Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:00:51.157Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Blattes de Byzance in India: Mollusk Opercula and the History of Perfumery1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 April 2013

JAMES McHUGH
JAMES McHUGH*
Affiliation:
University of Southern California, Los [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Aromatics derived from animals have played a very important role in the history of perfumery. The most well-known of these materials are musk from the preputial glands of the musk deer, ambergris produced in the stomach of the sperm whale, and civet from the anal glands of the civet cat. Two other notable materials are castoreum from the beaver, and hyraceum from the solidified urine of the African hyrax. The material that I will call ‘sweet hoof’ in this article, also called blattes de Byzance and unguis odoratus, is another fragrant material derived from an animal, consisting of the opercula of certain marine snails. With its marine origins ‘sweet hoof’ is intrinsically linked to the ocean and to trade, and it has also long been of importance all the way from the Mediterranean to China and Japan. Indeed, it is probably the most ancient animal derived aromatic to have an extensive global use, being mentioned in ancient Babylonian incense recipes. Yet, quite probably owing to its very low profile in more commonly studied genres of Sanskrit texts, the South Asian chapter of the history of ‘sweet hoof’ has yet to be written.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , January 2013 , pp. 53 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

I would like to thank a number of people who have been of great help in producing this article. First Dinah Jung at the University of Heidelberg organised a wonderful workshop on “Perfumery and Ritual – The Use of Aromatics in Asia”, and it is in that context that I produced this article. At Harvard, Kenneth Boss discussed mollusk opercula with me. Also, the scholar Thomas Zumbroich kindly shared an article he found on this topic. In India many perfumers, incense makers and herbalists have discussed mollusk opercula with me over the years, most notably J. N. Kapoor at R. P. Fragrances in Kanauj, and many people at both Vasu and Cyclebrand Agarbatti in Mysore. Perfumer Christophe Laudamiel has also discussed his perceptions of this material with me on several occasions. The Office of the Provost and the Grant Program for Advancing Scholarship in the Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Southern California provided generous support for travel and research in India in summer 2010, during which time I was able to collect more sources for this article.

References

2 For a very recent comprehensive history of musk see King, Anya, “The Musk Trade and the Near East in the Early Medieval Period.” Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University 2007.

3 Literally “Byzantine cockroaches” in French, this striking term has been the subject of some discussion. Some authorities suggest that this term is a corruption of the Greek blattos meaning purple: “Rondelet affirms that it was the production of the shellfish murex or purpura; and that the name Blatta is derived from the Greek βλαττος, ‘purple’.” Dunglison, R., Medical Lexicon, A Dictionary of Medical Science (Philadelphia, 1854), p.136 Google Scholar. Rumphius, a scholar who I discuss below, also refers to the term and suggests it derives from Blattion Byzantium. He translates this as “a leaf from Byza” which he suggests is the former name of a city in Africa. Rumpf, Georg Eberhard, The Ambonese Curiosity Cabinet, (translated) and (ed.) Beekman, E. M. (New Haven, 1999), p. 125 Google Scholar.

4 On this material in Chinese incense, see Schafer, Edward H., The Golden Peaches of Samarkand: A Study of Tang Exotics (Berkeley,1963), p. 175.Google Scholar On Japanese incense see Morita, Kiyoko, The Book of Incense: Enjoying the Traditional Art of Japanese Scents (Tokyo, 1992).Google Scholar

5 See the excellent article by Jursa, Michael, “Die Kralle des Meeres and andere Aromata,” in Philologisches and Historisches zwischen Anatolien und Sokotra: Analecta Semitica In Memoriam Alexander Sima, (ed.) Arnold, W., Jursa, M., Müller, W. W., Procházka, S. (Wiesbaden, 2009), pp. 147–180.Google Scholar

6 I am grateful to everyone I met at Cyclebrand Agarbatti and Vasu Agarbatti in Mysore India for sharing their knowledge of this material with me in summer 2006. Quite how an airborne fixative might work is unclear to me. Possibly such a substance might work by acting like a regular fixative in liquid perfumes, once the smoke of an incense permeates and settles into various porous materials such as fabrics and hair.

7 Personal communication.

8 On ambergris see Dannenfeldt, Karl H., “Ambergris: The Search for Its Origin,” Isis 73.3 (1982), pp. 382–397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed Dannenfeldt makes the point that ambergris, of unknown origin, lacked a classical textual account as to the nature of those origins. The same cannot be said for ‘sweet hoof’, at least within Sanskrit textual traditions, where its origins were quite well understood. As I note below, one South Asian Persian source is a little more speculative concerning the origins of ‘sweet hoof’.

