palm-leaf
Ingredients
palm leaves, removable strings, upper and lower covers
Preparation Steps
Original Recipe Text
The 'pothī' format (derived from Sanskrit pustaka/pustikā, meaning 'book') is the standard format for palm-leaf manuscripts in Nepal. This format is characterized by the absence of quires and fixed bindings. Instead, it utilizes loose leaves as the minimal units, which are stacked or piled upon each other. These leaves are secured together using removable strings that pass through the folios. The entire stack is typically protected by upper and lower covers (p. 242). Codicological structures vary between 'monomerous' units, where works follow one another with continuous foliation and no blank spaces (e.g., ULC Add. 1645, p. 243), and 'composite' manuscripts where sections might have independent foliations or were extracted from other Multiple-Text Manuscripts (MTMs) and joined later (p. 248, 250). In some arrangements, different works are demarcated by blank spaces or full blank pages between texts (p. 249, 253).
Evidence
"The fundamental contribution of Nepal to the preservation of a high quantity of manuscripts, among which are a number of precious early palm-leaf sources... the extant manuscript production from this area is early, abundant and, in certain cases, shows continuity over the course of time... ranging from old palm-leaf to recent paper ones."
Remarks
The study focuses on the Śivadharma corpus, a collection of Śaiva texts transmitted in Nepal primarily as Multiple-Text Manuscripts (MTMs). The earliest extant manuscript of this corpus is NAK 5-892, a fragmentary palm-leaf work dating from the late 9th to early 10th century (p. 240). Codicological analysis reveals that these manuscripts were often conceived as a single unit or corpus, referred to in colophons as 'pustakaṃ śivadharmam' (a book named Śivadharma) or 'śivadharmāṣṭakhaṇḍa' (the eight sections of the Śivadharma) (pp. 251, 254). The manuscripts show significant signs of use and repair, such as the addition of protective folios at the beginning and end (p. 245) or the replacement of damaged sections with more recent folios (p. 254). The preservation state of many early samples is poor, described as severely damaged or mutilated (pp. 240, 245, 254). Paleographic examination of different 'hands' and 'ductus' helps distinguish between the original kernel of a manuscript and later additions or composite parts (p. 250).