

The last page of the work gives us a final clue about the manuscript’s ownership and production. Under the heading “Tarih-i Mehmet Arif İbnü’s-Seyitü’l-Hacc Mehmet Sait” (“the History of Mehmet Arif İbnü’s-Seyitü’l-Hacc Mehmet Sait”) there are two birth notices. The first, dated 7 pm on Friday, the “gurre” of Şa’ban (1^st of the month of Şa’ban) 1238 AH, or 12 April 1823 CE, announces the birth of “my son, es-Seyyit Mehmet Arif” (“oğlum es-Seyyit Mehmet Arif dünyaya teşrif eyledi”). From the title of the page, it’s clear that it’s es-Seyitü’l-Hac Mehmet Sait who is writing this notice, or having it written on his behalf. Just below it is another one, this time announcing the birth of his daughter Fatime in the morning of Saturday 9 Ramazan 1239 AH, or 7 May 1824 CE, about 13 months after her brother. In this notice, Fatime’s mother Şerife Emine Hanım is identified as es-Seyitü’l-Hacc Mehmet Sait’s wife (“karım”).

From these two inscriptions, we know that the work would have been in the possession of es-Seyitü’l-Hacc Mehmet Sait at least until the mid-1820s. It’s hard to tell exactly where he might have lived, but the fact that the inscription is in Ottoman Turkish, not Arabic, and the later ownership of the work by Abdülhak Molla, makes me think that this might have been a household in Istanbul.

What can we say from all of this? We know that Bîçâre died in 1657 CE and that Mehmet Arif was born in 1823 CE, so the volume must have been produced at some point between these two dates. Moreover, it might have been in Abdülhalik Nasuhî's possession as late as 1897 CE, possibly in Beirut, where a fan of the Vali inscribed it with a brief poem. But at some point over those 15 years between Abdülhalik’s tenure and the manuscript’s purchase by the British Museum, it made its way into the possession of M. Géjou. More research on his pre-World War One dealings with texts is needed before we can fill in those gaps, and the travels of this unassuming volume. Until then, however, we can still raise a glass of sherbet to the recovery of a third copy of Bîçâre’s Divan, and a belated cheer to the births of Mehmet Arif and Fatime, whatever might have become of them.

Dr. Michael Erdman, Head, Middle East and Central Asia

The Lalitavistara is a Mahayana sutra (Sanskrit sutra or Pali sutta, meaning text, discourse, canonical scripture) about the life story of Gautama Buddha, covering the time of his descent from Tushita heaven until his first sermon in the Deer Park at Sarnath, Varanasi, India. It narrates how the Buddha manifested in this world and gained awakening.


The Lalitavistara, with five Dhyani Buddhas on the wooden cover, Patan, Nepal, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, cover

The title Lalitavistara has been translated as “the play in full”. It consists of 27 chapters and is written in Sanskrit and a vernacular dialect also known as 'Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit'. Portions of the text date back to the earliest days of the Buddhist tradition, but it is not known when the Lalitavistara was finally edited (Winternitz 1933: 252-3). Both the style and language of the text suggest a compilation: the work includes a continuous narrative in Sanskrit prose, with metrical passages in mixed Sanskrit, and the topics of the prose and verse parts often overlap. The point of view also changes occasionally from the third person to the first person, where the Buddha himself narrates the events. It is therefore believed that the Lalitavistara is not the work of a single author, but an anonymous compilation in which very early and more recent passages stand side by side.


The Lalitavistara, written in Sanskrit in Devanagari script on paper, Queen Maya dreams of a white beautiful elephant entering her womb, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, f.36r

In the Lalitavistara the miraculous element in the legend of the Buddha’s conception and birth is overemphasised, compared to accounts in other Buddhist schools. There are also a number of concepts and stories that appear in the Lalitavistara for the first time that are missing in similar Pali texts. One is in chapter 10, recounting the first day of the young Buddha as a Bodhisattva, while chapters 12 and 13 also contain episodes which are missing in other biographies of the Buddha. The last chapter (27) praises the Lalitavistara itself and enumerates the merits one gains by honouring this text (Winternitz 1938: 251, 252).


The Lalitavistara, written in Sanskrit in Devanagari script on paper, Queen Maya giving birth to the Buddha, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, f. 73v

The Lalitavistara, like other post-canonical Buddhist literary works written in hybrid and pure Sanskrit, represents the Buddha not just as a sage, but as an extraordinary being “adorned with the 32 marks of the Great Man”. The Buddha’s beneficial power, compassion, and omnipotence is stressed in these texts, where this marvellous being is depicted as a living miracle: upon seeing him the blind see, the deaf hear, the dumb speak, the sick are cured, and so on. Everywhere he lives he is worshipped and respected by the kings, the wealthy, the gods and all other beings (Lamotte1988: 645-6). In the Lalitavistara, the Buddha says that when he was born, this trichiliocosm (a universe of a billion worlds) trembled, and all the gods bowed their heads to his feet and paid homage to him; he is superior to all the gods, he is the God of Gods, but he will still follow his worldly customs (Lamotte 1988: 624).

