ILLUMINATED MANUSCRIPTS.
Among the minor arts of the Mohammadans, none is more individual and
characteristic than that of illuminating manuscripts. Possessing in the
Naskhy or cursive hand a script unrivalled in flexuous elegance, the art
of calligraphy may be said to have been forced upon the Saracens.
Penmanship soon took its place next to scholarship in the estimation of
the wise, and the names of great calligraphists, like Ibn-Mukla and
Yākūt Er-Rūmy, became almost as famous as those of the poets and
historians who provided them with the materials upon which to exercise
their art. Many of the ordinary books of reference, such as dictionaries
and annals, were transcribed with fastidious care in the fine bold
Naskhy character, and a further step was taken when illumination was
added to the beauty of penmanship. This embellishment was, however,
reserved for the book of books, the “noble Korān,” alone.[92] Ordinary
manuscripts might be beautifully written, but the Korān only was
ornamented with the rich illuminated title-pages and marginal medallions
which form the chief points of decoration in Arabic manuscripts. It is
only necessary to turn over the leaves of the thirteenth century Korān,
preserved in the British Museum (Orient. 1009), to realise what infinite
pains, what elaboration of the few decorative elements at their
disposal, what skill in the arrangement and application of gold and
colours, the Mohammadan illuminators expended upon their sacred book.
The first two and last two pages are the subjects of specially rich
decoration. They form each a rich panel, resembling a magnificent
carpet. A central ornament of intricate geometrical or arabesque design,
with the usual inscription, “Let none touch it save the purified,” (by
which the Muslim warns those who would handle the sacred volume to first
perform the prescribed religious ablutions,) is surrounded by three
borders, composed (1) of a sort of key-pattern, like what we have seen
on Mōsil metal-work, on a gold ground, (2) of flowers in various colours
on a prevailing blue ground, and (3) of free scroll-work, showing the
simple elements of the arabesque, which afterwards received such
manifold elaboration. There are generally four or five such full-page
illuminations in the best Korāns, two or three at each end of the
volume. The remaining pages are less richly ornamented: the headings of
chapters alone are framed in gold and colours, with arabesque and
geometrical borders, and the outer margins of the leaves are enriched
with numerous medallions, filled with arabesques and other designs. In
the example referred to, these medallions are exceptionally numerous and
varied. There are about three to each page, and their designs,
notwithstanding their small compass—for a floral border enclosing a gold
rosette is the prevailing type—present every change and contrast that
the illuminator’s ingenuity could suggest. The colours are chiefly
carmine, deep blue, black and gold, but green and yellow sometimes
appear. The bold writing—called _Thuluth_, or “Thrice-Naskhy”—of the
text is lightened by gold rosettes and other ornaments, to indicate the
punctuation and other directions to the person who chanted the Korān.
The character of the flowers and arabesques, and the scarceness of pure
geometrical ornament, lead to the impression that this beautiful
manuscript was illuminated at Damascus; but it may have been the work of
Cairo artists, trained in the Syrian school. Its date can hardly be
later than the thirteenth century.
[Illustration: FIG. 103.—ILLUMINATED KORAN OF SULTAN SHA‘BAN.
Fourteenth Century. (_Viceregal Library, Cairo._)]
Another very splendid copy of the Korān in the British Museum (Add.
22,406) bears inscriptions which prove that it was written for Beybars
Gāshenkīr in the years 704-5, or A.D. 1304-5, while he was still
_Ustāddār_, or major-domo, to the Sultan En-Nāsir ibn Kalaūn, and had
not yet ascended the throne himself. It was no doubt prepared for his
Khāngāh, or conventual mosque, which was completed in 706, and is still
standing. This magnificent manuscript is in seven volumes, and is
written from beginning to end in gold letters (within a delicate ink
outline) on a ground resembling the key-pattern of the early metal-work.
The first two pages are, as usual, fully illuminated, and covered with
splendid arabesques in gold, on blue and red ground, with the
inscription “Let none touch it save the purified” in white. The next two
pages are framed with interlaced borders; but the rest of the volume,
except the last page, has only the customary medallions, to mark the
divisions of the text, and the rosettes and whorls, of red, blue, and
gold, which are inserted in the writing for purposes of punctuation and
accent. The marginal medallions are much less frequent than in the
previously described Korān, and the designs are more monotonous. On the
last page, within a gold frame with interlaced border, is the
inscription
امر بكتابة هذا السبع الشريف واحواته المقر الكريم العالى المولوى الاميرى
الكبيرى الركنى استاد الدار العالية اعز الله نصره وكتب محمد بن الوحيد
“The writing of this noble Seventh and its sisters was ordered by his
excellency, the generous, the exalted, the lord, the great Amīr, Rukn-
ed-dīn, major domo altissimo, God magnify his triumphs; and Mohammad ibn
El-Wahīd wrote it.” In the marginal medallions of the same page are the
words ذهبه محمد بن مبادر عفا الله عنه, “Mohammad ibn Mubādir gilded it,
God assoil him!” Another of the seven volumes, or “sisters,” opens with
magnificent geometrical panels filled with arabesques within a free
scroll border; the pages are literally stiff with gold. At the end is an
inscription similar to that already translated, but with the addition
“and he finished the whole of it in the year 705.” A portion of the
margin of another volume gives the name of Sandal as the gilder, تذهيب
صندل; and the seventh part has the further information that this volume
“was incrusted (زمك) by Aydaghdy ibn ‘Abd-Allah el-Bedry,” which raises
a difficulty as to what this “incrustation” was. The word is frequently
employed to designate the laying on both of ink and of gold on a
manuscript; but the previous use of the words كتب and ذهب for these two
processes seems to suggest some different operation in the case of
Aydaghdy. Dr. Rieu thinks it may refer to the delicate outlining of the
characters, but this would more probably be termed كتابة. Perhaps the
زمك was the laying on of the colours, as distinguished from the تذهيب,
or gilding. It should be noticed that in this example the colours of the
medallions, &c., are _painted over the gold_, which gives them a
peculiar brilliancy.
A third Korān in the British Museum (Orient. 1401) is later—probably of
the end of the fifteenth or beginning of the sixteenth century—and the
decoration is very inferior to that of the two preceding examples. The
rosettes and medallions are comparatively few, and the ornament is over-
intricate, with something of the Alhambra effect. The headings of
chapters are good, but the execution is coarse; the full pages at the
beginning and end present some fine arabesques, but none of the designs
approach in delicacy those of the first Korān described above. The
colours are again laid over gold.