9 For example see Varāhamihira, The Bṛhat Saṃhitā by Varāhamihira: with the commentary of Bhaṭṭotpala. (ed.) Sudhakara Dvivedi. E. J. Lazarus, Benares 1895–97, p. 947.

10 Personal communication to the author, 15 June 2006.

11 David Heppell, “The chank shell industry in modern India,” Princely States Report 2.2, April 2001 [journal on-line]; available from http://www.princelystates.com/ArchivedFeatures/fa-03-03a.shtml; Internet; accessed 1 June 2006.

12 Petit, G., “A propos de l'utilisation en parfumerie hindoue d'opercules de gastéropodes marins. Leur emploi dans la sorcellerie et la pharmacopée malgache,” Bulletins et Mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie de Paris, VII° Série, tome 3 (1922): pp. 58–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Rumpf, Georg Eberhard, The Ambonese Curiosity Cabinet, (trans., ed.) Beekman, E. M. (New Haven, Connecticut, c. 1999), pp. 124–127.Google Scholar

14 Ibid. p. 125.

15 Made most famous by the perfumer Piesse who created a “gamut” of odours, found in: Piesse, G. W., Art of Perfumery, second American from the third London edition (Philadelphia, 1867), pp. 41–44.Google Scholar

16 Varāhamihira. The Bṛhat Saṃhitā by Varāhamihira, (ed.) Sudhakara Dvivedi. For the date of Bhaṭṭotpala see David Pingree, Census of the Exact Sciences in Sanskrit (1970, Series A, vol. 4, p. 270).

17 For one example see his commentary on Bṛhatsaṃhitā 76. 9 as numbered in Dvivedi's edition. Varāhamihira. The Bṛhat Saṃhitā by Varāhamihira: with the commentary of Bhaṭṭotpala. (ed.) Sudhakara Dvivedi. E. J. Lazarus, Benares 1895–97, p. 947.

18 Platts’ A Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi and English gives three terms, nakha, nakhī, and nakhail.

19 In my analysis here I am inspired by the work of Bruno Latour on the way in which a greater number of connections can produce knowledge in science, though of course the theory and context here are quite different as is my usage of some of these terms. Some readers might be alarmed by my simultaneous usage of Frege and Latour given their apparently rather different theories of language and epistemologies, but I should emphasise that I am not using these terms in a systematic philosophical sense, but rather as useful terminologies to highlight certain aspects of a given situation. See Latour, Bruno, Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies (Cambridge, MA, 1999).Google Scholar

20 On balsam see Truitt, Elly R., “The Virtues of Balm in Late Medieval Literature”, Early Science and Medicine 14.6 (2009), pp. 711–736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

21 Unless one takes a subset of the usage of the term ‘balsam’, such as in examining the application by Europeans of this term to materials found in the New World such as ‘balsam of Peru’. In such a case contemporary materials might usefully be brought into conversation with older ones.

22 On the date of this text, see Wujastyk, Dominik, The Roots of Ayurveda, Rev. (ed.) (London, 2003), 4.Google Scholar On attestations of this material see Sharma, Priya Vrat, Āyurveda kā Vaijñānika Itihāsa (Varanasi, 1975), p. 369.Google Scholar

23 Meulenbeld places Niścalakara in Bengal in the second half of the twelfth century ce, and Priya Vrat Sharma suggests a date later than 1250 ce. See Meulenbeld, A History of Indian Medical Literature, vol. II A (Groningen: E. Forsten, 1999–2002) p. 105. Sharma, P. V., “Some New Information about Niścala's commentary on the Cakradatta.” in Medical Literature from India, Sri Lanka and Tibet, (ed.) Meulenbeld, G. Jan, Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit Conference, vol. VIII, general editor J. Bronkhorst (Leiden, 1991), pp. 107–112 Google Scholar. For the first description of this text, see also Bhattacharyya's, D. C. important article “New Light on Vaidyaka Literature (From Niścalakara's Ratnaprabhā),” Indian Historical Quarterly 23.2 (1947), pp. 123–155 Google Scholar.