The Lalitavistara, written in Sanskrit in Devanagari script on paper, the monks crossing the Ganges on a boat, while the Buddha flew to the other side of the river, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, f.221r

The oldest copies of the Lalitavistara date from the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century, and it can be assumed that the original composition (or compilation) dates from the beginning of the Christian era. Although the Lalitavistara summarises a series of the jatakas (stories of the former existences of the Buddha), the biography remains incomplete, as it doesn’t mention the Buddha’s first return to Kapilavastu (the principal city of the Śākya clan) or his missionary trips, and there is no account of his demise. The Lalitavistara ends with setting in motion of the Wheel of the Dharma, which perhaps suggests that the narrative aims to tell the story of the complete awakening of a bodhisattva in his last existence (Lamotte1988: 654-5).

The Lalitavistara sutra has inspired elaborate artwork in different parts of Asia, and the themes of the text can be seen in temple art in Gandhara, and at the Borobudur temple complex in Java.


The Lalitavistara, written in Sanskrit in Devanagari script on paper, the Buddha conquering all demonic congregation, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, f.195v

There are three complete and one abridged manuscript copies of the Lalitavistara at the British Library, all from the collections of the India Office Library. The copy most often written about, and illustrated above, is I.O San 688, part of the B.H. Hodgson collection, which is adorned with coloured illustrations depicting scenes of the life of the Buddha. According to the colophon, the text was inscribed in Patan, Nepal, in 1803 by the Buddhist Pandit Amrtananda for Captain W.D. Knox, who is described as someone whose “liberality and other virtues surpassed the Hindu divinities and proved him to be an Avatara of Buddha”. An illustration at the end of the manuscript shows the presentation of the volume (ralitavisara) to Captain Knox, the first British resident in Nepal and an officer in the army of the East India Company, depicted in the military attire of the period and holding a prayer wheel.


The Lalitavistara, written in Sanskrit in Devanagari script on paper, with a painting of Pandit Amrtananda and Captain Knox. Patan, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, f. 253v

The same two figures appear with the Bodhisattva Manjushri (representing transcendent wisdom) and auspicious symbols on the back cover of the manuscript.

Pandit Amrtananda and Captain Knox depicted on the wooden cover of the Lalitavistara, Patan, 1803. British Library, I.O San 688, back cover

The two other manuscripts of the Lalitavistara in the British Library (I.O San 341 and I.O San 2880) are copies of the 1803 manuscript given to Capt. Knox described above (I.O. San 688).

The manuscript I.O San 341 was made for Henry Thomas Colebrooke – a Sanskrit scholar, orientalist, and Chairman of the East India Company – in the 19th century, who wrote at the beginning: “The Lalita Vistara ... Knox”. This copy is also annotated on the first folios, but it is not illustrated. There is a blank page on which is written in a second hand: śodha ṭīkā para (correct according to the tika, i.e. commentary or gloss), and there are a few corrections in the same hand. This manuscript is part of the H.T. Colebrooke collection.

The abridged copy (I.O San 2575), which is named 'a Buddha Purana', was copied in the 19th C. It is part of the collection of Colin Mackenzie (1753-1821) and was copied by one of his pandits. The manuscript comprises just a table of contents to the Lalitavistara, and contains a note by Colebrooke at the beginning, which reads: 'An abridgment of the Lalita Vistara, a Purana, containing the history of the life of Buddha. The original was brought from Nepal by Capt Knox. This abridgement by a pandit in Mr. Colebrooks’s service, contains the whole substance of the voluminous original.'


Note by Colebrooke at the beginning of a manuscript containing a list of contents of the Lalitavistara, 19th century. British Library, I.O San 2575

Bibliography
Igunma, Jana, and San San May, eds. Buddhism: Origins, Traditions and Contemporary Life. London: The British Library, 2019.
“Lalitavistara | Life Story, Biography & Legends | Britannica.” 4 July 2024 . 
Lamotte, Etienne. History of Indian Buddhism: From the Origins to the Saka Era. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université catholique de Louvain, Institut orientaliste, 1988.
‘The Play in Full / 84000 Reading Room’. n.d. 84000 Translating The Words of The Buddha. Accessed 4 July 2024. 
Winternitz, Moriz. A History of Indian Literature. 2, Buddhist Literature and Jaina Literature. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1933.

Azadeh Shokouhi, Sanskrit cataloguer

The opening text of Volume 1 of Ibn Bishr's 'Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 2v)

A chance request from a colleague one day had me search our catalogues and Arabic subject guide for histories of the Arabian Peninsula. While I was initially looking for works on Bahrain and the Arabian (or Persian) Gulf, I ended up stumbling upon Or 7718, described as a history of Najd, Baghdad and Basra under the title ‘Unwān al-majd fī ta’rīkh najd (عنوان المجد في تأريخ نجد). The manuscript, when I consulted it, was beautiful if simple in its decoration. Sadly, it didn’t fit the brief, but something about its colour palette and its organization intrigued me. The resulting search about its contents has convinced me that it was well worth the fascination.

‘Unwān al-majd fī ta’rīkh najd was written by al-Shaykh ‘Uthmān bin ‘Abd Allāh bin Bishr (الشيخ عثمان بن عبد الله بن بشر), also known as Ibn Bishr, in 1251 AH (1835 CE; volume 1) and 1270 AH (1854 CE; volume 2). The work is a history (as written on the package) of the Najd (central Saudi Arabia) with elements of the history of Baghdad and Basra. Why these two cities? Because Ibn Bishr’s work is actually two in one: both a history of the Najd region and a life story of Muḥammad ibn Abd al-Wahhāb (محمد ابن عبد الوهاب), the founder of Wahhabism who teamed up with Muḥammad bin Sa‘ūd (محمد بن سعود) in 1744 to unify the states of the Arabian Peninsula. Bin Sa‘ūd was the founder of the first Saudi State, also known as the Emirate of Dir’iyah, based around Dir’iyah, contemporary Saudi Arabia, and established in 1727. The author starts his history in 850 AH (1445-46 CE) and ends in 1270 AH (1853-54 CE), allowing for both the early history of the region and a comprehensive overview of ‘Abd al-Wahhāb’s activities to come across. Over the course of the work, Ibn Bishr recounts ‘Abd al-Wahhāb journeys through the Najd to Basra and Baghdad, where he studies and takes action against what he perceives to be incorrect Islamic practices, before returning to Najd. Much of what we see in Volume 2 takes the form of a chronicle and is therefore crucial to understanding the formation, establishment and territorial expansion of what would eventually become Saudi Arabia.  

