Caught in a Whirlwind: A Cultural History of Ottoman Baghdad As Reflected in Its Illustrated Manuscripts [1° ed.] 9004412697, 9789004412699

Table of contents :
Caught in a Whirlwind: A Cultural History of Ottoman Baghdad as Reflected in Its Illustrated Manuscripts
Copyright
Contents
Acknowledgments
Illustrations
Abbreviations
Notes on Transliteration
Introduction
1 Uncertain Loyalties
2 Two Governors, Two Paths to Power
1 Hasan Pasa's Universal History
2 The Travels and Deeds of Yusuf Pasa
3 From the Capital to the Province
4 The Garden of the Blessed
1 Fuzuli's Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā
2 The Brooklyn Museum of Art's Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā
5 Between the Ottomans and the Safavids: The Ankara Genealogy
1 The Composition of Genealogies at the Ottoman Court
2 The Texts and Their Translations
3 The Ankara Genealogy
4 The Ankara Manuscript and Its Paintings
Concluding Remarks
Appendix 1 Illustrated Manuscripts Attributed to Baghdad
Appendix 2 Single-page Paintings and Dispersed Leaves Attributed to Baghdad
Appendix 3 Timeline of Major Events Discussed in the Book
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

Caught in a Whirlwind

Arts and Archaeology of the Islamic World Edited by Marcus Milwright (University of Victoria) Mariam Rosser-Owen (Victoria and Albert Museum)

volume 15

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/aaiw

Caught in a Whirlwind A Cultural History of Ottoman Baghdad as Reflected in Its Illustrated Manuscripts By

Melis Taner

leiden | boston

Cover illustration: Three youths and an attendant. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2134, fol. 20b. The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2019034056

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. ISSN 2213-3844 ISBN 978-90-04-41269-9 (hardback) ISBN 978-90-04-41280-4 (e-book) Copyright 2020 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents Acknowledgments  VII List of Illustrations  VIII Abbreviations  XI Notes on Transliteration  XII Introduction  1 1 Uncertain Loyalties  14 2 Two Governors, Two Paths to Power  26 1 Hasan Paşa’s Universal History  28 2 The Travels and Deeds of Yusuf Paşa  54 3 From the Capital to the Province  72 4 The Garden of the Blessed  96 1 Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā  104 2 The Brooklyn Museum of Art’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā  107 5 Between the Ottomans and the Safavids: The Ankara Genealogy  146 1 The Composition of Genealogies at the Ottoman Court  147 2 The Texts and Their Translations  148 3 The Ankara Genealogy  152 4 The Ankara Manuscript and Its Paintings  161 Concluding Remarks  176 Appendix 1: Illustrated Manuscripts Attributed to Baghdad  185 Appendix 2: Single-page Paintings and Dispersed Leaves Attributed to Baghdad  188 Appendix 3: Timeline of Major Events Discussed in the Book  191 Bibliography  193 Index  207

Acknowledgments This book was first conceived as a dissertation project during my PhD studies at Harvard University between 2009 and 2016, and throughout its course, it has greatly benefited from the support of many people. Professors Gülru Necipoğlu, David Roxburgh, Cemal Kafadar and Emine Fetvacı have been a source of inspiration and constant support throughout the project. Both Professors Necipoğlu and Roxburgh took me under their wings and gave generously of their time to support and advise me over many years; I am deeply indebted to both. I am also very grateful for the encouragement of Tülay Artan—particularly for opening my eye to the weird and the humorous. More recently, Heghnar Watenpaugh has been a major source of inspiration as well. I must also thank Lale Uluç, Serpil Bağcı, Zeren Tanındı, Filiz Çağman, Günsel Renda for their keen observations and helpful comments. I would also like to thank my anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. I am also grateful to András Riedlmayer for his assistance finding obscure sources, and Himmet Taşkömür, Sooyong Kim, and Leili Vatani for their help with poetry, where I have lacked the eloquence. I would also like to thank Sasson Chahanovich, Gwendolyn Collaço, Daria Kovaleva, Mira Xenia Schwerda, Simon P. Watmough, and Melis Evcimik who have tirelessly read and commented on particular chapters. In addition to their comments, they have been a great support in the long and complex process of bringing this book to publication. I must also thank Jaimee ComstockSkipp, Cumhur Bekar, and Gizem Tongo OverfieldShaw for photographing several manuscripts at the Bodleian and Leiden University libraries. Throughout the course of the dissertation and the book project I have had the opportunity to meet wonderful friends and I cannot express my gratitude enough for them. I am grateful for the support of Ehjeen Kim, Aslıhan Gürbüzel, Eda Özel, Akif Yerlioğlu, Özlem Altınkaya-Genel, Veronika Poier, and Eda Çakmakçı.

Research for this project was made possible through the generous grants from the Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, the Harvard Damon Dilley Fund, and the Research Center for Anatolian Civilizations, and Özyeğin University—­which allowed me to undertake manuscript and archival research in various European and North American libraries, and most importantly at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library—without which this book would not have materialized. I am especially thankful to Zeynep Çelik Atbaş and all the staff at the Topkapı, particularly Esra Müyesseroğlu, for their generosity, trust and endless cups of tea. The continuous interest and warmth shown me by this dedicated library staff made my time there something I will always remember very fondly. From the team at the ticket gate to the guards in the library, I extend my sincere thanks. I would also like to thank Elaine Wright for her amazing generosity. I have visited the Chester Beatty Library several times during my research and everyone in the library has been incredibly friendly, making it a joy to work there. I greatly appreciate the support of Dürdane Çayır and Tuba Önen at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara, and of both Caitlin McKenna and Ayşin Yoltar-Yıldırım at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York. I am also deeply indebted to the curators and staff at the Uppsala University Library, the New York Public Library, the Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, the Biblitohèque nationale de France, Paris, the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and the British Library, London. Last, but definitely not least, I thank Nazlı and Alper Özgen and my family for being a constant love and support, for their endless trust and faith in me and for everything that cannot be expressed in words. My mother and father have been my biggest supporters in everything. Without their love and patience, this book would not have materialized, and it is to them that I dedicate this work.

Illustrations Figures 1

2

3a

3b

3c

3d

3e

4

5

6

7

8

9

Meeting of grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa and Süleyman I before the siege of Szigetvár. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 6a  32 Meeting of vizier Hasan Paşa and Mehmed III. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 13a  33 Battle between Afrasiyab and Zav. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 146b  36 Alexander receiving the ruler of China. Cāmiʿü’sSiyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 162b  37 Bahram Gur hunting an elephant in India. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 178b  38 Nushzad killed in battle with Ram Barzin. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 252a  39 Farrukh Hurmuzd killed at the orders of Azarmidukht. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 260a  40 Caliph Harun al-Rashid and Yahya b. Khalid Barmaki. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 33a  42 Caliph al-Mutawakkil ordering the Jews to put on distinct garments. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 54b  43 The Head of al-Muqtadir brought before Munis. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 70a  45 The last Abbasid caliph and his sons before Hulagu Khan. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 87a  46 Abd al-Qadir Gilani and the bandits. Cāmiʿü’sSiyer. Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 107b  48 Baha al-Din Walad preaching. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 112a  49

10

Mawlana meeting Shams-i Tabrizi. Cāmiʿü’sSiyer, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 121a  50 11 Audience of Kay Khusraw III and Muʿin ­al-Din Paraneh. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Topkapı ­Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 194a  52 12a Yusuf Paşa taking part in the samaʿ in Konya, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 7B  57 12b Yusuf Paşa praying in Konya, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 8a  58 13 Yusuf Paşa in Tarsus, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 11b  60 14 Meeting of Köse Sefer and Yusuf Paşa, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 15b  61 15 Yusuf Paşa in Urfa, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 17b  63 16 Meeting of Yusuf Paşa and Mir Şeref, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 19b  64 17 Severed heads of the rebels brought before Yusuf Paşa, Sefernāme, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, 29b  68 18 Two youths. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2145, fol. 19a  78 19 Portrait of Mehmed III. Silsilenāme, Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, fol. 15b  80 20 Falconer. Silsilenāme, Rastatt 201, Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, fol. 16b  81 21 Three youths and an attendant. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2133–34, fol. 20b  83 22 Youth and attendant. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2169, fol. 22b  84 23 Shooting arrows at a pole. Album, Topkapı ­Palace Museum Library, H. 2165, fol. 6a  86

ix

Illustrations 24

Youth on horseback with attendants. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H.2165, fol. 22b  87 25 Courtiers and attendants in a landscape. The Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, CA, M.85.237.25  88 26 Discussion in an interior setting. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol. 7a  90 27 Two scenes of discussion indoors. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fols. 10b–11a  91 28 Gathering outdoors. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol. 8b  92 29a A prisoner brought before a ruler. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol.19a  93 29b Audience scene. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2134, fol. 19b  94 30 The beggar presents the ball to the prince. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2134, fol. 20a  95 31 Page from the Album of Ahmed I, central ­image showing in the foreground a youth being ­offered coffee, and Mawlawis in the background ­drinking coffee. Topkapı Palace Museum Library, B. 408. fol. 17a  102 32 Expulsion from paradise. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 14a  109 33 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, ­ Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 38a  111 34 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 20b  112 35 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, T. 1967, fol. 19b  113 36 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Museum of Ethnography, Ankara, Besim Atalay Env. 7294, fol. 36a  114 37 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, ­British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol.19b  115

