"The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century"

ZEREN TANINDI ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI FESTSCHRIFT İslam Dünyasında Kitap Sanatı ve Kültürü Art and Culture of Books in the Islamic World Kültür ve Sanat Yayınları - 11 Sertifika No: 40121 Yayıncı Ahmet Akcan Editörler Aslıhan Erkmen Şebnem Tamcan Parladır Danışman Serpil Bağcı Kitap Tasarımı Gönül Kaya Kapak Tasarımı Utku Aydın Kapak ve yan kâğıt görselleri: Gelibolulu Mustafa Âli, Nusretnâme, 1584, TSMK H.1365, y. 265a. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı’na aittir. Zeren Tanındı Fotoğrafı: Aras Selim Bankoğlu İstanbul, Eylül 2022 ISBN 978-605-71924-2-4 Baskı Pelikan Matbaa Sertifika No: 40619 Katkılarıyla: gelenekselsanatlar.org Yazıların sorumlulukları yazarlara aittir. Kitaptaki metin ve resimlerin, tamamının veya bir kısmının, elektronik, mekanik, fotokopi veya herhangi bir kayıt sistemi ile çoğaltılması, yayımlanması ve depolanması, başka dillere çevrilmesi yayıncıdan ve ilgili müze müdürlükleri ve kurumlardan alınacak yazılı izne tabidir. Lale Yayıncılık, Lale Organizasyon Ticaret Limited Şirketi’nin markasıdır. Bu kitabın yayın hakları Lale Yayıncılık ve Lale Organizasyon’a aittir. ZEREN TANINDI ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI FESTSCHRIFT İslam Dünyasında Kitap Sanatı ve Kültürü Art and Culture of Books in the Islamic World EDİTÖRLER / EDITORS ASLIHAN ERKMEN Ş E B N E M TA M C A N PA R L A D I R DANIŞMAN / SUPERVISOR SERPİL BAĞCI K İ TA P TA S A R I M I / B O O K D E S I G N G Ö N Ü L K AYA İÇİNDEKİLER/CONTENTS Giriş Yazıları / Introduction Ahmet Akcan Sunuş 11 Serpil Bağcı Zeren Tanındı Hakkında 13 Erol Tanındı Eşim Zeren 17 Aslıhan Erkmen-Şebnem Tamcan Parladır Bizim Zeren Hocamız 19 Okuyucuya Notlar/ Notes to Readers 23 Zeren Tanındı Bibliyografyası/ Zeren Tanındı's List of Publications 25 Kısaltmalar / Abbreviations 37 ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI / ZEREN TANINDI FESTSCHRIFT Makaleler/ Articles 4 Firuza Abdullaeva-Charles Melville Shāh Ṭahmāsp Shāhnāma Pages in the Shāh Ṭahmāsp Album 43 Adel Adamova On Muhammed Siyah Qalam Pictures: A Question of Date and Place 55 Ayşe Aldemir Sakıp Sabancı Müzesi’nden Resimli Bir Gazavâtnâme Nüshası ve Çağdaş Kopyaları 65 Zeynep Atbaş Koleksiyoner Halil Ethem Arda’nın Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi’ndeki Koleksiyonu 77 Abdurrahim Ayğan İslâm El Yazmalarında Hz. Muhammed Şecerelerinin Tasarım Özellikleri 95 Hatice Aynur Râbia Hatun ve Kitap Koleksiyonu 111 Serpil Bağcı Sözden Surete-Suretten Söze: Edirneli Bir İskendernâme 127 Nil Baydar Kitap Kodikolojisi: Keşfü’l-Beyân An Sifâti’l-Hayevân Adlı Ünik Eserin Konservasyon Çalışmaları Sırasında Ortaya Çıkan Detaylar 143 Nourane Ben Azzouna The Theory and Status of Calligraphy in Medieval Islam 153 Funda Berksoy Friedrich Sarre ve İslam Kitap Sanatı 163 Sheila Blair From Manuscript to Shrine: Qurʾanic Illumination and Luster Mihrabs from Medieval Iran 175 Pelin Bozcu Minyatürlü Bir Babürlü Şahnâme 187 Barbara Brend Illumination and a Problematic Picture in a Dīvān of Hafiz-i Saʿd for Pir Budaq Qara Quyunlu 201 Filiz Çağman Osmanlı Sarayının Ehl-i Hiref Teşkilatının Önemli Bölükleri Dokumacılar 213 F. Çiçek Derman Osman Yümnî Efendi Tezhibiyle Bir Mushaf 225 M. Uğur Derman Kadıasker Mustafa İzzet Efendi’ye Dâir Notlar 231 François Déroche The Caliph, his Mawlā and the Muṣḥaf 237 Gülnur Duran Mushafların Bezenmesinde Ender Bir Uygulamaya Dair 251 Aslıhan Erkmen Eğitsel ve Görsel Hatıra Bağlamında Resimli İki Biyografik Eser: Meşāʾirü’ş-Şuʾarā ve Ṣafvetü’s-Ṣafā 261 E. İsmail Erünsal Erken İslâm Dünyasında Kitap: Ortaya Çıkışı ve Temel Kavramları 275 Emine Fetvacı The Album of Mehmed III (TSMK H. 2165): Some Thoughts on its Nature and Contents 299 Sabiha Göloğlu Tesir Duada mı, Resimde mi? Bir Dua Kitabının Görsel Seçkisi Üzerine 311 Christiane Gruber Burāq in Islamic Pictorial Traditions 321 Semih İrteş Şehzade Mahmut Türbesi