(Left) The colophon of Volume 1, including the additional note on the original composition of the text (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 160r); (Right) The colophon of Volume 2 including a supplication to God. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 258r).

Ibn Bishr completed his text in 1853-54 CE. Dating Or 7718, however, is on the tricky side, as the copyist evidently wished to preserve as much of the source text they were using while still creating a unified and standalone work. The first part of the ‘Unwān (ff 2v-160r) ends with a colophon that identifies the author as being ‘al-faqīr ilá raḥmat rabbihi al-muqtadir ‘Uthmān bin ‘Abd Allāh bin ‘Uthmān bin [A]ḥmad bin Bishr al-Najdī al-Ḥanbalī’ (الفقير الى رحمة ربه المقتدر عثمان بن عبد الله بن عثمان بن حمد بن بشر النجدي الحنبلي), effectively identifying Ibn Bishr as both from Najd and a follower of the Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence. The main text goes on to state that the manuscript was copied on a Friday in the middle of the month of Rajab in the year 1270 AH, which we know to be the date of completion of the second volume of the work. A brief addendum to the side of the text reads “he said that he had completed it [the volume] in Rajab of the year 1251 AH.” The date of Sha‘bān 1270 AH is found on f 258r, the colophon of the second volume of the work. 

(Left) A folio of Volume 2 showing text crossed out with a reader's addendum. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 255v); (Right) A folio of Volume 2 with a gap in the body of the text. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 181v).

The note on f 160r about the date of the first work being 1251 AH is in a different hand from the main text and matches a number of annotations throughout the codex. I suppose that these additions to the text imply that it was copied after 1270 AH from an earlier complete version against which corrections could be made. Indeed, there is an odd gap in the text on f 181r where the copyist appears to have stopped mid-sentence before starting on a new section of text a few centimetres below. For a tabyīḍah or fair copy of the text, as the copyist is wont to call it in the colophons, there seem to be an awful lot of mistakes or gaps. 

(Left) The title of the text with Bin 'aybān's tarjamah and a note on the identity of the copyist. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 2r); (Right) An ownership note and a shakier attempt at copying out the tarjamah. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 1v)

Corrections, or perhaps emendations, to the main body of the work aren’t the only textual additions we find. Four notable inscriptions at the front of the volume provide additional information about the history of the manuscript. One of them (f 1v) is obviously a learner practicing copying out the text on f 2r. Just above this is a brief ownership inscription stating the volume belongs to "‘Alī Abū Niyān wakīluhu Nāṣr bin ‘Abd ‘anna[hu] (or ‘Abdān?) min ahl al-Riyāḍ," (علي أبو نيان وكيله ناصر بن عبد ان من اهل الرياض) placing the work in Riyadh, capital of contemporary Saudi Arabia, at some point in the late 19^th century CE. It must have made its way from there to Cairo, where it was acquired by Maurice Naaman and eventually sold to the British Museum in 1912, at some point in the late 19^th or early 20^th centuries. 

Before making that trip, however, another Saudi Shaykh, ‘Abd al-‘Azīz bin ‘aybān (عبد العزيز بن عيبان), wrote a tarjamah or brief biography of Ibn Bishr on f 2r, just before the start of the actual text and below the title written by the copyist. Bin ‘aybān is himself mentioned in the text of the ‘Unwān, in an episode from 27 Rabī' al-Thānī 1265 AH (17 June 1849 CE) when Imām Fayṣal (Fayṣal bin Turkī Āl Sa'ūd) orders him to remain at Riyadh with his son, 'Abd al-Allāh bin Fayṣal Āl Sa'ūd, whom Fayṣal has just appointed his successor. Although I haven't found 'aybān died, this note is like not from long after the manuscript was copied. Just above his tarjamah is a brief note that "I say it clearly and openly: what you see here from beginning to end was written by Muḥammad bin ‘Umar al-Fākhrī (محمد بن عمر الفاخري)." This undoubtedly refers to the famed Saudi historian and contemporary of Ibn Bishr of the same name who lived between 1188 and 1277 AH (1772/73-1860/61 CE). We therefore have a definite range of some six years within which the manuscript could have been copied, provided that the person who wrote this note was truthful. 