38

39

40

41

42

43

44 45

46

47

48

49

50 51

52

Archangel Gabriel appears to Joseph in the guise of Jacob. Ḥadiḳatü’s-Süʾedā, British Library, ­London, Or. 12009, fol. 30b  117 Joseph found by the merchants. Ḥadiḳatü’sSüʾedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 31a  118 Martyrdom of Zechariah. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 82a  120 Fire Ordeal of Abraham. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʾedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 17a  121 The Prophet preaching before his death. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 144a  123 The Prophet preaching before his death. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 65a  124 The Prophet preaching. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl, British Library, London, Or. 7328, fol. 3a  127 The Prophet preaching. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl, 55.121.40, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, dispersed leaf  128 ʿAli receiving the Bayʿa. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl, Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, MA,1985.229, dispersed leaf  130 ʿAli b. Abi Talib after the Battle of Nahrawan. Ḥadḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, 70.143, fol. 218a  131 ʿAli b. Abi Talib at the Battle of Nahrawan. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʾedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 104a  132 Death of Hasan. Ḥadḳatü’s-Süʾedā, ­Brooklyn ­Museum of Art, Brooklyn, 70.143, fol. 260a  133 Death of Hasan. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 24b  134 Death of Hasan. Rawḍat al-Shuhadā, ­Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin-Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung, MS Diez A fol. 5, fol. 109a  136 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, fol. 560a  137

x 53

54

55

56

57

58

59a

59b 59c

59d

59e

60

Illustrations Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā, British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 269b  138 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 263a  139 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, T. 1967, fol. 271b  140 The Prophet Muhammad praying at the cemetery of Baqiʿ. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 66b  142 Hamza Mirza hunting, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 18a  155 The Prophet and his deputy and son-in-law ʿAli together with the Archangel Gabriel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 7b  157 The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme, LACMA M85.237.38, fol. 6b  158 The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme, CBL T. MS 423, fol. 21b  159 The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1591, fol. 23b  160 The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1324, fol. 23b  161 The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, A. 3110, fol. 8b  162 Adam and Eve with Cain and Abel and the ­Archangel Gabriel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, ­Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b  163

61

Cain and Abel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, ­ Ankara, ­Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b  163 62 Gayumars, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b.  165 63 Murder of Iraj, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, ­Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 4b  166 64 Saleh and the camel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 4b  167 65 Virgin Mary with the Infant Christ and Joseph, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 5b. 168 66 Atabeg Qutluq Khan and Shaykh Saʿdi, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 10b  169 67 Shaykh Haydar, Sultan ʿAli Safavi (brother of Ismaʿil I), Süleyman I, Ismaʿil I. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fols. 16b–17a  170 68 Shah Tahmasp I, Ismaʿil II, Murad III, ʿUbaydallah Khan on fol. 17b; Shah Muhammad Khudabanda, Emperor Akbar, Mehmed III, Hamza Mirza, on fol. 18a. Cemʿ-i Tārīh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography MS 8457, fols. 17b–18a  172 69 Selim II, Murad III, Mehmed III, Ahmed I. Silsilenāme, Linden-Museums, Stuttgart, VLA 1155, fol. 4b  174 70 The captive ruler of Gujarat being paraded, Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer. Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 163b  181

Table 1

Silsilenāme versions  150

Abbreviations BnF TPML TPMA TIEM IUL CBL AEM

Bibliothèque nationale de France Topkapı Palace Museum Library Topkapı Palace Museum Archives Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesi Istanbul University Library Chester Beatty Library Ankara Etnografya Müzesi

HAM LACMA ÖNB NYPL BL DIA

Harvard Art Museums Los Angeles County Museum of Art Österreichische Nationalbiblitohek New York Public Library British Library Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi

Notes on Transliteration In transliterating from the Ottoman and Persian this book follows the International Journal of Middle East Studies. Book titles and names of people have been transcribed according to the orthography of their respective systems, for example, Bāḳī for the Ottoman poet and Taqī Awḥadī for the Safavid author. In the footnotes and references, I have retained the manner of spelling and

t­ ransliteration provided in the titles of published primary and secondary sources. In the body of the text, I have chosen to transliterate the name of the Ottoman bureaucrat as Mustafa ʿĀli to distinguish it from ʿAli, and to transliterate the titles of books. The footnotes follow a full transliteration of names.

Introduction In his early seventeenth-century biographical dic­ tionary (tadhkira) of Persian poets, ʿArafāt alʿĀshiqīn wa ʿAraṣāt al-ʿĀrifīn (The Places of Assembly for the Lovers and the Open Spaces for the Mystics), Taqi al-Din Muhammed al-Husayni alAwhadi (d. circa 1632–33) introduces some poetic banter between Mawlana Shani Takkalu (d. before 1613–14), a Persian poet of Qizilbash background who was resident in Baghdad, and the Baghdadi poet Fazli (d. late sixteenth century).1 According to Awhadi, when the Ottoman ruler Murad iii (r. 1574–95) ordered the Jews to don red headgear, Fazli, the son of the poet Fuzuli, composed an “impertinent” (fużūlī) verse for the occasion, making a verbal play on the red headgear imposed on the Jews and the distinctive crimson headwear worn by the Qizilbash (lit. redheads): “The truth revealed the secret / The Jew placed red [headgear] on his head / Thus, the Qizilbash is a Jew.”2 1 J.T.P. de Bruijn, “Takī Awḥadī,” Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs. Brill Online, 2015, Reference. Harvard University. 21 July 2015 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclopedia-of-islam-2/taki-awhadi-SIM_7336; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Taqī Awḥadī, Tadhkira-yi ʿArafat al-ʿĀshiqīn wa ʿAraṣāt al-Ārifīn, ed. Ẕabīḥ Allah Ṣaḥibkārī (Tehran: Mīrās-i Maktub bā hamkārī-i Kitābkhānah, Mūzih va Markaz-i Asnād-i Majlīs-i Shūrā-yi Islāmī, 1389 [2010 or 2011]), 1971–2. Hereafter, Taqī Awḥadī, Tadhkira-yi ʿArafat al-ʿĀshiqīn. 2 The term Qizilbash is generally used to “denote a wide variety of extremist Shiʿi sects, which flourished in Anatolia and Kurdistan,” and used in a more specific sense by the Ottomans to denote the supporters of the Safavid house. See Roger Savory, “Ḳızıl-Bāsh,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. ed., P. Bearman et al. Brill Online, 2016. Reference. Harvard University. 15 March 2016 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/ entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/kizil-bash-SIM_4415; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007.

­ awlana Shani crassly responded to this with a M verse immortalized in Awhadi’s tadhkira: “Do not reveal too much Fazli, son of Fuzuli / The house of the Qizilbash / When Baghdad has bent over / From the arrow of the penis of the Qizilbash.”3 Such poetic cunning became a source of pride since, as Awhadi writes, Mawlana Shani had gained renown by his response to Fazli and was duly awarded by the Safavid ruler Shah ʿAbbas i (r. 1588–1629).4 The banter between Mawlana Shani and Fazli, happening at a time when the Ottomans and the Safavids were in heated ­rivalry— the two states were at war between 1578 and 1590—shows the reverberations of this poetic and not so implicit confessional competition. 3 Unfortunately, the verses by Fażlī and Shānī that Taqī Awḥadī includes in his tadhkira are in Ottoman Turkish. Having gone through two editions (once by the ­seventeenth-century Safavid author and a second time by the present edition), there are slight differences in the verses provided in the entries for Fażlī and for Mawlānā Shānī. Given the importance of the placement of diacritics that distinguish consonants, not all of the verses make sense. In the entry for Fażlī, the poem provided is: “Doh[u]s buz [sic] u sekz u sekzun [sic] (This is possibly the date 988 (dokuz yüz seksen sekiz) in Turkish, which corresponds to the date in the above-mentioned order) / Ḥaḳḳ rāz nihāne eyledi fāş / Giydi başına ḳızıl Yahūdī / Yaʿni ki Yahūdī’dir ḳızılbaş.” To this, Mawlānā Shānī responds: “Çoḳ itme Fużūlī oġlı Fażlī / ʿAlemde Ḳızılbaş evini fāş / Ger götin göge çekmiş / Baġdad be tīr-i kīr zi Ḳızılbaş.” Fażlī Isfahānī, in his Afżāl al-Tawārīkh (The Most Excellent of Histories), also mentions this episode, and provides a slightly altered version of the exchange, in which Shānī responds: “Sekiz yüz seksen ve sekizde / Ḥaḳḳ rāz itdi bu sırrı ʿāleme fāş / Çoḳ övme Fużūlī oġlu Fażlī / Ey bī-edeb-i gurbe-yi evbāş / Ger ki tüfek ile ger ki ḫod seng / Baġdād teke yir girer ḳızılbaş.” Taqī Awḥadī, Tadhkira-yi ʿArafat al-ʿĀshiqīn, 1971–2; Fazli Beg Khuzani Isfahani, A Chronicle of the Reign of Shah ʿAbbas, ed. Kioumars Ghereghlou (Cambridge: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2015), 134. 4 Ibid., 1972.