Kalemişleri 333 Cemal Kafadar Yeşil Okuma: Bir Hoş Usul 347 Gönül Kaya Resimli Bir Osmanlı Tarihi: Âsafî Paşa’nın Şecâatnâmesi 363 Ali Nihat Kundak “Çıraklıktan Ustalığa”: Safevî Döneminin Önde Gelen Bazı Kalem-i Siyahî Nakkaşları 381 Nurçin Kural Özgörüş Üç Ketebeli En’âm-ı Şerif’in Bilimsel Araştırması ve Konservasyonu 395 Banu Mahir Minyatürlü İki Divân-ı Câmî Nüshasının Kodikolojisi Üzerine 407 5 ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI / ZEREN TANINDI FESTSCHRIFT 6 Tadeusz Majda Qur’an Manuscript from East Turkestan 421 Charles Melville Four Folios from the So-Called Cama Shāhnāma 429 Rachel Milstein The Voice of the Poet: An Example of Visual Poetics in Persian Painting 441 Alison Ohta The Qur’an of Qānṣūh, Amīr Akhūr Kabīr 453 Bernard O’Kane Mamluk Illustrated Kalila and Dimnas and the Riyadh Manuscript 463 Günsel Renda Ankara Etnoğrafya Müzesi’ndeki Sıra Dışı Bir Kıyafet Albümü 475 Simon Rettig Regarding the East: Notes on Artists of the Book from Iran in Late Fifteenth-Century Istanbul 489 David J. Roxburgh A Painting on Silk and the Story of Baysunghur’s Garden Party 503 Barbara Schmitz The Artist Wali Jan (Veli Can): The Persian Connection 513 Marianna Shreve Simpson Solomon’s Secret and Other Surprises in a Late Sixteenth-Century Shâhnâma 527 Eleanor Sims Racing Toward Isfahan: A Stylistic Source for the Paintings from the “Diez Small” Shahnamah? 537 Abulala Soudavar Sādiqī Beyk’s Navā’ī Manuscript 547 Şebnem Tamcan Parladır Alı ̇ Çelebi’nin Hümâyûnnâmesi’nin Sultanî Nitelikte Müzehhep Nüshalarının Sahipleri 559 Melis Taner Osmanlılar ile Safevîler Arasında Bir Silsilenâme 573 Gülsen Tezcan Kaya Resimli Bir Alî Şîr Nevâyî Divânı Üzerinden Özbek Sultanı ‘Abdü’l-‘Azîz Bahadır Han’ın Nakkaşhânesi’ne Bir Bakış 585 Lâle Uluç The “I Believe Method” in the Historiography of the Turko-Persian World 597 Olga V. Vasilyeva Nava’i’s Khamsa of 1492-93 in the National Library of Russia 609 Jan Just Witkam The Leiden Manuscript of Al-Iṣṭakhrī’s Kitāb al-Masālik wal-Mamālik and its Lost Maps 625 Elaine Wright A Rare Copy of the Divan of Hidayat from the Library of Sultan-Khalil Aq Quyunlu 635 Bahattin Yaman Tercüme-i Miftâh-ı Cifr El-Câmi Nüshalarında Mehdı ̇ Tasvirleri 647 Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century 659 Zeynep Yürekli Görkay Bir Silahşor, Birkaç Resimli Kitap ve Bilmediğimiz Birçok Şey 669 Anı Yazıları / Memoirs Karin Ådahl 682 Semiha Altıer 683 Nurhan Atasoy 684 Jake Benson 686 Michele Bernardini 687 Tülün Değirmenci 688 Massumeh Farhad 690 Cornell Fleischer 692 Sevgi Kutluay 694 Gülru Necipoğlu 695 Scott Redford 697 İsenbike Togan 698 Fotoğraflar/ Photographs 701 7 Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century I n Islamic arts of the book it is common to find specialized artists of calligraphy, illumination, illustration, and binding who work on a single manuscript, especially for well-funded royal projects. We come across evidence of this type of division of labor in historical documents while the colophons of the manuscripts may or may not reveal all the specialists. Generally it is the calligraphers who are more often mentioned in the colophons since their work is essential for a manuscript to exist and perhaps due to the prestige of calligraphers among artists of the book. In this paper three well-rounded artists from the Ottoman realm whose works I have published separately will be discussed together in order to bring attention to the relatively frequent appearance of such artists around the early 16th century. In the 15th century Persian world several reports on the Timurid kitāpkhānah show that specialization by various artists of the book was almost a standard practice. However, there is also some documentary evidence for "such" artists claiming expertise in more than one area. Among the Timurids it is reported that Mirak Naqqash, who was the royal librarian at the court of Sultan Husayn Bayqara (r. 1470-1506), was originally a bow maker