The title page for Volume 2 of the work showcasing the red and yellow inks used for decoration throughout. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 161r)

The British Library’s copy of ‘Unwān al-majd fī ta’rīkh najd is remarkable for more than just its content and the individuals attached to it. A quick look through the volume shows even and exceptionally legible naskh. The handwriting is clearly practiced and smooth with similarities to other Najdi hands. The fluidity of the text highlights al-Fākhrī’s mastery of the copyist’s practice, especially when compared to the shakier letters of al-‘aybān’s text. More impressive is the use of colour in the manuscript. The main text is copied in black with section headings and important words highlighted in a light red, almost orange, quite distinct from the deep, bold red of manuscripts from Anatolia and Syria. Even more striking is the use of a dark yellow in titles and important words and phrases. Red and yellow are employed in alternation, sometimes in odd and even lines like those for the title of the work and the sections; or even within phrases, as in the title of the work in the colophon of the first part. A similar, but not identical, alternating use of light red and yellow is found in another one of the Library’s manuscripts, Sabā'ik al-laḥīn (سبائك اللحين) by Ḥumayd bin Muḥammad bin Ruzayq (حميد بن محمد بن رزيق) (Or 6563), sourced from Oman in 1903. Indeed, a colleague (thanks, Jenny Norton-Wright!) remarked that the colours remind her of Omani manuscripts that she's seen. The use of lighter shades of yellow and red can also be seen in the collection of Zaydī manuscripts from Yemen at the University of Leiden (thank you for this tip, Dr. Annabel Gallop!). A closer match might be the collection of Minhāj al-sunnah al-nabawiyah fī naqḍ kalām al-shī‘ah wa’l-qadariyah by Ibn Taymiyyah held at the King Fahad National Library in Riyadh. These were copied later than Or 7718 and by two different scribes, neither of whom was al-Fākhrī.

Or 7718 has not been the subject of any studies in English or other Western European languages, at least not that I’ve been able to find. It has, however, elicited a fair amount of excitement among Saudi scholars and X users, starting in 2018 when an article that mentioned the work appeared in the Saudi newspaper al-Iqtiṣādiyah. Excitement peaked again after images of the manuscript were posted by Dr. Muḥammad bin Turkī al-Turkī, a scholar of fiqh and ḥadīth at King Saud University in 2021, and again in 2023 by another Saudi account dedicated to resources on Saudi history. For Saudi readers, the British Library manuscript forms an interesting counterpart to a work held in Riyadh, housed in the King ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Library. This copy has formed the basis of multiple edited volumes of the text published in Arabic, including a 2002 edition edited by ‘Abd Allāh bin Muḥammad al-Munīf. 

The text has also been an important source for Anglophone scholars of Wahhabism and the history of the Arabian Peninsula, although they have tended to cite the printed versions and only mention the British Library manuscript: George Rentz and his The Birth of the Islamic Reform Movement in Saudi Arabia; former University of Jordan and McGill University professor Ahmad M. Abu Hakima, who referred to it in his History of Eastern Arabia, 1750-1800; Michael Cook, whose 1992 paper ‘On the Origins of Wahhabism’ compares multiple sources of ‘Abd al-Wahhāb’s life and inspiration; Cole M. Bunzel, for his Wahhabism: The History of a Militant Islamic Movement; UCLA Middle East, South Asia and Islamic Studies Librarian Sohaib Baig’s 2020 doctoral dissertation ‘Indian Hanafis in an Ocean of Hadith’; Bilal Tahir’s 2020 introduction to Wahhabi history, ‘Wahhabism and the Rise of the Saudis: The Persecuted Become the Persecutors’; Jörg Matthias Determann in his Historiography in Saudi Arabia; and, most recently, Shahajada M. Musa for his Masters thesis ‘The Emergence of a Scholar from a Garrison Society’ at the University of Wales Trinity Saint David. Perhaps the enthusiasm in KSA will lead more Anglophone scholars to take a closer look at Or 7718 as an object study in and of itself, beyond the content of the text. 

Section of a folio from Volume 2 showing additional information added by a reader about the identities of two individuals mentioned in the text and the nature of a particular run-in with enemies. (Ibn Bishr, Unwān al-majd fī ta'rīkh najd. 1850s. Saudi Arabia. Or 7718, f 177v)

There is clearly much more to be done to understand this remarkable example of Najdi cultural heritage in the British Library’s Arabic manuscript holdings. While there can be no doubt that Ibn Bishr’s text is of great value to understanding the early history of Wahhabism and Saudi Arabia, the additional information found through the work appears to be no less valuable in tracking out the country’s intellectual history. 

Dr. Michael Erdman, Head, Middle East and Central Asia

Sources and Further Reading

Abu Hakima, Ahmad M. 1965. History of Eastern Arabia 1750-1800: The Rise and Development of Bahrain and Kuwait (Beirut: Khayats).

Abu Hakima, Ahmad M. 1988. History of Eastern Arabia 1750-1800: The Rise and Development of Bahrain, Kuwait and Wahhabi Saudi Arabia (London: Probsthains).

Bunzel, Cole M. 2023. Wahhabism: The History of a Militant Islamic Movement (Princeton: Princeton University Press).

Cook, Michael. 1992. ‘On the Origins of Wahhabism’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 2(2): 191-202.

Determann, Jörg Matthias. 2021. Historiography in Saudi Arabia: Globalization and the State in the Middle East (London: IB Tauris).

Ibn Bishr, ‘Uthmān bin ‘Abd Allāh. 1983. ‘unwān al-majd fī ta’rīkh najd, eds. Āl al-shaykh, ‘Abd al-Raḥmān bin ‘Abd al-Laṭīf bin ‘Abd Allāh and Al-Shithrī, Muḥammad ibn Nāṣir ibn ʻAbd al-ʻAzīz (Riyāḍ: Dār al-Ḥabīb).

Rentz, George S. 2005. The Birth of the Islamic Reform Movement in Saudi Arabia (London: The London Centre of Arab Studies).