In the South Kensington Museum are the first two pages of a magnificent
Korān, belonging to the fourteenth century. They contain the first
chapter and the beginning of the second chapter of the Korān, in gold
letters on a ground shaded with red lines, and covered with beautiful
scrolls in two shades of blue; the border is of gold arabesque scroll-
work on a blue ground, with here and there a red flower-like ornament.
In the same Museum are a pair of fine leather boards, forming the
binding of a Korān, upon which little less skill has been expended than
upon the illumination of the manuscript itself. One of these is covered
with gold tooling, and has a border containing “the Beautiful Names” of
God; the other is tooled with a floral design with an oval centre. These
are fine specimens of Saracenic book-binding, and probably date from the
fourteenth or fifteenth century.
[Illustration: FIG. 104.—ILLUMINATED KORAN OF SULTAN SHA‘BAN.
Fourteenth Century. (_Viceregal Library, Cairo._)]
The finest illuminated Korāns in the world, however, are still preserved
in Cairo, where the Khedive’s library contains the volumes which have
been rescued from the chief mosques of the city. Like the glass lamps,
these precious manuscripts were no longer safe in the custody of the
mosque guardians; enterprising collectors proved dangerous to mosque
treasures; and the score of splendid _mushafs_, or copies of the Korān,
now stored in the Darb-el-Gemāmīz, were prudently saved in time. The
earliest of these is said to date from the second century of the flight,
and thus to be nearly twelve hundred years old; but the tradition is
somewhat apocryphal. The best examples, from the point of view of
illumination, belong to the period of the Mamlūk Sultans, like most
other works of art in Egypt. Three specimens of these Mamlūk manuscripts
are given in figs. 103-5, after Professor Ebers’ “Egypt,” but the size
of the present volume unfortunately precludes the possibility of
representing more than a quarter of each page. The designs are, however,
sufficiently shown even in this mutilated form, and perfect justice
could not be done to them without reproduction in the true colours and
gilt. The following is the description of the chief Korāns in the
Khedive’s library, as described by Spitta Bey, the late
librarian:[93]—The first is a Korān of Sultan Mohammad En-Nāsir ibn
Kalaūn (1293-1341), 21 by 14 inches, written by Ahmad Yūsuf, a Turk, in
730 of the Higra. It is written entirely in gilded characters, and there
is also a second copy of a similar description. Several other Korāns
date from the reign of Sultan Sha‘bān (A.D. 1363-77), grandson of the
last named, to whose mosque they were dedicated. The first of these,
dating from 769, 27½ by 19½ inches, has not its titles written in the
usual Cufic character, and the headings “in the name of God the all-
merciful” are in gold. Of the same date and similar size is the Korān of
Khawend Baraka, mother of Sha‘bān. The first two pages are written in
gilded and coloured characters, blue being the prevailing colour, and
are illuminated with stars and arabesques; the next two are in gold,
embellished with faint arabesques; and the whole work is written in a
bold and excellent style. Another copy of Sultan Sha‘bān, dating from
770, of the same width, but a little longer, contains some beautiful
workmanship on the early pages. The text is wider than that of the last,
and the book is bound in two volumes. Another and still larger copy,
dating from the same year, measures 32¾ by 21 inches. All these last
were destined for the school in the Khutt et-Tabbāneh (street of the
straw-sellers), founded by Baraka, the Sultan’s mother. Lastly we may
mention another copy written in 778 (1377), by order of the same prince,
by ‘Aly ibn Mohammad El-Mukettib, and gilded by Ibrāhīm El-Amidy. This
copy measures 28 by 20¼ inches, and above each sūra is recorded the
number of words and letters it contains. All these masāhif are written
on thick and strong paper, and vie with each other in magnificence. The
designs exhibit no great variety, but they are executed with the most
elaborate care and neatness. The text of these Korāns is provided with
red letters written above certain passages to indicate where the tone of
the reader’s voice is to be raised, lowered, or prolonged.
[Illustration: FIG. 105.—ILLUMINATED KORAN OF SULTAN EL-MUAYYAD.
Early Fifteenth Century. (_Viceregal Library, Cairo._)]
The collection contains three Korāns of the reign of Sultan Barkūk
(1382-99), the oldest of which measures 41 by 32 inches. It was written
by order of Mohammad ibn Mohammad, surnamed Ibn-el-Butūt, by
‘Abderrahmān Es-Sāigh, with one pen, in sixty days, and revised by
Mohammad ibn Ahmad ibn ‘Aly, surnamed El-Kufty. A second copy, of the
same Sultan’s reign, and of similar size, has its first and last pages
restored in the same style as those of other copies, but the modern
workmanship is inferior to the ancient. A smaller Korān, of the year
801, measuring 23 by 19½ inches, is written entirely in gilded
characters.
To Sultan Farag (1399-1412), the son of Barkūk, once belonged a copy of
the Korān dating from 814, and brought to the library from the mosque of
El-Muayyad. It measures 37 by 29¼ inches, and was also written by
‘Abderrahmān Es-Sāigh, the same skilful penman who had been previously
employed by Barkūk, and the author of a pamphlet, entitled “Sanā-at el-
Kitāba” (‘the art of writing’), and now preserved in this library. From
the year 810 dates a fine copy, 38½ by 27 inches, written by Mūsa ibn
Isma‘īl el-Kināny, surnamed Gagīny, for Sultan El-Muayyad (1412-21).
A copy which once belonged to the mosque of Kāït-Bey, dating from the
year 909, or a century later than the last, and unfortunately in a very
injured condition, is the largest Korān in the collection, measuring 44¾
by 35 inches. To the period of the Ottoman Sultans belongs the small
mushaf of Safīya, mother of Sultan Mohammad Khān, who caused fifty-two
copies to be written by Mohammad ibn Ahmad El-Khalīl Et-Tebrīzy. It
dates from 988, and measures 14 by 9⅓ inches. In it, as in one of the
other copies, a black line alternates with a gilded one, and the first
few pages are very beautifully executed. A copy of Huseyn-Bey
Khemashūrgy, 21½ by 16¾ inches, is written in a smaller character.
The description of such manuscripts fitly concludes a book on Saracenic
art. In illumination, as in other branches of decoration, the peculiar
character of Saracen ornament is clearly expressed. The effect is that
of rich embroidery, or gold brocade; in other words, illumination, like
mosaic, plaster, wood, and ivory, shows the tapestry motives of
Saracenic art. In the sanctuary of a mosque, or the kā‘a of a house, in
the complicated panelling of pulpit or ceiling, and in the chasing of
vessels of silver,—everywhere the same carpet-like effect strikes one.