from Herat who had first learned outlining (tahrīr), then illumination (taẕhīb), and later depiction (taṣvīr).1 In the Ottoman nakkaşhane specialization appears to be standard from the second half of the 16th century onwards. However, a number of artists of the book appear to be skilled in various arts of the book. We see evidence of this in a petition for employment from the early 15th century, which details the situation of an artist who came from Iran and had multiple talents. The document is included in an album most likely for the quality of its calligraphy.2 At its beginning Ahmad ibn ʿAbdullah, al-Hijazi mentions that he was once a student of poetry and calligraphy in Shiraz in 825/1422. He states that in the kutubkhānah of Ibrahim Sultan, Baysunghur, Ulugh Bey, and their father Shahrukh Mirza, there was a group of learned people such as a copyist (kātīb), illuminator (muẕahhīb), illustrator (muṣavvar), and a binder (mujallīd). He continues: 1 Wheeler M. Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents on the History of Calligraphers and Painters (Leiden: Brill 2001), 15. 2 İÜK (F. 1423, f. 35b). It is unfortunately damaged and lacks the end. Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents, 4850. Ph.D., Hagop Kevorkian Associate Curator of Islamic Art, Brooklyn Museum, New York 659 “I too laid some claim [to proficiency] in these arts by virtue of my aspiration and ardor, and through service and apprenticeship I acquired from every harvest a gleaning, and from every gleaning a seed, until during a voyage in the year 845 [1441- 42] I arrived in Edirne-May God preserve her from catastrophe- and chose, like the phoenix, to withdraw into a corner of unemployment.”3 ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI / ZEREN TANINDI FESTSCHRIFT He later admits that this was his fault since he had spent too much time drinking wine and idling. In Edirne luxury book production was developing under the patronage of the Ottoman Sultan Murad II at that time.4 Although the petition of Ahmad ibn ʿAbd Allah al-Hijazi is incomplete, we can deduce that as an artist with various skills he was perhaps hoping to get commissions from the Ottoman court. In fact, we have a record of his success. He copied a Koran in Edirne in 856/1452, eleven years after he arrived there5 (Figure 1). He used three 660 scripts and the first two opening text pages are fully illuminated as well as other verse markers. Since Ahmad ibn ʿAbd Allah al-Hijazi claimed that he had learned various arts of the book in Iran, it is possible that he was responsible for the copying, illumination, and even binding of this Koran. The manuscript was later endowed by the former grand vizier Mahmud Pasha to the tomb of Mevlana in Konya in 1468.6 The 16th century Ottoman historian Mustafa Âli in his Menaḳıb-ı Hünerveran, the earliest Ottoman text about calligraphers and artists of the book dated to 1587, records two hundred and seventy-eight artists of which only eighteen are recorded as having more than one skill. Many of them combine calligraphy with another book art such as illumination, gilding, or painting.7 Only four are recorded for their mastery in more than two areas.8 However it seems there are other well-rounded artists who may not have made it into Âli’s compi- 3 Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents, 49. 4 Ayşin Yoltar, “The Role of Illustrated Manuscripts in Ottoman Luxury Book Production: 1413-1520” (PhD diss., New York University. 2002), 29-37. 5 KMM, Inv. No. 7. The date of the Koran is erroneously given as 872/1467-68 in Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents, 49 note 5. For dating and information see Abdülbâki Gölpınarlı, Mevlânâ Müzesi Müzelik Yazma Kitaplar Kataloğu (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi 2003), 7-8, cat no. 7 and Ekrem Hakkı Ayverdi, Fâtih Devri Hattatları ve Hat Sanatı (İstanbul: Istanbul Matbaası, 1953), 13-15, fig. 3. A Kulliyāt of Jamali (İÜK F 516) is also noted to be copied by this calligrapher but that manuscript was copied by Ahmad bin Abdullah Muhammad bin Yahya Murshidi, and it is not clear if the two calligraphers are the same. 6 Naci Bakırcı, Âsitane: Dergâh-ı Mevlânâ Albümü (İstanbul: Ensar Neşriyat, 2007), 118. 