Sā‘ātī, Yaḥyá Maḥmūd. 1414/1993. Waṣfīyat al-makhṭūṭāt fī’l-mamlakah al-‘arabīyah al-sa‘ūdīyah ilá ‘ām 1403h (al-Riyāḍ: Maktabat al-Malik Fahd al-waṭanīyah).

Henry Alabaster (1836-84) started his career as an interpreter for Thai in the British consular service in Bangkok where he was in close contact with King Mongkut (Rama IV). He helped to organise the solar eclipse observation event in August 1868 that was attended by various foreign government officials, including British and French. Shortly after the King died from malaria a few weeks after this event, Alabaster had to return to the UK. Thanks to his language skills and his in-depth knowledge of Thai literature he was employed by Reinhold Rost, librarian of the India Office Library, to catalogue seventeen Thai manuscripts that had been sitting in the IOL collection unexamined for two or more decades. Alabaster returned to Bangkok in 1872 to become King Chulalongkorn’s (Rama V) adviser. In the first part of this blog post, four legal manuscripts from Alabaster’s “Catalogue of Siamese manuscripts”, first section, were introduced. Now we will look at the remaining thirteen manuscripts.

Henry Alabaster standing next to King Mongkut on occasion of the solar eclipse observation event at Wa Kor observatory in southern Thailand, on 18 August 1868 (detail on the right). Photo source: ณ หว้ากอ : อดีต ปัจจุบัน อนาคต [Na Wākō̜ : ʿadīt patčhuban ʿanākhot], Bangkok 2018. British Library YP.2023.b.318 (front cover)

The handwritten catalogue has three sections: 1) Royal edicts and books of laws; 2) Miscellaneous; and 3) Novels and dramas.

In the second section, there are only three records for literary works.

The first item (MSS Siamese 5) is described as “Suphasit. Elegant sayings or Poverbs” (สุภาษิต), written with white chalk pencil on black paper in folding book format, 56 fols. He explained that this work contains 222 secular and Buddhist proverbs, commonly known as “Suphasit Thai”, which were also mentioned in Pallegoix’s “Grammatica linguae Thai” (Bangkok, 1850). Alabaster did not explicitly say that this manuscript may be related to Pallegoix in terms of provenance, but Pallegoix may have had access to this or a similar manuscript after he became vicar apostolic of Eastern Siam in 1838.

The second record (MSS Siamese 6) is for a black paper folding book, 60 fols., containing a text with the title “Kratai kap Phë. The Hare and the Goat. A fable” (กระต่ายกับแพะ), with unrelated drawings of naga (serpents) and floral designs. Alabaster included a summary of the story and established 1811 as the year of creation thanks to a note in this manuscript saying that the scribe saw a comet for eleven nights (this must have been the Great Comet of 1811).

A small unfinished drawing in a black folding book containing the story “Kratai kap Phë. The Hare and the Goat. A fable”, dated 1811. British Library, MSS Siamese 6, f. 59

Next follows a description of another black folding book (MSS Siamese 7), 56 fols., containing two texts written with white ink: “Phra Samutha Khlong Wuta Chindamani Chan – Prosody (an extract)” (จินดามณี) and “Kaiya Nakhon, the City of the Body, a Buddhist Allegory” (กายนคร). Chindamani, or Jewels of Thought, is one of the most important literary treasures in Thai language going back to the 17th century. The other is a Thai version of a Pali text (kāya nagara) dealing with contemplation of the human body, which is one of the fundamental four meditations (satipatthāna) in Theravada Buddhism. Alabaster noted the inconsistent use of accents (tone marks) which may point towards a creation date around 1800 or earlier.

Extract from the “Chindamani” written in white ink in a black paper folding book. British Library, MSS Siamese 7, f. 14

The third section of Alabaster’s catalogue on “Novels and Dramas” is the most extensive part, containing descriptions of ten manuscripts:

- MSS Siamese 8 “Hoi Sang vol. 1. The Adventures of Prince Hoi Sang. His escape from the city of the genies and his marriage with Princess Ruchana” (หอยสังข์), black paper folding book, 56 fols., no date. Prince Hoi Sang is born in a conch shell, similar to the hero of the story of Sang Sinchai.
- MSS Siamese 9 “I-hnao vol. 4. A Drama founded on Malayan or Javanese legends” (อิเหนา), black paper folding book, 56 fols., no date. Alabaster gives a summary of the text which is a popular Thai version of the Javanese Panji tales.
- MSS Siamese 10 “Phra Unarut vol. 5. The fight of King Unarut with the Genie King whose daughter has eloped with him” (พระอุณรุท), black paper folding book, 56 fols., no date. Alabaster notes that this is a Thai version of the story of King Anirut (Aniruddha) and Queen Usa.
- MSS Siamese 11 “Dara Suriwong vol. 1. The loves of Prince Dara and the Princess with the fragrant hair” (ดารา สุริวงศ์), black paper folding book, 66 fols., no date. Story of a prince who finds a casket containing a lock of fragrant hair and his search for the hair’s owner who turns out to be the daughter of the King of Benares.
- MSS Siamese 12 “Suwannahong vol. 13. Prince Suwannahong and his angel wives” (สุวรรณหงส์), black paper folding book, 56 fols., no date. Alabaster provides a summary of the story of the prince and his three jealous wives.
- MSS Siamese 13 “Samut Niyai Phra Si Muang vol. 1. The Story of Prince Si Muang and the wonderful Hong Bird” (พระศรีเมือง), white paper folding book, 82 fols., no date. Story of a prince who possesses a talking bird (hamsa) that leads him to study with a hermit, who then seeks a wife for the prince.
- MSS Siamese 14 “Thao Sawatthi Racha vol. 1. The King of Sravasti and his white elephant” (ท้าวสาวัตถีราชา), white paper folding book, 56 fols., contains a later added date, 1817, “which is probably the time at which it passed into foreign hands”. Story of the King of Sawatthi, whose twin sons were born while he spent many years in the jungle to look for his escaped white elephant.
- MSS Siamese 15 “Thepha Lin Thong vols. 1 and 2. The Adventures of Prince Thepha Lin Thong” (เทพลินทอง), white paper folding book, 76 fols., no date. Alabaster notes that it was “written by some foreigner, probably a Portuguese in romanized Siamese”.
- MSS Siamese 16 “Another volume of the same work” (MSS Siamese 15), white paper folding book, 58 fols., no date. “Written in ink in Siamese character, the form of the letters slightly differing from the forms now in vogue. Mentioned by Pallegoix in his list of Siamese Books as ‘King Lin Thong’”. Alabaster gives a detailed two-page summary of this story.
- MSS Siamese 17/a-b “Sang Sin Chai vols. III and V. The story of Prince Sang Sinchai, possessor of the magic shell, the magic bow, and the magic sword” (สังข์ศิลป์ชัย), black paper folding books, 44 fols. (a) and 42 fols. (b), date not stated. Alabaster provides a very short summary of the story and mentions that “The first, second and fourth volumes have got separated and are now in the British Museum numbered 12261, 12262a; and 12264 of the Additional manuscripts”. What he refers to are three manuscripts acquired for the British Museum in January 1842 from Thomas Rodd, a London bookseller, as part of the collection of Scotsman Sir John MacGregor Murray (1745-1822) who served in the British establishment in Bengal from 1770 to 1797 and brought back a vast collection of Persian, Arakanese, Pali-Burmese and few Thai manuscripts. It is certain that MSS Siamese 17/a-b, and possibly other manuscripts described in Alabaster’s catalogue, were originally part of Murray’s collection – especially the legal texts in section 1 since Murray had a particular interest in such.

One opening of the Romanised version of “Thepha Lin Thong” written in black ink in a white paper folding book. British Library, MSS Siamese 15, f.9

After completion of his “Catalogue of Siamese manuscripts”, Alabaster was determined to return to Bangkok. He rejected offers of posts in Cayenne and Saigon, and by April 1872 was deemed to have resigned from the British consular service. The reason was that he had been invited back to Siam by King Chulalongkorn (Rama V) to work in the King’s service. In May 1872 he was on a ship back to Bangkok, and on 15 November 1872 Alabaster wrote in a letter to MP Charles W Dilke that the Siamese government had recognised his position and that he was helping to facilitate the conclusion of the Chiang Mai Treaty (British Library, Add MS 43885, p. 247).

In the years until his untimely death in 1884 due to a sudden illness, Henry Alabaster made significant contributions to the modernisation of Thailand. In an announcement of his death in the Straits Times Weekly, 10 September 1884, his achievements were highlighted as follows:
“This gentleman who has been in the country for almost thirty years, was known and highly esteemed by everybody. He might, indeed, claim to have been for a long time the most prominent foreign personage in Bangkok, on account of his great influence as well as for the high offices he held for many years. He was His Majesty’s librarian, the director of the Royal Museum, the Royal Surveyor, the Administrator of Royal Parks and Gardens, the Superintendent of Roads and Bridges, and the First Official Interpreter of the King. In this delicate position especially he knew well how to command the full confidence and the highest esteem of the Sovereign, who often applied to him for advice …”

Watercolour sketch of Wa Kor observatory by Palacia Alabaster, 1868. The National Archives, TNA, FO 69/46. Photo courtesy of Padej Kumlertsakul.

Especially for the future of the Thai library sector, Henry Alabaster played a crucial role as the King’s librarian who took the lead in cataloguing the royal collection of manuscripts and books. He instructed his Thai assistants in Western standards of cataloguing and classification, which he had learned from Reinhold Rost in order to create the “Catalogue of Siamese Manuscripts” for the India Office Library.

Alabaster left behind two families: three children by his English wife, Palacia; and two by his Thai wife, Perm. In a handwritten condolence letter  to Mrs Alabaster, King Chulalongkorn informed her, in English, that the funeral was to be conducted with all the honours of the First Class Phya, and a monument of European style would be erected at the place of Alabaster’s burial. Nearly three decades later, when King Vajiravudh (Rama Vl) introduced the use of surnames in 1913, Alabaster’s Thai family was given the name ‘Savetsila’, a literal translation of the word ‘alabaster’.

Henry Alabaster’s memorial inscription at the Protestant Cemetery in Bangkok reads:
“To Henry Alabaster, formerly of H.B.M.’s Consular Service, afterwards in that of His Majesty the King of Siam by whom this monument was erected in recognition of faithful service.
Born A.D.1836 - Died A.D.1884.
A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country.”

Henry Alabaster’s memorial erected by King Chulalongkorn (left) and bust (right) at the Protestant Cemetery in Bangkok, just a short distance from his grave, 2024. Photos courtesy of Jason Rolan.