Another salient feature of Saracenic work is exhibited in these
manuscripts: rich as they are,—as rich even as the exquisite Book of
Kells,—they suffer from the inevitable restrictions of religion.
Mohammad forbade portraits of animate things; and though we have
sometimes seen the prohibition evaded or defied, as a rule Mohammadan
art is figureless, and the illuminated Korāns exhibit this peculiarity.
Yet, without this same arid creed, the special features of Saracenic
decoration would never have been developed for the benefit and example
of Europe.
INDEX
OF NAMES, TITLES, AND PLACES.
* * * * *
‘Abda, 10 _n._, 242, 284.
‘Abd-el-‘Azīz, 294.
‘Abd-el-Kerīm, 213.
‘Abd-er-Rahmān Kikhyā, 88, 239, 279.
‘Adil, El-, 12;—208.
Akbugha, 256.
Aksunkur, 52, 279.
Almās, 188, 225, 250, 272.
‘Aly, El-Mansūr, 20.
Amīr, 17.
Amīr Akhōr, 30.
Amīr ‘Alam, 25, 31.
Amīr Bābdār, 34.
Amīr el-Kebīr, 29.
Amīr Gandār, 30.
Amīr Meglis, 31.
Amīr Shikār, 31.
Amīr Silāh, 30.
Amīr Tablkhānāh, 31.
Amīr Tabar, 31.
‘Amr, 4, 51, 52, 64.
Arkatāy, 272.
Ashraf, El-, 112; see _Bars Bey_.
Ashrafy, 18, 210 _n._
‘Askar, El-, 5, 9.
Asyūt, 123, 274, 282.
Atābek, 29.
Aybek, 13.
Aydaghdy, 302.
Aydekīn, 27.
Ayyūbīs, 10, 148.
Azhar, El-, 8, 9, 52, 64, 66, 98.
‘Azīz, El-, 194.
‘Azīz, Ibn, 196 _n._
Ba‘albekk, 290.
Bāb-en-Nasr, 66, 261 _n._
Bahādur, 272.
Bahry, 12.
Ballāsa, 274.
Barkūk, 52, 62, 64, 100, 128, 138, 225, 254, 270, 306.
Bars Bey, 62, 118.
Bashmakdār, 31.
Bawwāb, 80.
Bedr el-Gemāly, 9.
Behnesa, 282, 285.
Bektemir, 98 _n._, 225.
Beshtāk, 272.
Beybars, 12, 16 _n._, 25-8, 32, 34 _n._, 52, 65, 98, 122, 192, 223
ff., 270, 290.
Beyn-el-Kasreyn, 8, 28, 53, 76.
Beysary, 21, 23, 38, 209 ff.
Bundukdāry, El-, 27.
Dar-el-‘Adl, 11.
Dawādār, 31, 233.
Debīk, 282.
Dikka, 58, 80, 169, 199.
Dimyāt (Damietta), 282, 297.
Dīnār, 56 _n._
Durkā‘a, 82.
Ezbek, 272.
Farag, 236, 261, 307.
Fārisy, El-, 194 _n._
Fātimy, 193 f., 248, 284.
Ferghāna, 54 _n._
Firash-khānāh, 32.
Fustāt, El-, 4, 9, 274 ff.
Gamakdār, 33.
Gāmdār, 31.
Gandār, 30.
Gāshenkīr, 30.
Gauhar, 8.
Gāwaly, El-, 123.
Gemāly, El-, 9, 268 _n._
Ghāshia, 33.
Ghōry, El-, 53, 116, 120, 225.
Gīza, 11, 122.
Gubba, 32.
Gūkendār, 31, 33.
Hāgib, 30.
Hākim, El-, 9, 52, 62, 64, 98, 284.
Halka, 16.
Hanafīya, 70.
Hasan, Sultan, 53, 66-74, 100, 120, 134, 136, 225, 250, 251.
Hawāig-kash, 32.
Hawāig-khānāh, 32.
Ikhshīd, 7.
Imām, 128.
Ispeh-silary, 210.
Kā‘a, 80 ff.
Ka‘ba, 52, 225.
Kāfūr, 7.
Kāfūr Es-Sālihy, 255.
Kāhira, El-, 8, 9.
Kahlīs, 258, 272.
Kāït Bey, 53, 62, 74, 76, 100-112, 118, 126, 128, 136, 238, 270, 272.
Kalaūn, 12, 15, 18, 20, 76-8, 98, 116, 139, 142 ff., 156.
Kamarīyas, 263 ff.
Kāmil, El-, 12, 53, 98.
Karāfa, 74, 100, 194 _n._
Karākūsh, 11.
Kāshān, 276.
Kasīr, El-, 196 _n._
Kasr Yūsuf, 11.
Katāi‘, El-, 5, 9, 54.
Kātim-es-Sirr, 31.
Kebsh, El-, 19.
Ketbughā, 18-21.
Kettāmy, El-, 196 _n._
Khalif, 4, 8, 21, 139.
Khalīl, 18, 20.
Khān, 87.
Khān el-Khalīly, 18.
Khatīb, 128.
Khil‘a, 292.
Khumaraweyh, 6.
Kibla, 58, 70 _n._
Kiné, 274.
Kūfy, 68 _n._
Kurdy, El-, 203.
Kursy, 138, 168, 226.
Kūsun, 52, 65, 66, 134, 136.
Kusūr-ez-Zāhira, El-, 8.
Lāgīn, 14, 16 _n._, 20-4, 64, 130-3.
Līwān, 57.
Lulu, 207.
Mak‘ad, 80.
Malkaf, 84.
Mamlūk, 12 ff., 18 _n._, 189 ff., 223 ff.
Mandara, 80 ff.
Mangutimūr, 16 _n._, 23.
Mansūr ‘Aly, El-, 20.
Mansūra, 12.
Māridāny, El-, 52, 60, 64, 66, 132, 272.
Māristān, 12, 76-8, 142 ff.
Masr-el-‘Atīka, 9.
Mastaba, 80.
Medina, 49.
Meshrebīya, 80 ff., 156 ff., 266.
Meydā‘, 70.
Meydān, 6.
Mibkhara, 62.
Mihrāb, 58, 70.
Mihtār, 32, 230.