2 Another case memorialized by a mid-­ seventeenth-century Baghdadi historian, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan (d. after 1660), shows, however, that sources of friction did not simply lie among differences of confession or polity. In particular, this historian reveals contention also between the Ottoman imperial center and the province. The Baghdadi author writes of the above-mentioned Fazli’s response to a verse composed by an Ottoman bureaucrat, ʿĀli Efendi (possibly Mustafa ʿĀli, d. 1600), after the latter was dismissed from his post as finance director (defterdār) of Baghdad. Upon hearing the verses composed about Baghdad by ʿĀli, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan notes that Fazli went to his father’s grave and asked: “How is it that you, Fuzuli of Baghdad, could never speak such words while a sweet-tongued poet from the lands of Rum was able to find such meaning and expend this pearl and jewel?”5 With these words, Fazli identifies an inherent difference between his famed Baghdadi father and the Ottoman bureaucrat appointed from the capital and finds such ­poetry regarding Baghdad to be worthy of a local,  a  ­Baghdadi, rather than someone from the lands of Rum. In both cases, poetics becomes a source of identity, wit, pride, and competition, particularly at a time when the frontier province of Baghdad closely felt the effects of the OttomanSafavid war. A similar confrontation is also found in the accounts of two seventeenth-century authors, Şeyhoğlu (d. after 1642) and Evliya Çelebi (d. after 1685). Echoing each other, they write: “Baghdad is caught between two tribes: one is that of the shah of ʿAjam; the other is of the sultan of Rum…When the ʿAjam comes to Baghdad he says, ‘Heretic and Sunni!’ And when the Rum comes to Baghdad he

5 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād be-dest-i Pādişāh-ı Dīn-penāh Sulṭān Murād Hān Ġāzī (Histories on the Conquest of Baghdad at the Hand of the Religion-protecting Sultan Murad Han Gazi), Bodleian Library Or. 276, fol. 95a–b. Hereafter, Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād.

Introduction

says, ‘Shiʿite and infidel!’”6 This reciprocal denigration gives a prima facie impression of difference between the two rival dynasties based on confession. Şeyhoğlu’s short and spirited account concerns the loss of Baghdad to the Safavids in 1623. Yet, the traveler Evliya Çelebi—whose travelogue postdates the re-conquest of Baghdad by the Ottoman ruler Murad iv (r. 1623–40) in 1638— adds a very insightful remark that summarizes the entire historical and political situation. Specifically, Evliya Çelebi writes that Baghdad is “like a person caught in a whirlwind.” Such a remark, glib though it may seem superficially, hints at the complexity of interaction. Conflict is never straightforward. Indeed, Baghdad changed hands between the Ottomans and the Safavids from the first half of the sixteenth to the first half of the seventeenth century. It held a multi-confessional, multi-lingual population whose members may have seen a succession of different overlords within their lifetime, as was the case with the poet Fuzuli, for example, who both sought the patronage of as well as composed poetry for such diverse dynasties as the Aqqoyunlu (who held Baghdad between 1467–8 and 1508), the Safavids and the Ottomans. Evliya Çelebi’s simile of the “whirlwind” captures the gist of the fluidity and rapidity of fluctuation and confusion—the whirlwind moves, shuffles, uproots. The swirling aspect of the whirlwind suggests a moment when everything is blown together, while at the same time its aftermath points to a need for self-(re)definition. Evliya Çelebi’s observation of Baghdad’s turbulent p ­ ast—­fortified by Şeyhoğlu’s comment that the city had been 6 Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārü’s-selām-ı Baġdād’ıñ Başına Gelen Aḥvālleri Beyān İder fī Sene 1028 (The History of What Befell Baghdad, Abode of Peace, in 1619), Codex Schultens 1278, Leiden University Library, fols. 20b–21a. Hereafter, Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārü’s-selām-ı Baġdad; Yücel Dağlı and S. Kahraman, eds. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap, 243. On Şeyhoġlu’s Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārü’s selām-ı Baġdād see Mehmet Fatih Gökçek, “xvii. Yüzyılın İlk Yarısında Bağdat’ta Osmanlı-Safevi Mücadelesine Dair Bir Eser: Şeyh-Oğlu’nun Kitābu Tārīhi Dāri’s-Selām’ı,” Turkish Studies 11/6 (2016): 31–60.

Introduction

built on sedition and tyranny7—embodies that sense of re-definition. The period right after the war between the Ottomans and the Safavids is one such moment. The years leading up to the Ottoman loss of Baghdad that Şeyhoğlu focuses on is another, as is the re-conquest of Baghdad in 1638. While keeping this broader time frame in mind (i.e. from the late 1570s until the first half of the seventeenth century), this book focuses on a period of little over a decade following the Treaty of Constantinople in 1590—in which the Ottomans were able to negotiate more favorable terms— through to the rekindling of animosity between the Ottomans and the Safavids in the early seventeenth century. In this brief period arose a shortlived yet idiosyncratic and vibrant art market in Baghdad. This boom in art production petered out with the renewal of conflict between the Ottomans and the Safavids, as well as local uprisings in and around Baghdad in the early seventeenth century. From this period—in addition to a number of single-page paintings—more than thirty illustrated manuscripts and several dispersed pages survive, surely but a sample of what must have been quite a significant corpus. Aleppo, Cairo, and Damascus were also important provincial centers under Ottoman rule featuring sporadic illustrated manuscript production. And Tabriz—another center that changed hands between the Safavids and the Ottomans—was a vibrant cultural capital. Yet in this period Baghdad was unique in terms of the quantity of its art production. Political whirlwinds evidently also brought with them the stimulus of artistic creativity. This book explores the context in which this corpus of illustrated manuscripts appeared and disappeared. The profusion and cohesion of this short-lived art market is a phenomenon that distinguishes this province. A study of this output and its history highlights the issues pointed to above: the position of Baghdad between the Ottomans and the Safavids and its relations with the Ottoman capital. Provincial art is often considered to be derivative, based on 7 Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārü’s-selām-ı Baġdād, fol. 2b.

3 models and ideas from the capital. However, the liveliness of art production in Baghdad, its stylistic coherence, and compositional creativity suggest the vibrancy of the frontier between the Ottomans and the Safavids. Against the backdrop of often-complicated relations between the Sunni Ottomans and the Shiʿi Safavids, distinct visual styles played a visible role in establishing imperial identity. When the founder of the Safavid dynasty Shah Ismaʿil i (r. 1501–24), conquered Baghdad from the Aq Qoyunlu Turkmen confederation in 1508, he destroyed the Sunni holy sites, particularly the shrines of Abu Hanifa (d. 767) (founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of jurisprudence) and ʿAbd al-Qadir Gilani (d. 1166) (Hanbali Sunni jurist and founder of the Qadiri Sufi order). Shah Ismaʿil i then commissioned a new mausoleum over the tomb of Imam Musa al-Kazim (d. 799) (the seventh Shiʿi imam), and donated chandeliers and carpets to the shrines of ʿAli b. Abi Talib (d. 661), cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad, and his son Imam Husayn (d. 680), in Najaf and Karbala, respectively.8 The shrines of Abu Hanifa and of ʿAbd al-Qadir Gaylani were repaired and renewed when the Ottoman ruler Süleyman i (r. 1520–66) conquered the province in 1534, thus establishing and emphasizing Sunni Ottoman authority.9 Their endowment deeds, drawn up during the Safavid rule of Baghdad, were voided and new ones were created. Following his campaign of the “two Iraqs,” that is Iraq-i ʿArab and Iraq-i ʿAjam, corresponding to present-day Iraq and the lowlands of the Iranian plain and western Iran, respectively, the Ottoman ruler was recognized as the “possessor of the Arabian and Persian lands, the overseer of 8 Kioumars Ghereghlou, “The Question of Baghdad in the Course of the Ottoman-Safavid Relations According to the Safavid Narrative Sources,” in İslam Medeniyetinde Bağdat (Medīnetü’s Selām) Uluslararası Sempozyum, 7–8–9 Kasım, 2008, 2 Vols. ed., İsmail Safa Üstün (Istanbul: M.Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları, 2011), 603–21, 608. 9 Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 63. Hereafter, Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan.

4

Introduction

the ­regulations of the Two Mashhads (Najaf and Karbala), the pilgrim of the tomb of the Greatest Imam (Abu Hanifa).”10 Yet, the winds of change come quick. When the Safavids regained the province in 1623, the shrine complex of Abu Hanifa was once again demolished. Lest one think the tug-ofwar was over, the complex was repaired yet again in 1638 when the Ottoman ruler Murad iv conquered Baghdad. Competition through art and architectural patronage was ripe just before the Ottoman-Safavid wars of 1578–1590. In 1571, several years before the onset of the war, the governor of Baghdad was charged with the exchange of “Persian” style carpets with “Anatolian” style carpets in the shrines of Imams ʿAli and Husayn in Najaf and Karbala.11 The years leading up to the war also saw a plethora of reports and complaints about pro-Safavid elements in the frontier regions, including Shahrizol, Baghdad, and Basra.12 Interestingly, two decades after the request to exchange the carpets in the shrines, and the dust of the war had settled, we find a group of illustrated manuscripts that contains modes of representation and figure types that include elements from Ottoman, Safavid, and Indian painting.13 A whirlwind of artistic exchange again is hereby observed. What is interesting about this corpus, besides the fact that it flourished and faded quickly, is its relative stylistic cohesion; even before their attribution to Baghdad was established, their marked 10 11

12 13

Ibid., 191. Colin Imber, “The Persecution of the Ottoman Shiʿites According to the Mühimme Defterleri, 1565–1585,” Der Islam 56, no. 2 (July 1979): 246. Hereafter, Imber, The Persecution of the Ottoman Shiʿites According to the Mühimme Defterleri, 1565–1585. Ibid., 246–49. Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad (Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1990), 45 Hereafter, Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad.; G.M. Meredith-Owens, “A Copy of the Rawẓat al-Ṣafa with Turkish Miniatures,” in Paintings from Islamic Lands, ed. R. Pinder-Wilson (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1969), 110– 24. Hereafter, Meredith-Owens, A Copy of the Rawẓat al-Ṣafa with Turkish Miniatures.

