IRANIAN PRECIOUS STONES SE-SE 517 



women of the Nan Man (the aboriginal tribes of southern China), being 

 fastened in their hair; 1 and were known in the kingdom of Nan-cao. 2 

 Likewise the women of Wei-cou H ^H in Se-'wan wore strung se-se 

 in their hair. 3 Further, we hear at the same time of se-se utilized by the 

 Chinese and even mined in Chinese soil. In so^e cases it seems that 

 a building-stone is involved; in others it appears as a transparent 

 precious stone, strung and used for curtains and screens, highly valued, 

 and on a par with genuine pearls and precious metals. 4 Under the year 

 786, the Tang Annals state, "The Kwan-'a-si 8t^$l 5 of San-cou 

 K. ffl (in Ho-nan), Li Pi $ $& by name, reported to the throne that the 

 foundries of Mount Lu-si A Ki produce se-se, and requested that it 

 should be prohibited to accept these stones in the place of taxes; where- 

 upon the Emperor (Te Tsufi) replied, that, if there are se-se not pro- 

 duced by the soil, they should be turned over to the people, who are 

 permitted to gather them for themselves." The question seems to be 

 in this text of a by-product of metallic origin; and this agrees with what 

 Kao Se-sun remarks in his Wei lio } that the se-se of his time (Sung period) 

 were made of molten stone. 



I have given two examples of the employment of se-se in objects of 

 art from the K'ao ku t'u and Ku yu t'u p*u (p. 31). Meanwhile I have 

 found two instances of the use of the word se-se in the Po ku t'u lu t 

 published by Wan Fu in 1107-11. In one passage of this work, 6 the 

 patina of a tin ffi, attributed to the Cou period, is compared with the 

 color of se-se: since patinas occur in green, blue, and many other hues, 

 this does not afford conclusive evidence as to the color of se-se. In 

 another case 7 a small tin dated in the Han period is described as being 

 decorated with inlaid gold and silver, and decorated with the seven 

 jewels (saptaratna) and se-se of very brilliant appearance. This is 

 striking, as se-se are not known to be on record under the Han, but first 

 appear in the accounts of Sasanian Persia: either the bronze vessel in 

 question was not of the Han, but of the T'ang; or, if it was of the Han, 

 the stone thus diagnosed by the Sung author cannot have been identical 

 with what was known by this name under the T'ang. I already had 

 occasion to state (p. 33) that the Sung writers knew no longer what the 



1 Tan $u, Ch. 222 A, p. 2. 



2 Man su, p. 48. 



3 T'ai p'in hwan yu ki, Ch. 78, p. 9 b. 



4 Min hwan tsa lu, Ch. B, p. 4; Wei Ho, Ch. 5, p. 3; Tu yan tsa pien, Ch. A, pp. 3, 

 8; Ch. c, pp. 5, 9 b, 14 b. 



5 Official designation of a Tao-t'ai. 



6 Ch. 3, p. 15 b. 



7 Ch. 5, p. 46 b. 