Mimbar, 58, 126 ff.
Misr, 4, 250.
Mohammad: see _Nāsir_.
Mohammad ibn El-Wāhid, 301.
Mōsil (style), 144 ff., 182 ff., 204 ff.
Mu‘allim, Beny, 196 _n._
Muayyad, El-, 52, 64, 66, 68 _n._, 126, 136, 225, 307.
Mubāshir, 29.
Muhtesib, 32.
Mu‘izz, El-, 7, 8, 194 _n._, 284.
Mukaddam, 30.
Mushidd, 32.
Mustansir, El-, 9, 10, 121, 193, 242, 284, 286.
Nāïb-es-Saltana, 18, 20, 29.
Nāsir Mohammad, En-, 11, 18, 34, 52, 66, 98, 149, 192, 225 ff., 276,
304.
Naskhy, 57 _n._
Nāzūk, En-, 196 _n._
Nefīsa, Sitta, 139.
Nūr-ed-dīn, 148.
Rakhwāny, 32.
Ramla, 121-23.
Ras Nauba, 29.
Rashīda, 9 _n._
Rikāb-khānāh, 32.
Rōda, 12.
Rukeyya, Sitta, 139 _n._
Rūm, 284, 286 ff.
Sāg, 6.
Sahn-el-Gāmi‘, 70.
Sāky, 30.
Saladin, 10, 11, 16 _n._, 148, 149, 270.
Salār, 270, 290.
Sālih, Es-, 12, 13, 15, 27, 139.
Sālih, Mohammad, 176, 177.
Saphadin, 12.
Sātilmish, 230.
Sebīl, 87, 108.
Selāhkhōry, 30.
Selīm, 3.
Semenhūd, 274.
Shadd, 32.
Shāfi‘y, Esh-, 12.
Sha‘bān, 306.
Sha‘bān, Umm-, 176.
Sharabdār, 32.
Sharab-khānāh, 32.
Sheger-ed-durr, 13.
Sheykhū, 136, 250, 258, 272.
Shugā‘ ibn Hanfar, 204.
Shugāy, 18.
Sicily, 10, 194, 282, 290, 294.
Silāhdār, 30.
Sūk-el-Keftīyīn, 198.
Sūr (Tyre), 249.
Suyūfy, 60.
Syrian style, 189, 220 ff.
Tabardār, 31, 33.
Tabl-khānāh, 31.
Takhtabōsh, 80.
Talāi‘ ibn Ruzeyk, 98, 134 _n._, 225.
Tebrīz, 278, 307.
Tinnīs, 282.
Tirāz, 289.
Tishtdār, 32.
Tisht-khānāh, 32, 209.
Titles, Mamlūk, 18 _n._
Tughān, 279.
Tukuzdemir, 259, 270, 274.
Tūlūn, Ibn, 3, 5, 6, 22, 52, 53-65, 95, 96, 130-32, 154, 270.
Turkish and Tartar names, 14 _n._
Tustar, 284.
Ujāky, 29.
Ustāddār, 29, 31, 294.
Venice, 202, 249.
Vizīr, 18, 29.
Wāly, 32.
Wekāla, 87, 101-112.
Yelbugha, 261.
Zard-khānāh, 30.
Zenky, Beny, 148, 181, 268.
Zeyn, Ibn-ez-, 218.
Zimamdār, 31.
Zuheyr, 36.
Zunnāry, 33.
Zuweyla, Bāb, 19.
* * * * *
PRINTED BY J. S. VIRTUE AND CO., LIMITED, CITY ROAD, LONDON.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 1: H. C. Kay, _Al-Kahirah and its Gates_. _Journ. R. Asiatic
Society_, 1882.]
[Footnote 2: _E.g._, in A.H. 442 died Rashidah, daughter of the Khalif
El-Mu‘izz, leaving an inheritance valued at 2,700,000 dīnars; in her
house were 12,000 robes of different colours. All the Khalifs since El-
Mu‘izz had impatiently expected her death. In the same year her sister
‘Abda also died and left an immense fortune. Forty pounds of wax were
needed to put seals on her rooms and coffer. Among her treasures were
3000 vases of silver, enamelled and chased; 400 swords, damascened in
gold; 30,000 pieces of Sicilian stuff; quantities of emeralds, rubies,
and other precious stones; 90 basins and 90 ewers of purest crystal, &c.
(El-Makrīzy.)]
[Footnote 3: Among the principal Mamlūk nobles of the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries the following names most frequently occur; they are
Turkish or Tartar, and Mr. J. W. Redhouse, C.M.G., has kindly given me
their significations: Beybars, and Bars Bey, Prince Panther; Altunbugha,
Gold (yellow) Bull; Ketbughā, Lucky Bull; Kurt, Wolf; Tunkuz, Boar;
Aktai, White Colt; Karakush, Black bird of prey, Eagle; Tughan, Falcon;
Sunkur Ashkar, Bay Falcon; Aksunkur, Jerfalcon; Karasunkur, Black
Falcon; Lāgīn, Perigrine Hawk; Balban, Goshawk; Singar, Bird of prey;
Kalaun, Duck. The preceding names are derived from animals and birds of
prey, and it is probable that corresponding images were blazoned on
their owners’ shields. Names connected with the moon are common: _e.g._
Tūlūn, Setting Moon; Aybek, Moon Prince; Aydaghdy, The Moon has risen;
Aytekīn, Moon-touching, tall; others relate to steel, as Janbalāt, Whose
soul is steel; Aydemir, Battle-axe; Erdemir, Male Iron (tempered steel);
Bektemir, Prince Iron; Esendemir, Sound Iron; Tukuzdemir, Pig-iron (?).
Others refer to some personal characteristic, as Beysary, Prince Auburn;
Salār, The Attacker; Karamūn, Black Man; Aghirlu, Sedate; Bektūt, Prince
Mulberry; Kagkar and Kagkīn, Fleet in running; Kurgy means Armour-
bearer; Takgi, Mountaineer; Suyurghatmish, A present; Ezbek, True
Prince; Bektāsh, Prince-peer; Satilmish, Who was sold.]
