The Economic Development of Malaya . Report of a Mission Organized by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1955. xix, 707. Appendix, Index. $7.50.

as the invention of the barometer (p. 297); the dates of the production of the woodblocks of the Tripitaka are assigned in the chronology to the invention of movable metal type (p. 297) (This invention he notes three times in his book [pp. 65, 66, 297] and all three dates are different, none correct. The correct date is not ascertainable but it was sometime before 1239.); the encyclopedia which he mentions (p. 66) as consisting of 112 volumes (chuan) is a confusion of two encyclopedias of 55 and 57 chuan each; the Honggildong-jon was not written by the celebrated monk Kasan, but by H6 Kyun (p. 76); the compilation of Oreui [Five Ceremonies] was finished three hundred years before the date mentioned (p. 77); the Japanese attempts to eliminate Chinese influence by means of fomenting a political coup occurred in 1884, not in 1824 (p. 158); and Pak Y6ng-hyo was not sent to Japan before 1879, but in 1882 (p. 165). There are language errors also. The author is not sure of his Sino-Korean readings, i.e., Milo Pong for Piro-bong (p. 8), Eijo for Y6ngjo (p. 15), Yang and Ying for Yang and Yin (p. 28), Song Sol for Song Si-y61 (p. 77), Pak Young Ho for Pak Y6ng-hyo (pp. 165, 332), Lee Tong Hi for Yi Tong-hwi (pp. 166, 181, 333), Kim Pu Ki for Kim Pu-sik (p. 347), etc. Indeed his lack of any system of romanization of Korean words makes it hard for the reader to keep track of anything. His bibliography of books in the Far Eastern languages is weak and it is evident that the author is unfamiliar with them. Incorrect information about the language in which some books are written, incorrect titles and numbers of volumes, and so on are numerous. The book was apparently designed to be supplementary to Dr. George McCune's Korea Today, but comparison can only be invidious. If the author's aim was to enlist sympathy for a divided Korea and its prospects for "tomorrow," he might have succeeded better by limiting himself to postwar topics with which he personally was familiar. The author seems, frankly, not familiar with his native culture from native sources.