24 Sanskrit “basket” or “box”, possibly a regional or vernacular term for nakhī?

25 Kara, Niścala, Cakradatta-Ratnaprabhā: the Cakradatta (Cikitsā-Saṅgraha) of Cakrapāṇidatta with the commentary Ratnaprabhā by Mahāmahopadhyāya Śrī Niścala Kara, (ed.) Sharma, Priya Vrat (Jaipur, 1993), p. 390. nakhītrayam iti pañca nakhyo bhavanti yad uktam bhavadevīyagandhaśāstre “nakhī paṇcavidhā jñeyā gandhārthā gandhatatparaiḥ | kācid badarapuṣpābhā tathotpaladalā matā ∥ kācid aśvakhurākārā gajakarṇasamā tathā | varāhakarṇasaṃkāśā pañcadhā parikīrtitā ∥” iti. atrādyāsu caturṣu madhye nakhītrayaṃ grāhyam. varāhakarṇākārā tu sarvathā na grāhyā yaduktam anyatra vaṇgadeśīyagandhaśāstre “hayakhurakarikarṇabadarakuvalayapatram upayujyate karaṇḍam. gandhavidhau dhūpavidhau dve dve ca varāhakarṇikā heyā.” iti. pṛthvīsiṃhenāpy uktam “karikarṇaturagakhuranakhaṃ prayuñjīta gandhayogeṣu. dhūpeṣu badarotpalapatraṃ na varāhakarṇam ubhaye ‘pi. iti. Google Scholar

26 One wonders what it is good for. Medicine?

27 I am tempted to speculate whether the proximity of the ocean to this region produced a greater awareness of the nature of ‘sweet hoof’.

28 On all these texts, lost and extant, see the appendix in McHugh, James, Sandalwood and Carrion: Smell in Indian Religion and Culture (New York, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 Niścala Kara, Cakradatta-Ratnaprabhā, p. 391. śuddhiś ca gandhadravyāṇām avaśyaṃ kartavyā anyathā vairāgyam eva syāt yadāha pṛthvīsiṃaḥ “śodhanena vinā vastu virāgāyopapadyate.” iti.

30 On the possible identity of this Bhavadeva, see McHugh, Sandalwood and Carrion, pp. 114–115.

31 This could refer to several plants.

32 The French term “enfleurage” is the best translation of the perfumery process called vāsanam, which involves placing flowers next to a substrate (often oily) to be perfumed, and replacing the spent flowers with fresh ones for several days until they have imparted their fragrant quality to the substrate.

33 Niścala Kara, Cakradatta-Ratnaprabhā, pp. 391–392. bhavadevas tv anyathā āha “nakhīṃ gomūtrasaṃsvinnāṃ tridinaṃ bhūtale gatām | bhūtalād uddhṛtāṃ paścāt kvāthayet kāñjikena ca ∥ apanīya tvacaṃ pascād dhātrīkuṣṭhena mardayet | tataḥ sūryāṃśusantaptāṃ devīkuṅkumacandanaiḥ ∥ mardayitvā pacet paścān madhunā pākavin naraḥ | tataḥ pañcasugandhena mardanaṃ vāsanaṃ tathā ∥ kusumaiḥ karmaṇā ‘nena śudhyate sutarāṃ nakhī |

34 Rājanighaṇṭusahito Dhanvantarīyanighaṇṭuḥ, Ānandāśramasaṃskṛtagranthāvaliḥ 33, 2nd edition (Pune, 1927), p. 107. nakhaḥ kararuhaḥ śilpī karajo ‘tha khuraḥ śaphaḥ | śuktiḥ saṅkhacalaḥ kośī hanur nāgahanuḥ sahaḥ ∥

35 Ibid. nakhaḥ kaṭukam uṣṇaṃ ca viṣaṃ hanti prayojitam | kuṣṭhāni sādayaty eva kaphaṃ khaṇḍayati ∥

36 Indeed the jujube tree leaf would appear to be a better candidate for comparison with an operculum than the flower.

37 haṭṭe vilasati haṭṭavilāsinī veśyeva vā. The Nāmaliṅgānuśāsana (Amarakosha) of Amarasimha with the Commentary (Amarakoshodghāṭana) of Kshīrasvāmin, (ed.) K. G. Oka (Poona, 1913), p. 76. Note that another commentator on this text, Bhānuji Dīkṣita takes this term as well as hanu as synonyms of the previous item listed in the lexicon. Comparison with the pharmacological glossaries suggests that this is not the case and these terms belong with nakha. Though, possibly, those sources could all point to a very old confusion about the grouping of these items in lexical lists. See Nāmaliṅgāniṡāsana alias Amarakoṣa with the Commentary Vyākhyāsudhā or Rāmāśramī of Bhānuji Dīkṣita, (ed.) M. M. Paṇḍit Śivadatta Dādhimatha, revised Pt. Vāsudeva Lakṣmaṇa Paṇaśīkara, 1st edition 1915 (Delhi, 1984), p. 172.