[Footnote 4: Beybars, following the example of Saladin, organized a
feudal system by granting lands to the chief lords of his court in
return for service in the field, and his arrangement appears to have
lasted until the time of Lāgīn, when we find the whole land of Egypt was
divided into twenty-four kīrāts, of which four belonged to the Sultan,
ten to the Amīrs and the holders of royal grants, and ten to the
soldiers of the guard. Lāgīn made a fresh survey and reconstructed the
feofs: ten kīrāts were allotted to the Amīrs and guard together, one was
reserved for compensating the dissatisfied, four as before belonged to
the Sultan, and the remaining nine were assigned to the cost of levying
a new body of troops. We learn that the Sultan’s sixth part comprised
Boheyra, Atfih, Alexandria, Damietta, Manfalūt, with their villages, and
Kōm Ahmar. The feof of Mangūtimūr, the viceroy, included Semhoud, Edfū,
Kūs, and others, and brought in a revenue of more than 100,000 ardebbs
(each of five bushels) of grain, without reckoning money-payments,
sugar-candy (for which there were seventeen factories), fruits, cattle,
and wood. The only lands excepted from this general distribution among
the Amīrs and soldiers were the pious foundations, heritages, and the
like. Lāgīn considerably reduced the value of the individual feofs,
which had previously been worth, at the time of Kalaūn, at least 10,000
francs a year.—El-Makrīzy (Quatremère), II. ii. 65 ff.]
[Footnote 5: It will be useful here to explain the system of Mamlūk
names and titles. Every Mamlūk had (1) a proper name, such as Ketbugha,
Lāgīn, Beybars, Kalaūn, generally of Tartar derivation; (2) a surname or
honourable epithet, as Husām-ed-dīn, “Sword-blade of the Faith,” Nūr-ed-
dīn, “Light of the Faith,” Nāsir-ed-dīn, “Succourer of the Faith;” (3)
generally a pseudo-patronymic, as Abu-l-Feth, “Father of Victory,” Abu-
n-Nasr, “Father of Succour;” (4) if a Sultan, an epithet affixed to the
title of Sultan or King, as El-Melik Es-Sa‘īd, “The Fortunate King,” El-
Melik En-Nāsir, “The Succouring King,” El-Melik El-Mansūr, “The
Victorious King;” (5) a title of possession, implying, by its relative
termination _y_ or _ī_, that the subject has been owned as a slave (or
has been employed as an officer or retainer) by some Sultan or Lord, as
El-Ashrafy, “The Slave or Mamlūk of the Sultan El-Ashraf,” El-Mansūry,
“The Mamlūk of the Sultan El-Mansūr.” The order of these titles was as
follows: first the royal title, then the honourable surname, third the
patronymic, fourth the proper name, and last the possessive: as Es-
Sultān El-Melik El-Mansūr Husām-ed-dīn Abu-l-Feth Lāgīn El-Mansūry, “The
Sultan, Victorious King, Sword-blade of the Faith, Father of Victory,
Lāgīn, Mamlūk of the Sultan El-Mansūr.” It is usual, in abbreviating
these numerous names, to style a Sultan by his title, El-Mansūr, &c., or
by his proper name, Lāgīn, &c., omitting the rest, while a Noble (Amīr)
is conveniently denoted by his proper name alone. It may be added that
the word _ibn_, of frequent occurrence in these pages, means “son;” as,
Ahmad ibn Tūlūn, “Son of Tūlūn.”]
[Footnote 6: The greater part of the translation above is Col. Yule’s
(_Marco Polo_, i. 25): the Arabic text and French version are given by
Quatremère, in El-Makrīzy’s _Histoire des Sultans Mamlouks_, I. ii.
190-194.]
[Footnote 7: Col. H. Yule, _Marco Polo_, i. 24.]
[Footnote 8: The Sultan never forgot that he had risen from the ranks of
the Mamlūks, and was accustomed to address his late comrades in
brotherly style. “The Mamlūk” was a common title much esteemed by the
Sultan and retained in the days of his greatest power.]
[Footnote 9: Joinville describes the Sultan Beybars’ camp at Damietta:
It was entered through a tower of fir-poles covered round with coloured
stuff, and inside was the tent where the lords left their weapons when
they sought audience of the Sultan. “Behind this tent there was a
doorway similar to the first, by which you entered a large tent, which
was the Sultan’s hall. Behind the hall there was a tower like the one in
front, through which you entered the Sultan’s chamber. Behind the
Sultan’s chamber there was an enclosed space, and in the centre of this
enclosure a tower, loftier than all the others, from which the Sultan
looked out over the whole camp and country. From the enclosure a pathway
went down to the river, to the spot where the Sultan had spread a tent
over the water for the purpose of bathing. The whole of this encampment
was enclosed within a trellis of wood-work, and on the outer side the
trellises were spread with blue calico (?) . . . and the four towers
were also covered with calico.” Hutton’s trans. p. 94.]
[Footnote 10: Nāsir i-Khusrau (eleventh century) says that 50,000
donkeys were on hire at Cairo in his time. They stood at street-corners,
with gay saddles, and everybody rode them.]
[Footnote 11: Admirably translated by the late Prof. E. H. Palmer.
(Cambridge, 1877.)]
[Footnote 12: It is worth remarking that the almost contemporary
Nilometer was built by an architect from Ferghāna.]
[Footnote 13: By gold piece I mean a _dīnār_, a coin about the size of a
half-sovereign, which then weighed 63 grains on the average, and was of
nearly pure gold.]
[Footnote 14: As is well known, the prayers of Mohammadans are said with
the face directed towards Mekka, which at Cairo means south-east. The
older mosques are more correctly placed in the proper direction than the
later. In referring to the Mekka side of a mosque the term “east end”
will be used, as it conveys a more familiar idea to Europeans than
south-east.]
[Footnote 15: Kūfy is a form of Arabic writing, older in its general
application than the ordinary cursive hand, which is termed Naskhy,
though the latter existed contemporaneously with the Kūfy in the first
century of the Hijra. Kūfy is a stiff rectangular monumental script,
whilst Naskhy is rounded and flowing. An example of the former may be
seen in fig. 9, and of the latter in fig. 10. The oldest Kūfy is more
rectangular than the later, which allows various curves and tails which
were not used in the earliest form of the character.]
[Footnote 16: The bricks, according to Mr. Wild’s measurements, are
small and flat, about 7½ inches long, by 2½ inches wide, and 1¾ inches
thick; the joints of mortar are very thick, generally about an inch.
Wooden beams are introduced here and there to tie the brickwork
together, especially at the spring of the arches.]
[Footnote 17: El-Māridāny’s mosque is well illustrated in Ebers’
_Egypt_, ii. 70; and the minaret is separately engraved in i. 61. It is
converted from the square into an octagon very near the base, and thence
at the first stalactite gallery into the round; above the second gallery
(there are but two) is a stone neck or pinnacle, twelve courses high
supporting a conical bulb-like crown.]
