562 SlNO-lRANICA 



petits. . . . On les fabrique avec des filaments tendres du mirier et, 

 apres y avoir appose un sceau au nom de Tempereur, on les met en 

 circulation." 1 



The bank-notes of the Ming dynasty were likewise made of mul- 

 berry-pulp, in rectangular sheets one foot long and six inches wide, the 

 material being of a greenish color, as stated in the Annals of the Dy- 

 nasty. 2 It is clear that the Ming emperors, like many other institutions, 

 adopted this practice from their predecessors, the Mongols. KLAPROTH S 

 is wrong in saying that the assignats of the Sung, Kin, and Mongols 

 were all made from the bark of the tree Zu (Broussonetia) , and those of 

 the Ming from all sorts of plants. 4 



In the Hui kian U 31 t&, an interesting description of Turkistan 

 by two Manchu officials Surde and Fusambd, published in i772, 5 the 

 following note, headed " Mohammedan Paper" -f $, occurs: " There 

 are two sorts of Turkistan paper, black and white, made from mulberry- 

 bark, cotton ffi! 'Iff , and silk-refuse equally mixed, resulting in a coarse, 

 thick, strong, and tough material. It is cut into small rolls fully a foot 

 long, which are burnished by means of stones, and are then fit for 

 writing." 



Sir AUREL STEiN 6 reports that paper is still manufactured from mul- 

 berry-trees in Khotan. Also J. WIESNER, ? the meritorious investigator 



1 Ibid., p. 20. . 



* Minti, ch. 8i, P . i (# M U # i -K A -* K it ,) 



The same text is found on a bill issued in 1375, reproduced and translated by 

 W. VISSERING (On Chinese Currency, see plate at end of volume), the minister of 

 finance being expressly ordered to use the fibres of the mulberry-tree in the com- 

 position of these bills. 



3 M6moires relatifs a 1'Asie, Vol. I, p. 387. 



4 This is repeated by ROCKHILL (Rub ruck, p. 201). I do not deny, of course, 

 that paper money was made from Broussonetia. The Chinese numismatists, in their 

 description of the ancient paper notes, as far as I know, make no reference to the 

 material (cf., for instance, Ts'uan pu t'un li ^ ^fij $t ;, Ch. 5, p. 42; 6 A, p. 2; 

 6 B, p. 44). The Yuan li (Ch. 97, p. 3) does not state, either, the character of the 

 paper employed in the Mongol notes. My point is, that the Mongols, while they 

 enlisted Broussonetia paper for this purpose, used mulberry-bark paper as well, 

 and that the latter was exclusively utilized by the Ming. 



5 A. WYLIE, Notes on Chinese Literature, p. 64. The John Crerar Library of 

 Chicago owns an old manuscript of this work, clearly written, in 4 vols. and chapters, 

 illustrated by nine ink-sketches of types of Mohammedans and a map. The volumes 

 are not paged. 



6 Ancient Khotan, Vol. I, p. 134. 



7 Mikroskopische Untersuchung alter ostturkestanischer Papiere, p. 9 (Vienna, 

 1902). I cannot pass over in silence a curious error of this scholar when he says 

 (p. 8) that it is not proved that Cannabis sativa (called by him "genuine hemp") 

 is cultivated in China, and that the so-called Chinese hemp paper should be intended 

 for China grass. Every tyro in things Chinese knows that hemp (Cannabis sativa) 