7 Esra Akın-Kıvanç recently published a critical edition of the work and complied as an appendix a list of the artists based on the information given by Âli in the main text. See Esra Akın Kıvanç, Muṣṭafa‘ Âlī’s Epic Deeds of Artists, A Critical Edition of the Earliest Ottoman Text about the Calligraphers and Painters of the Islamic World (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 452-480: 2 chancery scribe and painter; 42 painter, decoupage artist; 52 calligrapher and ranga-nuvis; 53 calligrapher, illuminator, gilder; 75 gilder, calligrapher; 82 painter, gilder; 99 calligrapher, painter; 136 illuminator, calligrapher; 153 decorative painter, limner; 163 calligrapher, decoupage maker; 167 scribe, binder; 174 bookbinding designer, figural painter; 216 painter, calligrapher; 230 limner, painter; 237 calligrapher, gilder, illustrator; 248 gilder, illuminator, designer; 260 illuminator, figural painter; 274 calligrapher, gilder. 8 Kalender Pasha (1541-1600) who is known as an album maker is described in the epilogue (zeyl) of his work by Âli as being skilled at paper joining, art of gold illumination and sprinkling as well as affixing margins and frames. Serpil Bağcı, “Presenting Vaṣṣāl Kalender’s Works: The Prefaces of Three Ottoman Albums,” Muqarnas 30 (2013): 255. Kalender Pasha, who presented a Turkish Falname as a gift to the Ottoman sultan Ahmed I, writes in his own words that he gathered, arranged and adorned the pages and plates of this illustrated, gilded, and beautifully written manuscript (TSMK H. 1703). Massumeh Farhad and Serpil Bağcı, Falnama: The Book of Omens (Washington, D.C.: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, 2009), 68. Figure 1: Koran, 1452, KMM, no 7 (Bakırcı, Âsitane: Dergâh-ı Mevlânâ Albümü, 118). Figure 2: 9 monly practiced in the Ottoman realm it is likely that Suzi who uses a Persian pseudonym was of Iranian origin. In addition he executed in the same manuscript one double and five single-page miniatures. The double-page miniature serves as the opening page and depicts an Ottoman sultan, possibly Bayezid II under an awning in an open-air setting with his household officers, musicians, and other officials. We can say that the details of the miniature suggest that the artist is close to the court circles and knows its ceremonies. The other miniatures relate the story of Khusrau and Shīrīn. Hatifi composed his Khusrau and Shīrīn in 1490 following the famous work of Nizami on the same subject but the details differ. The most obvious case is the second For a detailed description of the manuscript see Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım, “A 1498-99 Khusraw va Shīrīn: Turning the Pages of an Ottoman Illustrated Manuscript,” Muqarnas 22 (2005): 95-109. Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım lation either from the Persian or Ottoman realms. We are able to identify through their works three such well-rounded artists of the book from the Ottoman realm around the early 16th century. Our first artist is known by his pseudonym Suzi (burning or enflamed). We encounter his work through one manuscript, a Khusrau and Shīrīn of Hatifi at the MMA (69.27).9 The artist Suzi claims very openly in the colophon that he did the writing (khaṭṭ), illumination (taẕhīb), gold or silver related work (tabr), and illustration (taṣvīr) of the manuscript all by himself in the year 904/1498-99. We see his mastery of nastaʻliq script as well as illumination at the beginning of the text designed as a double-page composition (the left side is missing today) (Figure 2). Since nastaʻliq was not com- The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century Khusrau and Shirin of Hatifi, 1498-99, MMA, 69.27, f. 2v. (YoltarYıldırım, "A 1498-99 Khusraw va Shīrīn," 98). 