[Footnote 18: See the plates in Bourgoin’s _Les Arts Arabes_, and Owen
Jones’ _Grammar of Ornament_. And for Kūsūn’s grilles, see Prisse
d’Avennes, pl. 46.]
[Footnote 19: These were put up in 1422. The original platform and steps
had been destroyed, together with the galleries of the minarets, by
Barkūk, in 1391, in order to prevent the military factions using the
lofty position afforded by the mosque as a battery upon the Citadel
opposite. Guns have been frequently engaged between the Citadel and the
mosque; and some of Napoleon’s shot can still be seen embedded in the
wall. The original bronze door and lantern were also removed during the
period of interdict referred to, and were bought by the Sultan El-
Muayyad for his own mosque.]
[Footnote 20: Fair views of Sultan Hasan’s mosque, exterior, portal, and
interior, may be seen in Coste, _Architecture Arabe_, pl. 21-6; Ebers’
_Egypt_, i. 238, 262, 268; and my supplement to _Picturesque Palestine,
Sinai, and Egypt_, entitled _Social Life in Egypt_, 95.]
[Footnote 21: This direction or point of the compass is called the
_kibla_, and the common application of this term to the niche itself is
an error.]
[Footnote 22: It is worth noticing that the courses of stone in a mosque
or house are always 13 or 14 inches high, and are hardly ever
subdivided. The windows, doors, and ornament are therefore regulated by
the courses, and are four or six courses, or whatever the number, and
not four-and-a-half, &c. It is thus easy to calculate the height of a
building of stone by counting its courses.]
[Footnote 23: For illustrations of Kalaūn’s Māristān and mausoleum, see
my _Social Life in Egypt_, 91; Ebers’ _Egypt_, i. 247-50. Both these
works contain several large engravings of mosque interiors, which should
be studied in connection with this chapter.]
[Footnote 24: These various details of the Cairo room will be more fully
described under their respective headings.]
[Footnote 25: Some mandaras, however, have two daïses, like the Kā‘a.]
[Footnote 26: R. S. Poole, in a lecture delivered before the Royal
Academy, and summarised in the _Builder_ of 14th February, 1885.]
[Footnote 27: Nāsir-i-Khusrau, _Sefer Nameh_, ed. C. Schefer, 133.]
[Footnote 28: For illustrations of the chief mosques and other buildings
of Cairo, consult (besides Coste and Prisse d’Avennes) Ebers’ _Egypt_,
where there are some admirable interiors of houses after Mr. Frank
Dillon’s pictures, besides good views of various portions of the mosques
of El-Māridāny (i., 202, ii., 70), the Māristān, &c. (i., 247, 249,
250), Sultan Hasan (i., 238, 262, 268), El-Muayyad (i., 273, 274), Ezbek
(i., 281), Kāït Bey (i., 284), and El-Ghōry (i., 286). My Egyptian
chapters in _Picturesque Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt_, vol. iv., contain
some fine woodcuts of El-Ashraf Bars Bey (142), Sultan Hasan (143),
Barkūk (145), Kāït Bey (148), and others, with useful street views; and
in the supplementary volume, _Social Life in Egypt_, are illustrations
of El-Hākim’s minarets (90), Kalaūn’s mausoleum (91), Sultan Hasan (95),
and Kāït Bey (99-101), besides many objects of Saracenic Art from the
Cairo museum.]
[Footnote 29: Franz Pasha, in his admirable essay prefixed to Baedeker’s
“Lower Egypt.”]
[Footnote 30: E. Stanley Poole, in an essay on Arabian architecture
appended to Lane’s _Modern Egyptians_, 5th ed. This sketch of my
Father’s was the first serious attempt to deal with the problems of the
origin and development of Saracenic art in Cairo.]
[Footnote 31: Compare the illustrations on pp. 306 and 307 (vol. i.) of
Perrot and Chipiez, _The History of Art in Chaldaea and Assyria_. The
knop and flower pattern is there seen combined with rosettes closely
resembling those of Ibn-Tūlūn. See also Mr. Wild’s drawings of the
decoration of Ibn-Tūlūn in the _Grammar of Ornament_.]
[Footnote 32: There are also some remains of tenth century Fātimy work
in the mosque of Talāi‘ ibn Ruzeyk; but most of the ornament belongs to
the restoration by Bektemir in the fourteenth century.]
[Footnote 33: M. Bourgoin has made an exhaustive study of the
geometrical ornament of the Saracens in his _Eléments de l’Art Arabe_.]
[Footnote 34: This gateway is illustrated by Coste, _Architecture
Arabe_; but the details are a little imaginative.]
[Footnote 35: A plaster cast of this column is in the South Kensington
Museum.]
[Footnote 36: The origin of the pendentive may be traced in the rude
brick-work, projecting course above course, in the corners of the
Kertsch tumulus, of which an illustration is given in Lane’s _Modern
Egyptians_, Appendix F, 587.]
[Footnote 37: E. Stanley Poole, in Lane’s _Modern Egyptians_, 5th ed.,
pp. 586-588.]
[Footnote 38: A. J. Butler, _Coptic Churches_, vol. i., pp. 37, 38. That
the Egyptian mosaic-work was derived from the art of the Lower Empire is
supported by the circumstance that the common Arabic name for a tessera
of mosaic is _fuseyfisā_, which is of course the Greek ψῆφος. The term
_faṣṣ_ is also employed in the same sense, and _mufaṣṣaṣ_ means “inlaid
with squares of marble,” or “covered with mosaic.” The Greek emperor
furnished the Khalīf El-Welīd with mosaics and workmen for his mosque at
Jerusalem.]
[Footnote 39: An engraving of a mosaic floor, surrounding a fountain of
the simpler kind usual in good Cairene houses, may be seen in Lane’s
_Modern Egyptians_, pp. 12, 13, 5th ed.]
[Footnote 40: _Sefer Nameh_, ed. Ch. Schefer, p. 65.]
[Footnote 41: The wood commonly used for lattice windows is the pitch
pine, which is imported from Asia Minor in lengths of about twenty
feet.]
[Footnote 42: The same shape is seen in the plaques of the bronze door
of the mosque of Talāi‘ ibn Ruzeyk, as restored by Bektemir in the 14th
century: see Prisse, ii., pl. 95. Some portions of the original mosque
of Talāi‘ are still standing.]