idiosyncrasy was noted. Merging elements from Ottoman, Safavid, and Indian painting, this group of manuscripts has often been described as being “eclectic.” In the words of Rachel Milstein, who provided a comprehensive catalogue of illustrated manuscripts from Baghdad, “the simultaneous depiction of Persian and Turkish attire in Baghdad miniatures is one of the reasons why this school resembles both Persian and Turkish painting.”14 Milstein sees in this appropriation of different motifs and elements a reflection of reality and the cosmopolitanism of Baghdad. This book attempts to unpack this “cosmopolitanism” or “eclecticism” of Baghdad painting through a more contextualized study of the corpus of illustrated manuscripts. What is it about Baghdad in this period that led to the rise of this relatively short-lived art market? How can we situate it in the broader decentralization underway in the Ottoman Empire and in the province’s particular position at the eastern frontier? While borrowing elements from Ottoman, Safavid, and Indian art, Baghdad painting retains a stylistic distinction—this is around the time when the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals were consolidating their imperial identity, projected in monumental architecture and through courtly manuscripts and objects.15 The corpus of 14

15

G.M. Meredith-Owens also pointed to the blending of “entirely Persian colours” and “Turkic racial types” in the paintings of an illustrated copy of the sixth volume of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Garden of Purity) of Mirkhwand (d. 1498) attributed to Baghdad. Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 45; Meredith-Owens, A Copy of the Rawẓat al-Ṣafa with Turkish Miniatures. In a number of works Gülru Necipoğlu elaborates on the “classical idiom” as well as a move from an international Timurid identity, which the Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals and Uzbeks shared, to a distinctive imperial identity. Gülru Necipoğlu, “From International Timurid to Ottoman: A Change of Taste in Sixteenth-Century Ceramic Tiles,” Muqarnas 7 (1991): 136–70; “A Kanun for the State, a Canon for the Arts: The Classical Synthesis in Ottoman Art and Architecture during the Age of Süleyman,” in Soliman le Magnifique et son Temps, Actes du

5

Introduction

i­llustrated manuscripts and single-page paintings from late sixteenth- to early seventeenth-century Baghdad shows a certain stylistic coherence that reveals a hybridity that seems to be caught particularly between an Ottoman and a Safavid style, with further elements from Indian painting. Much like the characterization of Baghdad as being “like a person caught in a whirlwind” between the Ottomans and the Safavids, this corpus spurs us to look beyond binaries of difference and to uncover layers of interaction. As the province—which lay at the frontiers of both the Ottoman and Safavid empires—changed hands between the two dynasties, its multi-lingual, multi-confessional and cosmopolitan populace was “caught” between the two early modern states. By exploring the particular conditions and the historical context in which this art market appeared in the last decade of the sixteenth century and dwindled in the first decade of the seventeenth century, this book seeks to understand the complexities of interactions in the liminal space of Baghdad, where the hybridity of the edge stands out in marked contrast to the imperial images of Istanbul and Isfahan. Appearing in a transitional area between two major powers, Baghdad paintings reflect certain elements of both Ottoman and Safavid art. Yet, they exhibit a distinct, idiosyncratic style that highlights the

Colloque de Paris Galeries Nationales du Grand Palais, 7–10 Mars 1990, ed. Gilles Veinstein (Paris: Rencontres de l’école du Louvre, 1992), 195–216; “Süleyman the Magnificent and the Representation of Power in the Context of Ottoman-Habsburg-Papal Rivalry,” The Art Bulletin (1989): 401–27; “Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Palaces,” Ars Orientalis 23 (1993): 303–42; “Early Modern Floral: The Agency of Ornament in Ottoman and Safavid Visual Cultures,” in Histories of Ornament: From Global to Local, eds. Gülru Necipoğlu and Alina Payne (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016), 132–56. Hereafter, Necipoğlu, Early Modern Floral. For the consolidation of the Ottoman historical style in manuscripts also see Emine Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013). Hereafter, Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court.

cultural diversity and richness of the transitional zone. Much like ecological zones of transition where the edge shows great productivity and biodiversity, the corpus of illustrated manuscripts, produced during a period of relative peace, embodies the richness of the transitional.16 Building upon studies by Filiz Çağman, Zeren Tanındı, Rachel Milstein, Karin Rührdanz, and more recently Lale Uluç, this book casts light on provincial production by providing a broader, trans-regional perspective that examines the production of illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad through complex layers of Ottoman and Safavid relations, as well as a more focused look at individual manuscripts on the micro level.17 This ­corpus 16

I would like to thank Heghnar Watenpaugh for her comments on the panel “Art and Architecture on the Periphery of Empire” at the Historians of Islamic Art Association Biennial (2018) that introduced the idea of the edge effects and edge habitat. For a further elaboration of the concept see Heghnar Watenpaugh, “The City’s Edge: Rethinking Sources and Methods for the Study of Urban Peripheries,” Annales Islamologiques 46 (2012): 129–44. Also see Nancy Turner et al., “Living on the Edge: Ecological and Cultural Edges as Sources of Diversity for Social-Ecological Resilience,” Human ­Ecology 31 (2003): 439–61. 17 Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman ­ Baghdad; Filiz Çağman, “xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergah­ larında Gelişen bir Minyatür Okulu,” in I. Milletlerarası Türkoloji Kongresi (Istanbul: Tercüman Gazetesi ve Türkiyat Enstitüsü, 1979), 651–77. Hereafter, Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen bir Minyatür Okulu. Also see the broader study by Filiz Çağman and Nurhan Atasoy, published a year later, which also discusses several of the manuscripts that were produced during the reigns of Murād iii and Meḥmed iii but which point to another school of painting than the court atelier. Filiz Çağman and Nurhan Atasoy, Turkish Miniature Painting (Istanbul: R.C.D. Cultural Institute, 1974), esp. 58–63; Karin Rührdanz, “Zwanzig Jahre Bagdader Buchillustration– Zu Voraussetzungen und Spezifik eines Zweiges der Türkischen Miniaturmalerei,” in Mittelalterliche Malerei im Orient (Halle (Saale): Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberd, 1982), 143–59. Hereafter, Rührdanz, Zwanzig Jahre Bagdader

6

Introduction

of more or less stylistically coherent illustrated manuscripts (though not without variants) is an urban phenomenon associated with Ottoman governance. However, as this frontier region was of great importance to both the Ottomans and the Safavids, Baghdad needs to be studied in a wider and comparative context. Utilizing unpublished texts and highlighting previously overlooked “connected” art histories, this book provides a more nuanced picture—one in which governors, upstart rebels, and local Arab chieftains all played crucial roles in leveraging their power between the Ottomans and the Safavids. By more closely situating the province in the context of Ottoman and Safavid relations, this book also challenges the notion of a “school” of painting, especially when movement was central to an artist’s career, and raises the question of whether our definition or description of “Ottoman” or “Safavid” manuscripts is also too rigid. A contextual approach that transcends the territorial boundaries of modern nation-states, as well as the imperial boundaries of the sixteenth-­ century Safavid and Ottoman Empires (which were, at best, loose and often changing), is useful for a study of Baghdad on several accounts. The liminality of Baghdad as a frontier province is one reason: culturally and geographically, Baghdad was at a crossroads between the Ottomans, the Safavids, and local Arab tribes. Linking the Indian Ocean, to which it was connected through ­Basra, and to the Mediterranean via overland trade routes, Baghdad was truly at the nexus of many ­Buchillustrations; Lale Uluç, Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans and Ottoman Collectors: Sixteenth-Century ­Shiraz Manuscripts (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2006); “Selling to the Court: Late-Sixteenth-Century Manuscript Production in Shiraz,” Muqarnas 17 (2000): 73–96. Hereafter, Uluç, Selling to the Court; Zeren Tanındı, “Osmanlı Yönetimindeki Eyaletlerde Kitap Sanatı,” in Orta Doğu’da Osmanlı Dönemi Kültür İzleri, Uluslararası Bilgi Şöleni Bildirileri (Hatay, 25–27 October 2000), Vol. 2, ed. Şebnem Ercebeci (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2002), 501–9.

worlds and many winds.18 Following the Ottoman conquest of Syria and Egypt in the early sixteenth century, the conquests of Baghdad in 1534–35 and of Basra in 1546 provided an outlet for the Ottomans into the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. For the Ottomans, Baghdad and Basra were of great strategic importance. The city of Baghdad was also in close proximity to Najaf and Karbala, sites of the shrines of the Shiʿi imams, ʿAli and Husayn. While revered by the Ottomans as well, these shrines were of primary spiritual importance for the Safavids, who claimed descent from Imam ʿAli. Housing major Shiʿi shrines, Baghdad was an important center for the Safavids and a strategic node for the Ottomans. It also held the Sunni shrines of Abu Hanifa and ʿAbd al-Qadir Gilani, mentioned above, as well as Bektashi convents that, “functioned primarily as rest houses for those visiting the Shiʿi pilgrimage sites”19 in Najaf, Karbala, Samarra, and Kazimiyya. The province of Baghdad drew many visitors, from those on pilgrimages to the shrines to merchants, poets, and artists. Its geopolitical position at a crossroads between two empires and on major trade routes made Baghdad a cosmopolitan, provincial center. The other reason to study the province through layers of Ottoman and Safavid encounters springs from the illustrated manuscripts themselves. One can think, for example, of Asafi Dal Mehmet Çelebi, the secretary, first to Lala Mustafa Paşa (d. 1580), 18

19

For a close study of Ottoman endeavors in the Indian Ocean and strategies for imperial expansion, see Giancarlo Casale, The Ottoman Age of Exploration (­Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2012). Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2008), 130. Also see the more recent publication by the same author, Vefailik, Bektaşilik, Kızılbaşlık: Alevi Kaynaklarını, Tarihini ve Tarihyazımını Yeniden Düşünmek (Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2015; idem, “The Forgotten Dervishes: The Bektashi Convents in Iraq and their Kizilbash Clients,” International Journal of Turkish Studies 16 (2010): 1–24.