Jana Igunma, Henry Ginsburg Curator for Thai, Lao and Cambodian

References and further reading
Igunma, Jana: Reunited at last: a classical Thai verse novel from Ayutthaya (published 25 April 2022)
Alabaster, Henry. Henry Alabaster of Siam: correspondence 1857-1884 and career. [Great Britain]: Alabaster Society, 2009.
Alabaster, John S. Henry Alabaster of Siam 1836-1884: serving two masters. [Great Britain]: Alabaster Society, 2012.
Correspondence of Henry Alabaster and Palacia Alabaster (accessed 14 May 2023)

The Chevening Fellowship hosted by the British Library’s Asian and African Collections Department from September 2022 to September 2023 has been completed successfully. The aim of this project was to research and catalogue manuscript textiles found in the Library’s Southeast Asian collections.


Display of manuscript textiles from the Southeast Asian collections, 6 September 2023

Over the past twelve months Chevening Fellow Noon Methaporn Singhanan assessed, described and photographed 120 manuscript textiles. The outcome is detailed catalogue descriptions, with photo documentation, and an extensive bibliography for further study. The metadata of the textiles will be added to existing manuscript records in the online catalogue in the coming weeks. As a final highlight of this project we organised a display of selected textiles for colleagues and external guests on 6 September 2023. During this event, Noon answered questions about the displayed items and her research. She also demonstrated how manuscript mats with bamboo sticks were made in northern Thailand, a tradition she has helped to revive in the past through her volunteer project at UNESCO prize-winning temple Wat Pongsanuk in Lampang.


Chevening Fellow Noon Methaporn Singhanan demonstrating how to make a manuscript mat with bamboo sticks

To summarise the findings from this project, Noon said that there were three important aspects that will help with her PhD research: 1) the diversity of materials originating from different places across the globe, 2) the different types of manuscript textiles she discovered, and 3) the importance of object comparison as a research method.

Diversity of materials
Quite unexpectedly, Noon found a large number of textiles and materials which did not originate from Southeast Asia, but from China, Japan, India, and the UK. Raw cotton used to produce fabrics in Britain was most likely sourced from American plantations and from India. For example, most of some 29 British-made wooden boxes (IO Pali 1-29) with kapok and velvet cushioning contain stunning Chinese silk tapestries in the style of Dragon Robes and silk ribbons that were repurposed to wrap around Burmese Buddhist manuscripts. These were given to Arthur Phayre, Commissioner of Burma 1862-7, by the King of Burma.


Wooden box with red velvet and kapok cushioning, containing a Burmese Buddhist palm leaf manuscript with two wrapping cloths cut to size from Chinese silk brocade, c. 1862-7 or earlier. British Library, IO Pali 29

A Burmese Kammavāca manuscript (Add MS 23939) from the late 18th or early 19th century was found to be wrapped with a stunning piece of Japanese silk brocade with a pattern of Chrysanthemums, plum blossoms and butterflies woven into yellow silk with gilded washi paper threads.

Another surprising find was a scrolled paper manuscript with a Buddhist text in Shan language from the first half of the 20th century (Or 15368), acquired in 1995 from Søren Egerod’s collection. Sewn on to the binding is a factory-made cotton cover printed with a leaf pattern, which may have been imported or made locally post-1920 in one of the emerging cotton mills in Burma. Attached at the rim is a synthetically dyed green felt ribbon, made from wool, a material that is unusual in the Shan manuscript tradition. Further testing will be necessary to establish the country of origin of the wool.

Noon also discovered a wrapper made up of several parts, including a stunning piece of batik cotton fabric with rose pattern on the outside, and checkered silk sewn together with a piece of cotton on the lining. This was custom-made for a Burmese Buddhist palm leaf manuscript dated 1869 (Or 11810).

The great variety of materials and techniques to make manuscript textiles is evidence of trade and exchange relations from the late 18th to the early 20th century. In some cases, a creation date is contained in the manuscript, and usually a date is included in the acquisition record of a manuscript, so that it is possible to estimate the approximate age of the textiles.

Types of manuscript textiles
The most common type of manuscript textile found in the Southeast Asian collections is the cloth wrapper, either custom-made to fit the size of the manuscript or sometimes made from re-purposed pieces, like for example shoulder cloths and tube-skirts in the Lao manuscript tradition (Or 16886). Noon found out that many Burmese manuscripts are wrapped with printed cotton fabrics which originated in the UK, but occasionally imported velvet is found, too. One Burmese shell book dated 1907 (Or 16052) contains pages made from fine silk and it is wrapped in a piece of cloth woven on the backstrap loom in Karen style. Some manuscripts from Thailand have wrappers made from imported fabrics like silk brocades from India or European printed cotton (Or 1044). A red silk brocade wrapper with a gold thread pattern (Or 5107) was made in India for a 19th-century royal Thai edition of the Tipitaka on palm leaves. A stamp on the red coloured cotton lining is in a Brahmic script (probably originating from north-west India).


Cloth wrapper and mat consisting of 84 coconut leaf stalks, yarn and cotton fabric made for a Burmese Buddhist manuscript dated 1856. British Library, Or 12645

Another frequently found type of manuscript wrapper is the wrapping mat produced from yarn or fabric that is reinforced with bamboo slats or stalks from coconut tree leaves. Occasionally, the cloth wrapper and mat could be combined, and such items were found in the Burmese collection. The example above (Or 12645) is a wrapper made from an imported printed cotton handkerchief, of UK origin made for the South Asian market, together with a locally custom-made mat consisting of 84 coconut leaf stalks intertwined with red and yellow cotton fabric. These two items were used to cover a Burmese Buddhist palm leaf manuscript dated 1856.

