KURENAI : Kyoto University Researc

The Japanese studies of Andreas MOller ( 1630-1694)
XI, 7: Xll-XIV, 8: XV-XX)- again coinciding with MUller's and Klaproth's words. At
some point however it was rebound into a single volume, and judging from the fact that
the title on the spine is given in the German-based Romanization "Dsti-chai" (which is typical
of Klaproth 181lb and 1822, i.e. his 1812 catalogue of the Berlin collection) this was
most likely done briefly after it entered Klaproth' s possession around 1811 or 1812.
It is here thus left to the reader to decide whether it is likely to be mere coincidence when
MOller's catalogue from the 1680s mentions a Haipian fragment as well as a Zihai for
the Berlin collection, while Klaproth mentions them not even with a single word in his own
I 812 catalogue of the same collection, but rather held the two above-mentioned items in
his private poss·ession.
Our preliminary conclusion is therefore that the Berlin Zihc'ii put into use by Mi.iller in
"SJ" and other works was indeed an exemplar of Ylnyim zihai, almost certainly exactly the
same one that is now found in Manchester. 71 Incidentally the title page ofYZ merely carries
the short title "Zihtii'' in large characters, which might explain why both MUller and Mentzel
never considered it necessary to speak of "Ylnyim zihiii".
4. Closing remarks
At about the same time as MUller was writing his account of the Japanese script, Georg
Meister (1653- 1713) visited Japan twice, namely in 1682- 83 and 1685- 86. Following his
return to Europe he published Der Orientalisch-Jndianische Kunst- und Lust-Gartner (The
Oriental-Indian art and pleasure gardener; Dresden 1692), which is in fact the only other
71
There does not appear to be anything suggesting the existence of a WZ in Europe at an early date,
or of another exemplar of YZ besides the one owned for some time by Klaproth.
- 123 -