7

Introduction

then to Özdemiroğlu ʿOsman Paşa (d.  1585), who joined the campaign against the Safavids in 1577–78. After years of captivity in Qazvin and Isfahan, and his final escape through Shiraz, Kazarun, Basra, and Baghdad to Erzurum, Asafi Dal Mehmet Çelebi composed his Şecāʿatnāme (Book of Courage).20 Like the illustrated Şecāʿatnāme, the Kitāb-ı Gencīne-i Fetḥ-i Gence (Treasure Trove of the Conquest of Ganja) of Rahimizade İbrahim Çavuş (d. 1590)—who had gone to Baghdad in 1575 at the order of Murad iii as a sergeant (çavuş-u dergāh-ı ʿālī), and who later took part in the Ottoman-Safavid war of 1578–1590—points to various Safavid stylistic influences, according to Çağman, Tanındı, and Inal.21 Indeed, there is the further example of the Tabrizi painter Walijan, who worked at the Ottoman court atelier in the mid1580s.22 The authors themselves are testaments to 20

21

22

Güner İnal, “The Influence of the Ḳazvīn Style on Ottoman Miniature Painting,” in Fifth International Congress of Turkish Art, ed. Géza Fehér (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1978), 457–76, 459. On the Şecāʿatnāme, see also Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court, 213–15. Günay Karaağaç and Adnan Eskikurt, eds. Rahimi-zāde İbrahim Çavuş, Kitāb-ı Gencīne-i Feth-i Gence [Osmanlıİran Savaşları ve Gence’nin Fethi (1583–1590)] (Istanbul: Çamlıca, 2010), xxxix; Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court, 185–88, 209–12; Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, “Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapı Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations,” Muqarnas 13 (1996): 132–48. It must be highlighted here that Tabriz also changed hands between the Qara Qoyunlu Turkmen confederation, the Safavids and the Ottomans. Between 1585 and 1603, Tabriz was under Ottoman rule. While with the hindsight of history we know the Safavids reconquered Tabriz, such changes of power must have affected the people living there, including the ways they adapted/ reacted to a foreign rule, and change in tastes. Note, for example, the influences of Iznik ceramics in the kubachi wares of Tabriz. Esra Akın-Kıvanç, Mustafa ʿAli’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), 134. Hereafter, Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds; Lisa Golombek, Persian Pottery in the First Global Age:

­ obility. Given that movement is common among m artists and patrons seeking demand or patronage, we can question the validity of the notion of “schools” of painting. Such works necessarily bespeak stylistic influences from Shiraz, Qazvin, and Mashhad, and reveal broader ties to the Ottoman and Safavid capitals. While these works were not produced in Baghdad, they invite us to consider the movement of artists, poets, and objects. Similarly, the historical analysis the reader will encounter in these pages suggests that we should not be so beholden to the view that style emanates exclusively from a local “school.” The objects themselves are also carriers of possible influence. Consider, for example, the plethora of Shirazi manuscripts of the sixteenth century. Lale Uluç has shown that deluxe Shiraz manuscripts, many of which contain notes and seals of ownership, emulated royal manuscripts and were intended for courtly circles, Ottoman, Safavid, and Turkmen alike. Uluç has linked the waxing of the production of deluxe manuscripts in Shiraz with the appointment of Muhammad Mirza, the future Safavid ruler Muhammad Khudabanda (r. 1578–87), to Shiraz as nominal governor in 1572, and the governorship of Fars by the Dhu’lQadirids between the early sixteenth century and the early 1590s. From the 1590s on, Uluç notes, the flow of Shiraz manuscripts dwindled. This coincides with Shah ʿAbbas i’s structural reforms and the removal of the Turkmen Dhu’l-Qadirids from the governorship of Fars.23 The region was given in the early 1590s to Allahverdi Khan, a Georgian slave (ghulām). After this time, artistic and architectural endeavors were mostly concentrated in Isfahan.

23

The Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Leiden: Brill, 2013). On Shāh ʿAbbās i’s reforms, see Kathryn Babayan, Mystics, Monarchs, Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002); idem, “The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamite Shiʿism,” Iranian Studies 27 (1994): 135–61.

8 This is also, coincidentally, the time when Baghdad painting flourished. That the production of illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad began shortly after the removal of the Dhu’l-Qadirids from office and the waning of Shiraz production, points to a possible exodus of artists from Shiraz to Baghdad, as do certain stylistic affinities. Uluç points to an illustrated Mathnawī of Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273) (New York Public Library, MS Per. 12) dated to 1603 as a possible link to the continued patronage of Dhu’l-Qadirids; the colophon of this manuscript includes the name of the patron Imam Virdi Beg b. Alp Aslan Dhu’l Qadr. Both Uluç and Barbara Schmitz contend that this manuscript may be from Baghdad (albeit with Shirazi or Qazvini influences) based on style as well as the inclusion of figures depicted wearing Ottoman headgear.24 This would provide a further link between Shiraz and Baghdad and may help explain the onset of painting in the latter in the 1590s. The decade of relative peace following the Ottoman-Safavid wars, the opportunities for ­ amassing wealth in the frontier province and the port of Baghdad, and the possible exodus of artists from Shiraz allowed for a decent amount of supply and demand for both short, relatively more affordable illustrated works, as well as high-end, luxury manuscripts. This trend—which faded in the early seventeenth century, as local uprisings shook the province—was further affected when war with the Safavids resumed. Interestingly, two examples from the late 1620s and 1630s, and one from the turn of the eighteenth century show that art production in Baghdad continued.25 This set 24 Uluç, Selling to the Court, 91; Barbara Schmitz, Islamic Manuscripts in the New York Public Library (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 265–67, 265. 25 To these, we can also tentatively add the illustrated Dīvān of Bāḳī (d. 1600) dated 1636 as a product of the wider province of Baghdad. These later examples (particularly those that are securely attributed to Baghdad) from the 1620s onwards, when Baghdad was under Safavid rule, do not share the stylistic coherence with those works from the 1590s into the early seventeenth century. Rather, they bear closer resemblance to

Introduction

comprises: an illustrated Shāhnāma dated 1627– 1629 (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1496);26 a drawing by the Safavid painter Muhammad Qasim of a likeness of a certain “Vali Tutunji” made in Baghdad (Bibliothèque nationale de France, O.D. 41, fol. 33b); and a manuscript of the ʿAjāʾib al-Makhlūqāt wa Gharāʾib al-Mawjūdāt (Wonders of Creation and Oddities of Existents) (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 400) dated 1699. The two former examples have a Safavid style associated with Isfahan. The 1699 ʿAjāʾib al-Makhlūqāt wa Gharāʾib al-Mawjūdāt is also stylistically different from the more coherent group of late sixteenthcentury Baghdad manuscripts, and the works from the 1620s and 1630s. We know these three examples are associated with Baghdad based on the information in their colophons and the inscription on the single-page painting (preserved in an album). It is very possible that there were other illustrated manuscripts produced in Baghdad in the mid to late seventeenth century, but that may have been catalogued as provincial Safavid. Further

26

S­ afavid painting. So far, with the lack of further localized examples, it is hard to come to a conclusion about the continued production of illustrated works but I suspect more examples may appear through further research. The 1636 Dīvān of Bāḳī (British Library Add. 7922) has been the subject of a recent master’s thesis, adding to the debate on the possible attribution of this manuscript, in which Charles Rieu and Norah Titley argue it is the royal patronage of the Safavid Shah Ṣafi i (r. 1629–42) and Sheila Canby contends it comes from a provincial location (possibly Najaf) by Sheila Canby). See Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Turkish Manuscripts in the British Museum (London: British Museum, 1888); Norah Titley, Persian Miniature Painting and Its Influence on the Art of Turkey and India: The British Library Collections (London: The British Library, 1983); Sheila Canby, The Golden Age of Persian Art, 1501–1722 (London: British Museum Press, 1999); Özlem Yıldız, “Text and Image in the Divan of Baki: An Illustrated Manuscript in the British Library (Add. 7922)” (MA Thesis, soas, 2018). Zeren Tanındı briefly describes this manuscript in her article, “Bağdat Defterdarının Resimli Şahnamesi,” in İslam Medeniyetinde Bağdat, 329–43.