Generally, there are three techniques of making wrapping mats. One method often seen in the Lao and northern Thai manuscript traditions is to weave the mat on the loom, using cotton yarn for the warp and alternately cotton yarn and bamboo slats for the weft (Or 12401).


Hand-woven mat with 19 bamboo slats and factory-made hem made for ten northern Thai palm leaf bundles with Buddhist texts. Manuscripts dated 1827-74. British Library, Or 12401

Another technique to make wrapping mats is to connect the bamboo slats by wrapping cotton yarn, or occasionally wool yarn, around them; and by using yarns of different colours one can create beautiful symmetric diamond or zig-zag patterns (Or 16545). This method was widely used in Burma and northern Thailand.

A third method is to manually weave the mat using yarn, bamboo slats or coconut leaf stalks, and rectangular pieces of fabric to insert between the yarn and bamboo slats (Or 12645).

Mat made from knitting wool with 95 bamboo slats in a diamond-shaped symmetric pattern, for a Burmese Buddhist manuscript dated 1852. British Library, Or 16545

In the Shan manuscript tradition, the most common type of textile is the cloth cover. Scrolled paper books with text in Shan script are usually equipped with a cloth cover, either made from imported printed cotton or locally made cotton fabric that is sewn on to the stab-stitch binding. Occasionally, a ribbon is attached at the rim of the cloth cover to secure the scrolled manuscript. Noon found one exceptionally beautiful Shan scrolled manuscript from the 19th century adorned with a locally made plain white cotton cover that was painted by hand with a floral design in red, orange, yellow and blue tones (Or 16137).


Shan scrolled manuscript containing a Buddhist text (right), with a hand-painted cotton cover (left) sewn-on to the binding, 19th century. British Library, Or 16137

In the Thai, Burmese and Malay manuscript collections Noon found textile manuscript bags and envelopes, all of them made from imported fabrics. One such example is a manuscript bag for a Thai palm leaf manuscript, custom-made from imported printed cotton fabric (Or 15885). The factory-made outer layer has red, brown and white floral ornaments, whereas the lining was made from locally-made cream coloured cotton fabric. A rope to tie up the open side of the bag is decorated with small cotton tassels at its ends, and such tassels are attached to all four corners of the bag, too.


Manuscript bag for a palm leaf manuscript from Thailand, made from imported printed cotton, c. 1840-60. British Library, Or 15885

An envelope made from European damask silk originally came with a letter from Pangiran Adipati of Palembang, addressed to Stamford Raffles in Bengkulu in 1824 (MSS Eur D 742/1/61). The envelope is combined with a paper wrapper made from Dutch paper, with intricately cut ends at the back, made in the Malay tradition.


Yellow silk and paper wrapper addressed to Raffles from a letter from Pangiran Adipati of Palembang, made from European damask silk and Dutch paper, 1824. British Library, MSS Eur D 742/1/61

In the Burmese collection Noon found a large number of manuscript ribbons (sazigyo) which fulfil two purposes: 1) to wrap around palm leaf or Kammavaca manuscripts - the latter often consisting of loose leaves - in order to keep the leaves in order when the manuscript is stored, and 2) to add a dedicatory message from the donor which is woven into the ribbon. Sazigyo were usually made in the tablet-weaving technique from cotton, silk or hemp. These ribbons can be of extraordinary lengths of several metres, and in addition to the inscription decorations in form of sacred symbols, geometric forms, plants and animals can be found (Or 3665).


Burmese manuscript ribbon (sazigyo) made from hand-spun cotton yarn, with text and ornaments on a solid red background, 19th century. British Library, Or 3665

Object comparison
When researching the manuscript textiles, Noon realised that many questions remained unanswered, especially regarding the country of origin and creation dates. Therefore, she visited several other organisations in the UK, including the British Museum, the Library of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), the Wellcome Collection, the John Rylands University Library in Manchester, Brighton Museum and Art Gallery, the National Archives at Kew and the Victoria and Albert Museum to see if there were similar items in these collections, possibly with recorded dates or detailed provenance records.

The method of object comparison proved useful to establish connections between some textile items and places of origin. During a visit to the John Rylands University Library in Manchester, Noon had the opportunity to see seven silk wrappers of exactly the same make as the British Library’s Or 5107. It is almost certain that they belonged to the same set of the Tipitaka thought to have been commissioned by King Rama III (r. 1824-51). The Mancunian acquisition record tells us that the Thai palm leaf manuscripts were donated by Pali scholar Thomas Rhys Davids in 1917.


Cotton wrapper with a butterfly and vine print on red background, lined with plain white cotton. Manchester 1874. British Library, Or 16673

During a visit to the National Archives in Kew Noon consulted numerous large volumes containing samples of textile designs registered by British companies in the 1870s-80s. With great excitement she found an exact match for a cloth wrapper made from a piece of imported printed cotton fabric with plain white hand-woven cotton lining in the British Library’s collection (Or 16673). It was made for a Burmese palm leaf manuscript with text on the Life of the Buddha, dated 1883. The fabric design was registered in 1874 by The Strines Printing Company in Manchester.


The moment of discovering a registered fabric design matching British Library Or 16673 at the National Archives in Kew.

Jana Igunma, Henry Ginsburg Curator for Thai, Lao and Cambodian Collections
Noon Methaporn Singhanan, Chevening Fellow at the British Library 2022-23