661 Figure 3: Khusrau and Shirin of Hatifi, 1498-99, MMA, 69.27, f. 15v. (YoltarYıldırım, "A 1498-99 Khusraw va Shīrīn," 100). miniature where Shapur, disguised as a monk, sits in front of Shirin’s palace. Without being seen and ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI / ZEREN TANINDI FESTSCHRIFT with the aid of a mirror Shapur sees Shirin’s face. 662 The artist’s specific illustration of this scene different from Nizami’s version suggests that he knew the Persian text well. Yet we can also see that Suzi has applied details of his Ottoman environment in the illustrations of Hatifi’s text: in the first miniature where Khusrau’s hunt is illustrated, the artist depicted the Ottoman Janissary headgear on one of Khusrau’s soldiers (Figure 3). In a few places the artist applies a form of perspectival drawing, and even shading to indicate depth and atmospheric impression.10 Not all miniatures show the same level of consistency in their Ottoman features in iconography or style. Some miniatures11 show stronger Turkman features seen in Persian miniatures of the second half of the 15th century.12 It is likely that the artist Suzi was originally trained in Iran, possibly in Shiraz during the Aqqoyunlu rule. But when he copied this manuscript and worked on its various parts in 1498-99 he must have already spent enough time to have learned the new stylistic and iconographic features to accommodate Ottoman tastes. Yet his desire to describe all his talents in the colophon suggests that he wanted to be recognized and rewarded at the Ottoman court for his multiple skills, just as Ahmad al-Hijazi did. The second artist shares several of the characteristics mentioned for Suzi. Darvish Mahmud bin ʿAbdullah Naqqash can be studied through four of his works: two of them were made in the Aqqoyunlu center Tabriz and two of them in the Ottoman center Istanbul.13 The ones he worked on in Iran are two small manuscripts in Paris: a copy of the Firāqnāmah14 of Salman Savaji and the Dahnāmah15 of Auhadi. They are not dated but the Firāqnāmah has the seal of the Aqqoyunlu 10 Min. 1, 2, 3, 5 see Yoltar-Yıldırım, “A 1498-99 Khusraw va Shīrīn,” fig. 8, 9, 10, 12. 11 Min. 4, 5 see Yoltar-Yıldırım, “A 1498-99 Khusraw va Shīrīn,” fig. 11, 12. 12 For an example of a Shiraz Manuscript illustrated in a similar style see TSMK, H. 1008 copied in 1490-91, David J. Roxburgh, ed., Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years, 600-1600 (London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2005), 428-29, cat. no. 209. 13 For a detailed analysis of these works see Ayşin Yoltar -Yıldırım, “Following the Path of a Nāḳḳāsh from the Aḳkoyunlū to the Ottoman Court,”Artibus Asiae 67/1 (2007): 147-172. 14 PBnF, Supp. persan 1528, (125 x 175 mm) 15 PBnF, Supp. persan 1411, (89 x 162 mm) Figure 4: the manuscript. Just like Suzi, he added specific details of the Ottoman court in his miniatures, such as the Ottoman household officers wearing their red headgear (Figure 4).18 But the decorative elements in the Turkman style of the Dahnāmah, such as the flowering tree, remain visible against the gold skies. 16 TSMK, H. 1123. The name of book was previously known as Shāhnāmah az guftār-i Malik-i Ummī. The new reading of the author as Malik Ahi or Malik-i Ahi has been based on another copy in CUL marked as Bāyazīdnāmah (Or. 196). See Sooyong Kim, “An Ottoman Order of Persian Verse,” in Treasures of Knowledge: An inventory of the Ottoman Palace Library (1502/3-1503/4), ed. Gülru Necipoğlu, Cemal Kafadar and Cornell H. Fleischer, (Leiden: Brill, 2019), 644, note 49; Also Gülru Necipoğlu, “The Spatial Organization of Knowledge in the Ottoman Palace Library,” in Treasures of Knowledge, 71 note 145. I am thankful to Zeren Tanındı for bringing this new reading to my attention. 