9

Introduction

manuscript research may unearth more examples and may point to continued or revived art production in Baghdad, since attributions to the province have so far been based on its idiosyncratic, late sixteenth-century style. The distinctiveness of the Baghdad style of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries has long been noted. The attention of early scholars was captured by figures with large heads, gaping mouths and protruding noses, frequent use of profile and frontal views, and a mix of elements of different origins. Paintings tend to have crowded compositions especially when representing scenes of preaching—often the audience crowds around the preacher, while some push themselves in and peer through doorways. There is much interaction among the audience. Figures are often expressive. Some give in to tears at the speech of the preacher, while others turn to discussion with those sitting next to them. Emotive figures abound in paintings representing not only preaching but also other subjects, such as the death of the Prophet Muhammad. At times, figures peer at the viewer frontally. Oftentimes, they are represented in profile. In such cases, they are represented most frequently with crooked noses, and sometimes with almost grotesque, gaping mouths. There appears to be a sense of animation, a sense of humor even, in many of the paintings from Baghdad that the court paintings of Istanbul do not share. Compared to the formal legibility of official, court paintings of Istanbul, paintings from Baghdad have a sense of liveliness, enhanced by interaction among the figures. Different ethnic types are also represented. Sometimes darker-skinned figures wearing tall black caps that also cover the neck or people with black and white striped clothing appear, representing the Bedouins. Indians are also represented with darker skins, often in profile, and donning short caps. Included often in the paintings, Europeans are shown in hats and wide-legged pantaloons. In addition to an awareness of different figural types, most paintings also brought together different architectural styles and objects of daily

use.27 While exhibiting some variety, this stylistic coherence and idiosyncrasy—with its clear influence from Safavid, Indian and Ottoman art— stood apart from the courtly manuscripts of the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals. Filiz Çağman and Karin Rührdanz were able to attribute this distinctive style to Baghdad through the information provided in the colophons of a Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Gardens of the Blessed) manuscript acquired by the Brooklyn Museum of Art copied by Husayn al-Kashani in Baghdad (discussed in Chapter 4), and an illustrated manuscript of Fuzuli’s Beng u Bāde (Opium and Wine) copied by Mustafa b. Muhammad al-Rızavi al-­ Husayni and prepared for the governor of Baghdad, Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa (d. 1602).28 Following Çağman and Rührdanz’s lead, Milstein’s 1990 study extensively detailed the style and iconography of Baghdad painting. She pointed to the eclecticism of the paintings, which drew on elements—­ including sartorial and architectural details— from both contemporary and earlier fashions. This she found to be a reflection of the cosmopolitanism of Baghdad, as well as the history of the province, as it changed hands between the Ottomans and the Safavids.29 In addition to the eclecticism of Baghdad painting, Milstein also noted some marked compositional schemes in which a sense 27

I do not focus on style and iconography extensively in this work, since Milstein has provided an extensive guideline and schema of different types of clothing, objects, architecture, and figure types that were included in the numerous illustrated manuscripts from Baghdad. Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 132–40. 28 Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen bir Minyatür Okulu, 652; Karin Rührdanz, “Islamische Miniaturhandschriften aus Beständen der ddr—iv. Illustrationen zu Fuduli’s ‘Bang wa Bade,’” Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift, Gesellschafts und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe 27 (1978): 107–14; idem, Zwanzig Jahre Bagdader Buchillustration, 143–59. 29 Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 43–45.

10

Introduction

of time and space was rendered through the use of the page margins and the vertical and horizontal division of the picture plane.30 While borrowing or bringing elements from different sources, artists also innovated, especially in terms of composition and with the inclusion of elements that related specifically to the text. The majority of the manuscripts produced in Baghdad in this short period belong to the genre of saintly biography and popular religious literature, not surprising for a city given the appellation “bastion of saints” (burc-u evliyā). They recount stories of the prophets, the martyrdom of the family of the Prophet Muhammad, and the lives of famous mystics. There are multiple illustrated copies of the same title, such as illustrated genealogies, Fuzuli’s Hadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, or Lamiʿi Çelebi’s (d. 1533) Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Killing of the Family of the Prophet). Numerous illustrated copies of the same title suggest an increase in the popularity of such works, as well as a market for popular religious stories. Many of the texts that were illustrated in Baghdad are new texts, that is, texts written in the mid- to the late sixteenth century. There are also two new texts that were composed in Baghdad for two governors in the early seventeenth century: an illustrated travelogue-cum-campaign logbook (Sefernāme) detailing the travels of Governor Çerkes Yusuf Paşa (d. 1614), and an illustrated universal history, Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (Collection of Biographies) composed for Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa (discussed in Chapter 2). Additionally, there are works of literature. These include the Dīvān of Baki (d. 1600), possibly prepared for Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, and the above-mentioned Beng u Bāde of Fuzuli, also prepared for this governor. Other works of literature include several copies of the Hümāyūnnāme (The Imperial Book) of ʿAli Çelebi (d. 1543),31 and a 30 31

Ibid., 54–63. Ernst Grube makes a note of the “mixed, provincial Safavid style” of two illustrated copies of the Hümāyūnnāme (British Library Add. 15153 and Topkapı Palace Museum Library R. 843). While a location of

copy of the Shāhnāma (Book of Kings) of Firdawsi (d. 1020)—the latter being, so far, the only known illustrated copy of the Persian Shāhnāma produced in the Ottoman lands.32 Furthermore, there are also numerous single-page paintings that have hitherto escaped scholarly attention. In terms of thematic interests, the illustrated works from this period drew on both age-old works of literature such as the Shāhnāma, and also catered to the pursuits the cultural and religious topography fed. While the trilingualism of the province is often noted in tadhkiras, the illustrated works produced in Baghdad in this period are in Ottoman Turkish and Persian. They seem to have been geared toward a relatively broad audience of Turkish and Persian speakers, which included Mawlawis, Bektashis, Ottoman governors, and possibly Turkmen or Safavids, or at least those with a pro-Safavid bent, as one case will reveal (Chapter 5). This more or less stylistically and thematically coherent group brings together different elements. In doing so, I argue, it also challenges monolithic views of what is Ottoman or Safavid. This book does not focus on each individual manuscript produced in late sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century Baghdad, nor on their specific iconographic or codicological aspects. Instead,

32

production is not provided in these two examples, they are now commonly attributed to Baghdad based on style. Ernst J. Grube, “Some Observations ­Concerning the Ottoman Illustrated Manuscripts of the Kalīlah wa Dimnah: Alī Çelebī’s Humāyūnnāme,” in 9. Milletle­ rarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi, Bildiriler: 23–27 Eylül 1991, Vol. 2 (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1991): 195–206; Şebnem Parladır, “Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebi’nin Hümāyūnnāmesi” (PhD diss, Ege Üniversitesi, 2011). Uluç points out that the paintings in this Shahnama manuscript “are more closely related to those from Safavid manuscripts than Ottoman,” while also including Ottoman sartorial details. Lale Uluç, “The Shahnama of Firdausi in the Lands of Rum,” in Shahnama Studies ii: The Reception of Firdausi’s Shahnama, ed. Charles Melville and Gabrielle van den Berg (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 159–80, 162–69.

11

Introduction

it focuses on the particular context in which this material emerged. Rather than describing each manuscript in this corpus, or following a linear progression of evolution as Milstein does, I have chosen to organize the book around several key questions. What were the conditions that led to the flourishing of art in Baghdad? How can we situate this blossoming in the context of empire-wide social and urban transformations? What types of works were chosen for illustration, and for whom? What were the relations between the province and the center? What distinguishes Baghdad from other frontier provinces? In each chapter, I showcase an exemplar manuscript that has stronger connections to Baghdad as a tool to explore these questions. A list of illustrated and unillustrated manuscripts that are connected to Baghdad either through the information contained in their colophons or through stylistic affinity and a timeline of major events are provided in the appendix. Here, a note about sources is necessary. In terms of the available archival sources, the extant cadastral surveys and law codes in the Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives date to circa 1539–1545, soon after the conquest of the province under Süleyman i. There are also cadastral surveys from 1577–1578, right before the onset of the Ottoman-Safavid wars, marking the critical periods of post-conquest and prewar. However, the period in between, and after, are lacking. There are also a number of mühimme registers (registers of important affairs) containing copies of orders sent to the provinces. While these provide a wealth of information, particularly regarding Ottoman-Safavid relations, they do not directly answer the kinds of questions posed in this book. It must also be noted, however, that we currently lack concrete information regarding the specifics of the production of illustrated manuscripts in other centers, such as Shiraz, Qazvin or Tabriz as well. Where archival sources are lacking, narrative sources are plentiful. Both local histories and accounts of the re-conquest of the province by Murad iv in 1638, and broader histories, and tadhkiras provide information, particularly

r­egarding relations between the imperial center and the province. The first chapter sets the historical and political background to Ottoman-Safavid relations and sheds light on the links between Istanbul and the province, the central administration’s ways of managing and accommodating the province, and the province’s governors and upstarts who used its liminality to leverage their authority. This chapter suggests that multiple focal points are needed to understand the frontier zone of Baghdad. It also shows that governors, as well as upstarts, had the means—if not always legitimacy—to increase their wealth and rank. This is examined in the context of social and urban transformations taking place toward the end of the sixteenth century. While, for now, we know of only two patrons of illustrated manuscripts—the above-mentioned Çerkes Yusuf Paşa and Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa—a governorship in Baghdad was a relatively lucrative post, especially when its position as a port city and the prevalent decentralization of the empire allowed for extortion to amass wealth. Upon coming to Baghdad, Mustafa ʿĀli mused about the competitive bids for office in Baghdad.33 Some governors, such as Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa (d. 1598) and Cigalazade Mahmud Paşa (d. 1643), and their families had property in Baghdad and elsewhere, like Aleppo.34 Some, such as Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa, Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa and Cigalazade Sinan Paşa (d.  1606), were also patrons of architecture.35 In addition to a number of governors who were noted for having acquired great wealth in Baghdad, such as Kadızade ʿAli Paşa (d. 1616) and Dilaver Paşa (d. 1622), upstarts that rose from relatively humble ranks, such as Uzun (Tavil) Ahmed and his sons, 33

Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual: The Historian Mustafa Ali (1541–1600) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 120. 34 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 69b–70a. 35 Mehmet Karataş, ed. Nazmi-zade Murteza: Gülşen-i Hulefā (Bağdat Tarihi, 762–1717) (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2014), 195.