38 Gaṅgādhara, Gaṅgādhara's Gandhasāra and an unknown author's Gandhavāda, with Marathi commentary, (ed.) Vyas, Ramkrishna Tuljaram. Gaekwad's Oriental Series, no. 173. (Vadodara, India, 1989)Google Scholar.

39 The last part of this passage is confusing. The term tālakṣīrīpateḥ would seem to be a corruption of an Indic version of tabashir, yet the side-heading suggests this whole line provides synonyms for a distinct product, karcūrasattva. Although associated with a plant, bamboo silica was also classified as one of the varieties of pearl in medieval South Asia, which most probably explains its inclusion in the list of animal derived aromatics.

40 The full passage is as follows, Gaṅgādhara, Gandhasāra, p. 48. śuktiḥ śaphanakhāhvaś ca khuro nāgahanur hanuḥ | nādo vāri varaḥ karnaśilpī kolotpalacchadaḥ ∥ kolakarṇī kambukośī sunādaḥ śilpaśaṅkau | nakhī

41 Here, in the section on examination, we see a material called ‘crab’ (karkaṭa). This term is also given as a synonym of an unidentified material called ‘tiger claw’ (vyāghranakha) in the glossary section of this same text. Possibly the implication of this line is that this is a lesser material to be used in incense, or maybe this is the start of a lost line (or possibly the next line that does not seem to be connected) on the examination of ‘tiger claw’? Ibid. p. 51. nakhī tu gajakarṇābhā gandhahastikhurātha vā | badarotpalapatrā syād dhūpyo ‘tha karkaṭaḥ ∥

42 Although I wish to focus on Sanskrit sources, I should note that the Ain-i Akbari of Abū al-Faẓl ibn Mubārak a sixteenth-century Persian gazetteer of the kingdom of the emperor Akbar that was composed in India, also discusses ‘sweet hoof’, which was used in Arab (and no doubt Persian) perfumery. The short account of this material in this text notes that in Hindi the material is called nakh and that it is treated by being heated with butter. This Indo-Persian account of the material also incorporates materials that would seem to derive ultimately from the works of Dioscorides, namely that ‘sweet hoof’ is fragrant because is feeds on sumbul (spikenard). This is not surprising given the existence of Arabic translations of Dioscorides — for ‘sweet hoof’ see Sadek, M. M. — The Arabic Materia Medica of Dioscorides, (St-Jean-Chrysotome, 1983), p. 82 Google Scholar. The Ain-i Akbari also gives the price of this material in India at that time, which would seem to be approximately the same price as cheaper ‘other kinds’ of frankincense. It is particularly interesting to note the way in which the exoticising, western discourse of the unguis odoratus shell that feeds on well-known aromatics in India was now being reiterated within South Asia itself. Abū al-Faẓl ibn Mubārak, Ain-i Akbari, translated by H. Blochmann (Calcutta, 1927), p. 87. For the discussion in Dioscorides see Pedanius Dioscurides of Anazarbus, De materia medica, translated Lily Y. Beck (Hildesheim, 2005), p. 96.

43 For many references to perfumes in Sanskrit literature see McHugh, 2012.

44 For many examples of such usages see Sternbach, Ludwik, 1974. “Camphor in India,” in Vishveshvaranand Indological Journal vol. 54, Acharya Dr. Vishva Bandhu Commemoration Volume, (ed.) Sharma, B. R., pp. 425–467. (Hoshiarpur, 1974).Google Scholar

45 Someśvara, Vikramāṅkābhyudayam. (ed.) M. L. Nagar, Gaekwad's Oriental Series no. 150 (Baroda, 1966), p. 11.

46 For a complete discussion of this riddle see McHugh 2012, Chapter Five.

47 See McHugh 2012, Chapter Seven.

48 In the Ain-i Akbari materials such as musk and camphor are significantly more expensive than ‘sweet hoof’, ambergris being the most expensive aromatic.

49 For a charming and very reliable recent discussion of the production of ambergris today, see Kemp, Christopher, Floating Gold: A Natural (and Unnatural) History of Ambergris (Chicago, 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50 McHugh, James, “The Disputed Civets and the Complexion of the God: Secretions and History in India,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 132:2 (2012), pp. 245–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

51 Perfumery expertise itself would, however, have been a marker of several types of social distinction, some based on wealth.