[Footnote 43: A very similar style of work is seen in the carved wooden
niche from the mausoleum of Sitta Rukeyya, which may belong to a time
very nearly contemporary with Es-Sālih Ayyūb. This niche is now in the
Arab Museum at Cairo, and a photograph of it may be seen in the
portfolio of objects in the _Musée Arabe_, of which a copy is in the Art
Library at South Kensington.]
[Footnote 44: E. T. Rogers Bey: _Rapport sur le lieu de sépulture des
Khalifs Abbassides_, &c. (Com. Conserv. Mon. de l’Art Arabe).]
[Footnote 45: It may, however, be the crest of Karākūsh, the eunuch, who
was commissioned by Saladin to build the Citadel. Karākūsh means “black
bird of prey.”]
[Footnote 46: _The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt_, ii. 66, 67.]
[Footnote 47: _The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt_, vol. i., pp. 86,
87.]
[Footnote 48: _The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt_, vol. i., p. 212.]
[Footnote 49: A. de Longpérier, _Œuvres_, i., 71, 254.]
[Footnote 50: Compare what has been said above, pp. 126 ff.]
[Footnote 51: S. Lane-Poole, _Catalogue of Oriental Coins in the British
Museum_, vol. iii.; _International Numismata Orientalia_, vol. i., pt.
2.]
[Footnote 52: Mesopotamia and the adjacent districts have been famous
from remote antiquity for copper mines, and in the present day near
Māridīn is a kiln where the copper is refined which is extracted from
the mine of Argana Ma‘din; and copper vessels are still made at Tōkāt,
and exported to Syria and Egypt.]
[Footnote 53: In the Arsacid relief of Takhti-Bostan, the king hunts
from a boat, exactly as on this bowl.]
[Footnote 54: A. de Longpérier, _Œuvres_, i. 390.]
[Footnote 55: This inlaying, or rather the precious metal thus inlaid,
is termed in Arabic _keft_ كَفْت. كفّت (2nd conj.) means to plate or
cover with a leaf of metal. We read in El-Makrīzy of نحاس مكفت بالذهب
والفضة, “Copper, plated with gold and silver;” نحاس اصفر مكفت بالفضة,
“Brass, plated with silver;” and elsewhere of فولاد مكفت بالذهب, “Steel,
plated with gold;” and saddles, bridles, and precious stones, مكفت,
“plated” with, or set in, gold and silver. الطعيم (from طعّم) means
“incrustation,” “inlaying;” and مطعّم practically the same as مكفت, only
it does not necessarily imply metal-plates. El-Makrīzy writes—الكفت هو
ما تطعم به اوانى النحاس من الذهب والفضة, which shows that مطعّم is
applied to inlaid metal-work as well as مكفت. But it is also used for
inlaid ivory and wood: _e.g._ خشب مطعّم بالعاج والابنوس, “Wood, inlaid
with ivory and ebony,” صنع تابوتا من ابنوس مطعّم بالصدف, “He made a box
of ebony inlaid with mother-of-pearl.” See El-Makrīzy, _Hist. des
Mamlouks_, (Quatremère,) ii. i. 114, _note_.]
[Footnote 56: _Gazette des Beaux-Arts_, xii. 64-74.]
[Footnote 57: With regard to these distinctions, I must say that the
first, which is real Damascening, is the only method employed on early
Saracenic work, and it is used alike for large surfaces and small; but
_not_ for mere threads, which are, I believe, generally fixed by the
punched mode described above. Raised walls, mentioned in M. Lavoix’s
second method, are not known to early Saracenic art, and certainly do
not apply to Damascus work: they only came in when the Venetian style of
cutting away the whole surface except the pattern became the vogue. The
third method is the late and bad one.]
[Footnote 58: _Souvenirs d’un Voyage en Perse_, 1867, pp. 236-9.]
[Footnote 59: “I have seen,” says Nāsir-i-Khusrau, in the 11th century,
“copper bowls of Damascus containing each 30 menn of water; they shine
like gold. They tell me that a woman owns 5000 of them, and lets them
out daily for a dirhem a month.”]
[Footnote 60: El-Makrīzy, _Mamlouks_, ii. 246.]
[Footnote 61: _Sefer Nameh_, 158.]
[Footnote 62: _Sefer Nameh_, 149; El-Makrīzy, _Mamlouks_, ii. 250.]
[Footnote 63: A. de Longpérier, _Œuvres_, i. 453-5.]
[Footnote 64: We know that Basra painters were brought to Egypt in
Fātimy times. El-Makrīzy tells us that the “Mosque of the Karāfa,”
erected by Taghrīd Darzān, the wife of El-Mu‘izz, was built by a Persian
architect, El-Hasan El-Fārisy, and resembled the Azhar. Its chief gate
was cased with iron, and fourteen square brick gates led into the
sanctuary: before each of them was an arch resting on two marble
columns, in three parts, blue, red, and green, and other colours. The
ceilings were decorated in various colours _by workmen from Basra_, and
the Beny Mu‘allim, the masters of El-Kettamy and En-Nāzūk. Opposite the
seventh doorway was an arch on the two sides whereof were painted
fountains with steps, which looked real. Painters used to come to see
it, but could not imitate it. Two rival painters, El-Kasīr and Ibn-‘Azīz
(of ‘Irāk), were pitted one against the other by the Vizir El-Yāzūry;
the first painted a picture of a dancing-girl in white robes on a black
blind arch, as though she were inside it, and the second a similar girl
in crimson robes on a yellow ground, as though she were standing out of
the arch.]
[Footnote 65: _Khitat_ (Būlāk ed.), ii. 105.]
[Footnote 66: When El-Makrīzy speaks of white and yellow copper, he
means of course brass or bronze. The greater number of the inlaid
objects I have seen are of brass, and not of copper; though of course
the word _En-Nahās_ may be taken to include “yellow copper” (or brass)
as well as pure red copper. In the South Kensington collection, which
has had the advantage of the chemical tests of Dr. Hodgkinson (F.R.S.E.,
Professor at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, and of the Royal
College of Chemistry), there are 20 brass objects to 8 of bronze, while
what copper there is has a coating of an alloy of lead and antimony,
which gives a grey appearance to the bowls thus treated. Some of the
bronzes are zinc bronzes, _i.e._ contain zinc as well as tin, but as a
rule they contain a large proportion of tin.]