12

Introduction

and Bekir Subaşı and his son Derviş Mehmed, were also able to accumulate riches.36 Even though the late sixteenth and the early seventeenth centuries saw a broad economic downturn in the Ottoman lands, some were still able to profit. The position of Baghdad as a trading port and its relative distance from the center allowed a fortunate handful to accumulate great wealth and this seems to have further boosted the art market there. Building upon this background, the second chapter focuses on the two known patrons of illustrated manuscripts and their patronage. Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, the son of the eminent grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa (d. 1579), was a remarkable character prone to much grandiosity, especially during his tenure in Baghdad. A very finely illuminated and illustrated copy of Fuzuli’s Beng u Bāde was prepared for him. It is possible that he was also the patron of an illustrated Dīvān of Baki, a detached page from which includes a portrait, likely of the governor.37 An even more ambitious work that was produced for him was an illustrated universal history, the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer. Compared to this grand project, the manuscript that was prepared for Çerkes Yusuf Paşa was quite humble—a small, personal, illustrated traveloguecum-campaign logbook. The second chapter studies these manuscripts in comparison and points to the different directions the two patrons took in crafting an image for themselves as they sought to establish themselves in their posts and as they dealt with uprisings. These two works are also important because they are works that were specifically composed for the two governors. 36

37

Louis Gédoyn, Journal et Correspondance de Gédoyn “le Turc,” consul de France à Alep, 1623–1625, ed. A. Boppe (Paris: Société d’Histoire Diplomatique, 1909), 136–40; Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 65a, 72a, 79a–b. Zeren Tanındı, “Transformation of Words to Images: Portraits of Ottoman Courtiers in the ‘Diwans’ of Bākī and Nādirī,” res: Anthropology and Aesthetics 43 (2003): 131–45.

The next three chapters move from these officially commissioned works to ones that may have been prepared for different audiences, including the Mawlawi and Bektashi populations in and around Baghdad, as well as the open market. Chapter 3 concentrates on changing tastes in art, and especially the increasing interest in collecting single-page paintings and calligraphies. Through a study of previously overlooked single-page paintings from Baghdad, this chapter shows that, despite stylistic differences, these paintings shared in the changing tastes and new themes of entertainment current in the capital. These single-page paintings also make clear that the total output of material was quite varied and not limited to popular religious literature, as the scholarship suggests. This is followed in Chapter 4 by a case study of the above-mentioned Brooklyn Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā. Multiple illustrated copies of this text on the Karbala tragedy were made in the late sixteenth century. There are at least nine full, illustrated copies and several dispersed pages held in various libraries and museums. This chapter suggests that these works were read by and produced largely for a local Bektashi audience. The popularity of this work stems from the sacred topography of Baghdad and can be understood as analogous to pilgrimage certificates. Illustrated works on the Karbala tragedy coexist with illustrated stories on the lives of Sufi mystics and on the deeds of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi. These works—produced, for the most part, in single copies—were likely produced for a Mawlawi audience, and possibly supported by local governors or officials. The coexistence of different types of texts further highlights the multi-confessional nature of Baghdad. The final chapter deals with the numerous copies of illustrated genealogies (silsilanāma) produced for the open market, concentrating in particular on one early seventeenth-century copy that appears to have been altered to suit multiple audiences. This illustrated genealogy composed in Persian takes the shared genre of the genealogy and turns it on its head through its pro-Safavid text and iconography. The manuscript, possibly quite early

Introduction

in its lifetime, was altered through partial changes in its introduction and was addressed to the Ottoman ruler, Ahmed i (r. 1603–17). While this particular manuscript points to the fluidity of texts, objects and identities, the group of some dozen illustrated genealogies is also remarkable for being an innovation in Baghdad (at least concerning its popularity), which then spread to the Ottoman court in Istanbul and became more popular in the seventeenth century. As such, these manuscripts also challenge the assumption that “influence” always flowed from the capital to the provinces, by providing evidence for running the other way around.

13 The book ends with several hypothetical questions on the production of illustrated manuscripts outside of the court. I also suggest that an approach that considers a focused study of a region, particularly a frontier zone, along with a macrolevel study of exchanges and encounters can be employed for other frontier zones. Furthermore, research into trade and politics among eastern Anatolian provinces down through Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra as well as other Arab provinces, will shed light on the dynamics of relations and exchanges, as well as the reception and consumption of books and objects, in this broader frontier region.

Chapter 1

Uncertain Loyalties The long Ottoman-Safavid war of the late sixteenth century took a toll on the treasury.1 In 1589, near the end of the war, janissaries in Istanbul revolted when their salaries were paid with debased coinage. Doğancı Mehmed Paşa, the governorgeneral of Rumeli and a favorite of Sultan Murad iii, and Mahmud Efendi, the chief treasurer, were executed.2 The grand vizier Siyavuş Paşa (d. 1602) was dismissed from his post. The 1589 revolt was a harbinger of further janissary revolts and urban uprisings. The reʿāyā (tax-paying common people) was more immediately and adversely affected by the currency debasement. As taxes were fixed in terms of the devalued akçe (asper), the reʿāyā found it more difficult to pay their taxes in cash. They were burdened by additional extraordinary taxes.3 In addition, provincial auxiliary mercenary troops using firearms were used at times of war. These 1 William Griswold, The Great Anatolian Rebellion 1000– 1020/1591–1611 (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1983), 2. ­Hereafter, Griswold, The Great Anatolian Rebellion. 2 Cemal Kafadar is careful to note the time lag between the debasement and the uprising. Günhan Börekçi too revisits the execution of this governor-general and looks into palace cliques and factionalism within the court, which, in addition to the immediate reason of debasement, led to Doğancı Mehmed Paşa’s death. Cemal Kafadar, “When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew and Bankers Became Robbers of Shadows: The Boundaries of Ottoman Economic Imagination at the End of the Sixteenth Century” (PhD diss., McGill University, 1986). Hereafter, Kafadar, When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew; Günhan Börekçi, “Factions and Favorites at the Courts of Sultan Ahmed I (r. 1603–17) and his Immediate Predecesors” (PhD diss., Ohio State University, 2010), 172–97. Hereafter, Börekçi, Factions and Favorites. 3 Şevket Pamuk, “The Price Revolution in the Ottoman Empire Reconsidered,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 33 (2001): 69–89. Hereafter, Pamuk, The Price ­Revolution in the Ottoman Empire Reconsidered.

segbāns (irregular auxiliary troops) and levends (mercenary soldiers) served provincial governors, who were tasked to mobilize mercenaries at times of war and to provide for their own entourage.4 Governors-general were normally in charge of their own sancaks (district), known as the paşa sancağı (district of the governor-general). However, when taxes levied from their own districts were not enough to support their household, they could seek out further income through other districts of the province under the guise of general inspection.5 When governors were transferred or dismissed, their segbāns risked losing their source of income. Transformations in the military and timar systems, price inflation, debasement of the akçe—as well as possible effects of natural disasters such as several earthquakes in the Amasya region in the 1590s and a deteriorating climate—paved the way to general social unrest.6 The final years of the sixteenth century and the first decade of the seventeenth century were marked by more localized sūhte (madrasa student) uprisings and broader Celali uprisings. The structural changes and the Celali revolts that wreaked havoc mainly throughout Anatolia came hand in hand with an economic downturn and decentralization in the Ottoman Empire and broader global 4 On levends, see Mustafa Cezar, Osmanlı Tarihinde Levendler (Istanbul: Çelikcilt Matbaası, 1965). 5 Mustafa Akdağ, Celali Isyanları (1550–1603) (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basım Evi, 1963), 59. Hereafter, Akdağ, Celali İsyanları; Suraiya Faroqhi, “Making a Living: Economic Crisis and Partial Recovery,” in An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, ed. Halil Inalcık (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 433–74. 6 On climate change, see Sam White, “The Little Ice Age,” in Water on Sand: Environmental Histories of the Middle East and North Africa, ed. Alan Mikhail (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 71–91; idem, “The Real Little Ice Age,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 44 (2013): 327–52.

Uncertain Loyalties

transformations in world trade.7 In the face of economic instability and job uncertainty, the taxpaying reʿāyā could seek employment as irregular soldiers, the paramilitary could seek continued work or increase in rank, and governors could seek continued office or autonomy. These were several options of vertical mobility among others, as can be seen in the case of Canpuladoğlu ʿAli Paşa (d. 1610),8 who planned to form a state of his own in northern Syria, or of Kasım Paşa, who was appointed as governor of Baghdad in early 1604 but failed to show up for duty and instead levied taxes from the reʿāyā of Bursa together with his household of levends.9 Alliances among upstarts and local amirs were also possible, such as that between Canpuladoğlu ʿAli Paşa and Muhammed, son of Tavil (Uzun) Ahmed, the upstart in Baghdad.10 If such an alliance did not prove fruitful, there was always the possibility of threatening to form one with the Safavids, which almost always had the

7

See Akdağ, Celali İsyanları; Ömer Lütfi Barkan, “The Price Revolution of the Sixteenth Century: A Turning Point in the Economic History of the Near East,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 6, no. 1 (1975): 3–28; Griswold, The Great Anatolian Rebellion; Cemal Kafadar, When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew; Baki Tezcan, “The Monetary Crisis of 1585 Revisited,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 52 (2009): 460–504; Pamuk, The Price Revolution in the ­Ottoman Empire Reconsidered. 8 In addition to Akdağ’s Celali İsyanları, Griswold’s The Great Anatolian Rebellion, and Barkey’s Bandits and Bureaucrats: The Ottoman Route to State Centralization (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994), which deal with the larger context of Celali uprisings, banditry and the state’s various responses to individual cases, another work that is devoted to Canpuladoġlu ʿAlī Paşa is an unpublished master’s thesis: Süleyman Duman, “­Celali İsyanları Örneğinde Canbuladoğlu Ali Paşa İsyanı” (MA thesis, Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi, 2011). 9 Akdağ, Celali İsyanları, 242; Mehmet İpşirli, ed. Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, Vol. 1 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2007), ­267–68. Hereafter, Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā. 10 Griswold, The Great Anatolian Rebellion, 121.