17 Sara Nur Yıldız mentions that another copy of this work was identified by Zeren Tanındı in the CUL marked as Bāyazidnāmah (Or. 196) and the date of completion is given as 1486. However the paintings in the manuscript are in 19th century Qajar style. Sara Nur Yıldız,“Ottoman Historical Writing in Persian 1400-1600,” in Persian Historiography, ed. Charles P.Melville (London: I.B. Tauris, 2012). A third copy which is an incomplete draft is in SYEK (Fatih 4092). See Zeren Tanındı, “The Illustration of the Shahnama and the Art of the Book in Ottoman Turkey,” in Shahnama Studies II. The Reception of Firdausi’s Shahnama, ed. Charles Melville and Gabriella van den Berg (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 144-45. 18 Also Yoltar-Yıldırım, “Following the Path of a Nāḳḳāsh,” fig. 8 and 10. The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century Shahnamah of Malik-i Ahi, TSMK, H. 1123, f. 14r. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı, Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı'na aittir. Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım sultan Yaʻqub who reigned in Tabriz between 1478 and 1490. Darvish Mahmud bin ʿAbdullah Naqqash placed his name as the calligrapher in the colophons of both works, and his epithet, Naqqash, suggests he was an illustrator and/or illuminator as well. Both manuscripts are copied in nastaʻliq on gold-sprinkled paper. There is a single illuminated panel and three miniatures in the Firāqnāmah. In the Dahnāmah there are four miniatures but no illumination. The miniatures show some inconsistency in composition and style but I proposed that Darvish Mahmud was responsible for the illustrations in both manuscripts and in fact worked in the same capacity on two other Ottoman manuscripts. Most likely after the death of the Aqqoyunlu Sultan Yaʻqub in 1490, Darvish Mahmud moved to the Ottoman capital. As can be inferred by its colophon, Darvish Mahmud copied an Ottoman manuscript called Shāhnāmah az guftār-i Malik-i Āhī.16 It is not dated but stamped with the seal of the Ottoman sultan Bayezid II (r. 1480-1512). The manuscript is a historical text in Persian that relates the political events of Bayezid’s reign that took place between 1481 and 1485, and is dedicated to Bayezid.17 Knowing Persian well, Darvish Mahmud must have been an ideal candidate to copy it. As in his earlier works in Iran, Darvish Mahmud copied the Ottoman manuscript in nastaʻliq on gold-sprinkled paper. There are seven miniatures dispersed throughout 663 Figure 5: Khusrau and Shirin of Hatifi, TSMK, H. 686, f. 43r. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı, Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı'na aittir. Based on the comparison of the script and illustrations I suggested another Ottoman manuscript to be the work of Darvish Mahmud as well. The ZEREN TANINDI ARMAĞANI / ZEREN TANINDI FESTSCHRIFT Topkapı Khusrau and Shīrīn of Hatifi19 is copied in 664 nastaʻliq on gold-sprinkled paper. There are only three miniatures and they do not show much familiarity with the Ottoman world. But we can detect Darvish Mahmud’s stylistic features when compared to the other miniatures he executed. His placement of the figures outside the picture frame,20 the flowering tree against the gold skies (Figure 5),21 and the oddly shaped colored hills and flower groups22 can be noted as part of his style. In summary we can say that while Darvish Mahmud Naqqash was in Tabriz he copied, illustrated, and illuminated a Firāqnāmah and a Dahnāmah sometime before 1490. He then came to the Ottoman court and worked on the Shāhnāmah of Malik-i Ahi and the Khusrau and Shīrīn of Hatifi. There is an Ottoman court record indicating that an artist called Mahmud Naqqash, who came from Iran received 2000 akçes in 913/1508 and another document mentioning Darvish Mahmud Naqqash who received 1500 akçes a year later in 914/1509.23 I had suggested that perhaps these were for the two manuscripts he copied in Istanbul, the Shāhnāmah of Malik-i Ahi and the Khusrau and Shīrīn of Hatifi. An Ottoman document listing the contents of Bayezid II's library and is composed by his royal librarian in 908/1502-3 was recently discovered in the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.24 Since the Topkapı Shāhnāmah of Ahi, which has a seal of Bayezid II, is already included in this list25 it must have been produced sometime be- 19 TSMK, H. 686. 