[Footnote 67: There is no “market of the inlayers” in Cairo now; but
workmen may still be found who can inlay copper with silver after a
somewhat rude fashion, using a simple graver, and beating silver wire
into the excavated design.]
[Footnote 68: See M. Lavoix, _Les Azziministes_, _ubi supr._, for these
and other indications.]
[Footnote 69: El-Makrīzy, _Hist. des Mamlouks_, Quatremère, II. i. 115,
_n._]
[Footnote 70: The relative termination, _y_, affixed to a name, though
originally implying the relation of slave to master (as _El-Ashrafy_,
the Mamlūk of El-Ashraf), came to signify also the mere relation of a
retainer, liegeman, or even courtier, without the notion of ownership.
Beysary was called El-Ashrafy, as one of the courtiers of El-Ashraf
Khalīl, the Sultan’s “man;” but he was not his slave.]
[Footnote 71: El-Makrīzy, l. c. II. ii. 135 _n._]
[Footnote 72: It has been fully described by M. de Longpérier, in the
_Revue Archéologique_ (N. S. vii. 306-9), and the article reappears in
the first volume of his _Œuvres_ (pp. 460-6).]
[Footnote 73: Ibn Batūta (i. 75) tells us that the monastery attached to
the mosque where Huseyn’s head was buried at Cairo had doors plated with
silver, and silver rings. En-Nāsir Mohammad, in 733, furnished a door
for the Ka‘ba at Mekka, which was made of ebony, covered with silver
plates of great weight.]
[Footnote 74: An engraving of the top of the table, showing the Arabic
inscriptions in Kūfy and Naskhy, and the ornament of ducks, &c., may be
seen in my _Social Life in Egypt_, p. 35.]
[Footnote 75: A. Nesbitt, _Descriptive Catalogue of the Glass Vessels in
the South Kensington Museum_, lxiv., &c.]
[Footnote 76: A. Nesbitt, _Descriptive Catalogue of the Glass Vessels in
the South Kensington Museum_, lxiv., &c.]
[Footnote 77: They were called _Kandīl Kalaūny_, “Kalaūn’s lamp.”]
[Footnote 78: _Sefer Nameh_, ed. C. Schefer, 152.]
[Footnote 79: An engraving of one of them was published in the _Art
Journal_, and afterwards in my _Social Life in Egypt_, 98.]
[Footnote 80: The descriptions of this and the two following lamps are
taken partly from Mr. Nesbitt’s _Catalogue of Glass in the South
Kensington Museum_, to which I contributed the interpretation of the
Arabic inscriptions. I have, however, after an interval of ten years,
made a second examination of the lamps, which has resulted in some
important corrections of my earlier readings of the inscriptions, and I
have also amplified Mr. Nesbitt’s descriptions.]
[Footnote 81: The badges on the Gate of Cairo, called the “Bāb-en-Nasr,”
may, perhaps, be the arms of the builder, El-Gemāly, and, if so, the use
of armorial bearings in Egypt in the eleventh century is proved. They
consist of a circular shield sculptured with a sixfoil ornament, and
crossed behind by a straight sword; and of a pear-shaped shield with
four studs or bosses and a serrated edge.]
[Footnote 82: See the engravings in Lane’s _Modern Egyptians_.]
[Footnote 83: _Sefer Nameh_, ed. C. Schefer.]
[Footnote 84: See Col. Yule’s admirable translation of Marco Polo. “At
Baudas [Baghdād] they weave many different kinds of silk stuffs and gold
brocades . . . wrought with figures of beasts and birds.”—i. 67.]
[Footnote 85: _Note sur un drap d’or arabe que possède le Musée
Industriel de Lyon: lue à l’Académie de Lyon, 30 Mai_, 1882, par M.
Pariset.]
[Footnote 86: The gold leaf was attached to the paper or skin by
gelatine, and then cut and rolled round the thread. The early Italian
weavers imported this peculiar Saracenic gold thread: hence the
_mysterium auri filati_ of the chroniclers. See the interesting account
of gold tissue in Fischbach, _Geschichte der Textil-Kunst_, 76, ff.]
[Footnote 87: For other notices, see Col. Yule’s notes in his
translation of Marco Polo, i. 67, 68, &c.]
[Footnote 88: Col. Yule, i. 45-6.]
[Footnote 89: J. B. Giraud, _Les Origines de la Soie, son Histoire chez
des Peuples de l’Orient_, p. 60.]
[Footnote 90: F. Michel, _Recherches sur le Commerce et la Fabrication
des Etoffes de soie, d’or et d’argent_, ii. 133.]
[Footnote 91: Mr. Fischbach almost admits as much himself, when he
occasionally notes his hesitation in ascribing a Saracenic stuff to an
Eastern loom or to Sarrasinas at Lucca; and some of his “Saracenic”
examples are even vaguely attributed to “Asia Minor or Greece.” He has
enjoyed the scholarly assistance of Prof. Karabacek, who has made
considerable use of Col. Yule’s and Sir George Birdwood’s discoveries,
and added the results of his own researches. The attribution of no. 13
to Ibrāhīm of Dehlī, however, is not warranted by the Arabic inscription
in the lithograph, which does not show the name of that Sultan. 88a,
again, which “cannot be read,” shows the name ‘Abd-Allah clearly.
Fischbach’s _Geschichte der Textil-Kunst_ contains Prof. Karabacek’s
information, but the Saracenic divisions are unhappily full of
misprints, which detract from the scholarly aspect.]
[Footnote 92: The curious figures in certain MSS. of El-Harīry’s Makamāt
are quite exceptional, and probably the work of Christians.]
[Footnote 93: Baedeker’s _Lower Egypt_, 268.]
Transcriber's note:
pg 34, footnote 9, Changed: "were sprea with blue calico" to: "spread"
pg 105, Changed: "eighth by a spendid arched gateway" to: "splendid"
pg 121, footnote 39, Changed: "may be seen in Lane’s _Modern
Egyytians_" to: "_Egyptians_"
pg 153, Changed: "Coptic carving should be ound earlier" to: "found"
pg 200, Missing reference to note 67 added after "the Sūk
El-Keftīyīn."
pg 226, footnote 74, Changed: "inscriptions in Kū y and Naskhy" to:
"Kūfy"
pg 296, Changed: "stiff-looking green and read peacocks" to: "red"
pg 311, Changed: "[Muayyad, El-,] 69 _n._" to: "68 _n._"
Some minor changes in spelling and punctuation have been done
silently.