20 Yoltar-Yıldırım, “Following the Path of a Nāḳḳāsh,” fig. 9 and 15. 21 Cf. fig. 4. 22 Yoltar-Yıldırım, “Following the Path of a Nāḳḳāsh,” fig. 8 and 17. 23 Yoltar-Yıldırım, “Following the Path of a Nāḳḳāsh,” 171-2., For a recent study of this Register of Rewards see İlhan Gök, “Atatürk Kitaplığı M.C. O.71 Numaralı 909-933/1503-1527 Tarihli İn’âmât Defteri (Transkripsiyon-Değerlendirme)” (PhD diss., Marmara Üniversitesi, 2014), 760, 907. 24 Ms. Török F. 59. Treasures of Knowledge. 25 See Gülru Necipoğlu, “The Spatial Organization of Knowledge, 39-42; “Appendix III with Plates from Manuscripts at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library,” 1023 and Zeynep Atbaş, “Artistic Aspects of Sultan Bayezid II’s Book Treasury Collection,” in Treasures of Knowledge, 183-185. 26 For a detailed analysis of the two works see Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım, “An Accomplished Artist of the Book at the Ottoman Court: 1515-1530,” in M. Uğur Derman 65th Birthday Festschrift, ed. İrvin C. Schick (Istanbul: Sabancı University, 2000): 603-616. 27 Fehmi Edhem Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Türkçe Yazmalar Kataloğu (İstanbul: Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi, 1961), no. 2299. 28 Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, Topkapı Saray Museum: Islamic Miniature Painting (İstanbul: Ali Rıza Baskan, 1979), cat. no. 36. 29 Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Turc. 183 30 The main field, which is brownish yellow, is symmetrically decorated with black cloud scrolls detailed in gold. The border is decorated with gold lotuses over a black ground. The doublures are dark burgundy colored and decorated with a stamped and gilded central medallion and four corner pieces with raised motifs of leaf scrolls and lotuses. Yoltar, The Role of Illustrated Manuscripts, 585; Emil Gratzl, Islamische Bucheinbände: des 14. bis 19. Jahrhunderts; aus den Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek (Leipzig: Verlag von Karl H. Hiersemann, 1924), pl. XVIII, no. 27. 31 Serpil Bağcı et al., Osmanlı Resim Sanatı (İstanbul: T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 2006), 64, fig. 33. 32 Yoltar, The Role of Illustrated Manuscripts, 588-591. 33 Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım, Ottoman Decorative Arts (Ankara: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2009), 79. The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century Turkish was copied in naskh. The Topkapı manuscript, a copy of ʿAli Shir Nava’i’s Khamsah in Eastern Turkish was copied in nastaʻliq. The Munich manuscript is quite small and has a lacquer binding directly applied onto leather in a simple style featuring cloud patterns.30 There are a few illuminated headings and four miniatures in the Munich manuscript, including two double-page miniatures (Figure 6).31 The relationship between text and image is strong and a decorative Persian style is visible in all miniatures.32 His second work from 1530 is much more accomplished. The manuscript has a unique lacquer binding decorated with saz motifs, which were quite prominent in the Ottoman decorative repertoire at that time (Figure 7).33 Just like the Munich manuscript here too the lacquer is applied directly onto leather. The text block opens with an illuminated roundel with the name of ʿAli Shir (Nava’i). The beginning of the text is arranged as double-illuminated pages. There are also illuminated chapter headings. The text is copied in nastaʻliq script. In addition Pir Ahmad executed sixteen paintings of large-size compositions. Compared to his earlier work in the Munich manuscript, we see that he retains the decorative style with floral backgrounds and tiled facades but he also includes sev- Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım tween 1486 and 1502/3. Thus, it appears that Darvish Mahmud continued to work for the Ottoman court and produced at least two more works in 1508 and 1509, one of which could still have been the Topkapı Khusrau and Shīrīn of Hatifi. Our third well-rounded artist is known by the two works he executed in the Ottoman realm in 1515 and 1530.26 Pir Ahmad bin Iskandar was initially known as a copyist of an illustrated Khamsah of ʿAli Shir Nava’i dated to 1530 in the TSMK (H. 802).27 A full reading of the colophon in the Topkapı Khamsah states that Pir Ahmad bin Iskandar not only copied, but also illustrated, gathered, and bound the manuscript. Based on a comparison of the style of the illustrations of this manuscript with another manuscript in Munich it had been proposed that both manuscripts were illustrated by the same artist.28 The Munich manuscript29 has a colophon indicating that it was copied, illustrated and bound by a single artist in 1515, but the artist did not provide his name. When we combine the information from the two colophons, we can easily say that it was Pir Ahmad bin Iskandar who executed various parts of the Munich manuscript in 1515 and the Topkapı manuscript in 1530. The Munich manuscript, a copy of Yusuf and Züleyha of Hamdi in (Western) 665 Figure 6: Yusuf and Züleyha of Hamdi, Munich Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Turc. 183, f. 133r (Bağcı, et. al., Osmanlı Resim Sanatı, 64, fig. 33). Figure 7: Khamsah of ‘Ali Shir Nava’i, 1530, TSMK, H. 802, Outside Binding T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı, Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı'na aittir. Figure 8: detect such colophons more frequently around this time, and the formative stage of the Ottoman nakkaşhane produced a suitable environment for well-rounded artists from Iran to come to prominence in the Ottoman realm. 34 The artist’s other works which he has only copied and/or illuminated are given by Bağcı et al, Osmanlı Resim Sanatı, 65, note 69., In addition, a small manuscript of Necati’s Dīvân copied in 931/1524-24 by Pir Ahmad (with an unfinished single painting but several illuminations by him) is in Vienna Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, see Dorothea Duda, Islamische Handscriften II/2 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008), 77-78. I am as always very grateful to Zeren Tanındı for bringing this copy to my attention. Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım eral new architectural features such as a watermill and a basilical building with a round opening in the tympanum (Figure 8). Based on an Ottoman court record, Pir Ahmad appears to have arrived from Tabriz after Selim I’s raids in 1514. Already trained in various arts he may have executed the Munich manuscript in 1515 to petition for further commissions or a reward. His accomplished 1530 manuscript is proof that the artist managed to receive a high level commission from the Ottoman court and that his multiple skills improved over time.34 In light of these three instances I would like to propose that artists who arrived at the Ottoman court from Iran in the late 15th and early 16th centuries, had more of a chance of being employed if they had multiple skills in the arts of the book. The colophons of the manuscripts they worked on suggest that they expected their skills to be recognized either in terms of rewards or commissions. I believe it is for this reason that we are able to The Question of Well-Rounded Artists of the Book at the Ottoman Court in the Early 16th Century Khamsah of ‘Ali Shir Nava’i, 1530, TSMK, H.802, f. 117v. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı, Milli Saraylar İdaresi Başkanlığı'na aittir. 667