15 desired effect in border regions.11 This was particularly the case in Baghdad. Writing in 1608, the Carmelite missionary Paul Simon noted the efficacy of feigning an alliance with the enemy. He wrote that the pasha of Baghdad, who he does not name, was “in rebellion against the Sultan of Turkey, in order to pay his soldiery … and he leans on the Shah of Persia.”12 This is an apt observation by the Carmelite, who remained but a short time in Baghdad. Seventeenthcentury Safavid historian Fazli Beg Isfahani also noted the double-dealing of Tavil Ahmed, who had assumed power in Baghdad in the early seventeenth century and appeared to side with the Safavids and with the Ottomans.13 The recurring wars and the position of Baghdad between the two powers gave some the opportunity to use this situation to their advantage and to amass wealth, which was critical in the patronage of art and architecture. The economic downturn, currency fluctuation and shortage of treasury of the late sixteenth century paved the way to widespread rebellion. But the structural changes that went along with this also allowed for alternative means of mobility, as well as an opportunity for local governors or leaders to try to increase their autonomy. This can be seen in the wider context of a shifting of the base of patronage at the Ottoman court from the last quarter of the sixteenth century onwards. The effects of economic and structural changes were certainly felt in Baghdad, particularly in the first quarter of the seventeenth century. An unpublished account of the conquests of Baghdad (by Sultan Süleyman I in 1534, Shah ʿAbbas i in 1623, and Sultan Murad iv in 1638) by the m ­ id-seventeenth-century Baghdadi author, 11 Ibid., 128. 12 Anonymous, A Chronicle of the Carmelites in Persia and the Papal Mission of the xviith and xviiith Centuries (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1939), 138. Hereafter, A Chronicle of the Carmelites. 13 Kioumars Ghereghlou, ed. A Chronicle of the Reign of Shah ʿAbbas (Cambridge: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2015), Vol.1, 346–50.

16

Chapter 1

­ ustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi (d. after 1660), M sheds light on power dynamics in and around the city. His Tārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād (History of the Conquest of Baghdad) shows us the volatile position of the city and its hinterland and the impacts of the economic downturn. The author identifies himself as a Baghdadi storyteller (meddāḥ) and notes that as a resident of the city, he had composed his account of events “as they actually were” (ḥaḳḳa ne vaḳıʿ olduysa). He adds that his sources of information were books of history and reports from acquaintances who had seen and heard the events and that he hoped that his work would be read in gatherings and remembered.14 Despite the fact that the author claims, in Rankean fashion, to have noted the events “as they actually were,” I take this source as a construct of someone forced 14

We later see the author copying manuscripts in Aleppo, including the Dīvān of Ṭālib Āmulī (d. 1626–7) copied there on 22 June 1660 (Leiden University Library Acad. 149). Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād be-dest-i Pādişāh-ı Dīn-penāh Sulṭān Murād Hān Ġāzī (Histories on the Conquest of Baghdad at the Hand of the Religion-protecting Sultan Murad Han Gazi), Bodleian Library Or. 276, fol. 2b, 64a. Hereafter, Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276. There are several other manuscript copies of this work. One is part of a compilation (presently in the Süleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye 3140), the first part of which comprises a translation of the Tārīh-i Ṭabarī (History of Tabari). The second part is the Fetiḥnāme. The manuscript was copied by el-Ḥacc Muḥarrem bin ʿAbdurraḥman. This work was copied at the request of the mid-seventeenth century commander of Aleppo, Murtaża Paşa. The colophon of the last work, which is the Fetiḥnāme, gives the date of 1656–57 (fol. 405a). Unfortunately, the manuscript shows signs of water damage toward its middle section at the top, and several folios in the middle are illegible. Another copy of Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan’s work is also found in a compilation (which includes the Tācüʾt Tevārīh (The Crown of Histories)) in the Library of the Leiden University (UB Or. 1183). See Jan Schmidt, Catalogue of Turkish Manuscripts in the Library of Leiden University and Other Collections in the Netherlands, Vol. 3 (Leiden: Brill, 2012).

to flee his native city and thus seeking a way to memorialize his homeland’s past and its loss. However, this fact also makes it a valuable account that focuses on Baghdad more than most other contemporary sources. It provides details about the fall of Baghdad not mentioned in other contemporary chronicles. Taken together with other contemporary narrative sources, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s account sheds much light on the complicated power struggles in the frontier province. The author, forced to flee the city when it fell to the Safavids, slows the pace of his otherwise chronologically organized account, to focus on “the many seditions in Baghdad,” particularly on the events that led to its fall to the Safavids—the cause for his self-imposed exile. Before detailing these many seditions in Baghdad, he remarks: The role of the governor is to guard and foster his reʿāyā like sheep, so that he may feed off of their milk. Certain governors, out of their own ignorance, devastate the reʿāyā. Some devour them ­directly; others let the wolves snatch them. The inevitable result is the governor’s eventual destruction … The aim of books of history is such that they give a lesson to those who read them and listen to them.15 This will be a recurring trend in Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s history, wherein governors or independent claimants to control oppress the reʿāyā. Through Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan elBağdadi’s account, as well as other contemporary sources, we can see that for the most part governors and rebels in this region wished to capitalize on the lucrative trade that the port, as well as the conjuncture of upheaval and commotion, offered. Thus, in 1608 the upstart Tavil Ahmed and his two sons Muhammad and Mustafa could gather around them a sizable group of segbāns and ­local

15

Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥ­ nāme-i Baġdād, fol. 65a.

Uncertain Loyalties

gönüllüs (volunteers), prohibit the appointed governor of Baghdad from entering the city, and even foster relations and exchange gifts with the Safavid ruler.16 That the father and sons could all claim sovereignty in Baghdad is critical in pointing to fundamental changes in governance in this frontier province of Baghdad, which increasingly took on the appearance of a hereditary prize— as indeed it became in the eighteenth century.17 In addition, their correspondences with the Safavid shah and plans of allegiance with the Safavids suggest the tenuous, yet critical, position of Baghdad between the two rival dynasties.18 It becomes apparent that, particularly from the early seventeenth century onwards, governors and local contenders for power used the remoteness of the province to their advantage. Through Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s account, we get a sense of the conditions that allowed some to increase their eminence and wealth but that also led to the loss of the province. Similar contemporary accounts, though to a much lesser degree, also point to the precarious nature of the border regions. As Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi focuses on the seditions in Baghdad, he finds the root of the problem in the excess of segbāns who had to be provided for, in individual rebels and in the extortionist behavior of some governors. Specifically, the rebellious behavior of the above-mentioned Tavil Ahmed and his sons had troubled the ambitious governor, and later grand vizier, Nasuh Paşa (d. 1614), whose army deserted him when lured by Tavilzade’s [lit., son of Tavil] bribe.19 Mustafa 16 17

Ibid., fols. 65a–b. See, for example, Thomas Lier, Haushalte und Haushaltpolitik in Baghdad, 1704–1831 (Würzburg: Ergon ­Verlag, 2004). 18 Jalāl al-Din Muḥammad Munajjim Yazdī, Tārīkh-i ʿAbbāsī yā Ruznāmeh-i Mulla Jalāl, ed. Seyfullah ­Vahidinya (Tehran: Vahid, 1987), 312, 342. 19 Naʿīmā writes that Naṣuḥ Paşa gathered together a force including Seyyīd Hān, who was among the Kurdish begs, Sohran Beg, and Ebūrīşoġlu Emir Aḥmed to fight Ṭavīlzāde Muḥammed, who had forged a royal ­order and appointed himself governor of Baghdad.

17 b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi implies that this Tavil Ahmed also indirectly led to the rise of Bekir Subaşı, who would be the main cause for the loss of Baghdad in 1623. While not elaborating, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s account highlights Nasuh Paşa’s vexation with the city’s residents, writing: “Nasuh Paşa was irritated by the inhabitants of Baghdad. He made haste to take revenge.”20 So, when Dilaver Paşa (d. 1622) was posted as the governor in 1612, Nasuh Paşa warned him about Baghdad, saying:

The historian points out that Ebūrīşoġlu reverted to duplicity and stalled the others while Naṣuḥ Paşa waited in Mosul for forty days. In the meantime, Seyyīd Hān’s letter to Baghdad was intercepted. In the letter, Seyyīd Hān notified Ṭavīlzāde Muḥammed that they had stalled Naṣuḥ Paşa, and that he [Ṭavilzāde] should try not to lose Baghdad. Realizing this and the difficulty he would have mounting a successful campaign against Ṭavīlzāde with his remaining forces, Naṣuḥ Paşa nevertheless marched on toward Baghdad. Further segbāns from Naṣuḥ Paşa’s force were bribed into joining Ṭavīlzāde Muḥammed. In the ensuing battle, Velī Paşa, governor of Şehrizor, was killed and Naṣuḥ Paşa was injured, and he returned. Naṣuḥ Paşa’s failure is noted further in a letter from Constantinople dated June 22, 1606. A further report by Francis Zaneti refers to news in the February of 1607 that Baghdad had been taken by the Safavids. In 1608, Cigalazāde Maḥmud Paşa, then in the winter quarters of Ruha (Urfa), was appointed as governor of Baghdad, and was successful against the rebels in Baghdad. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan writes that when the rebel Tavilzade Muṣṭafa could not defeat this governor, he left Baghdad together with his levends and segbāns and went to the Safavid lands. Nażmizāde Murtaża and Ṭopçular Kātibi, however, write that in the end Tavilzāde Muṣṭafa was assuaged and given the sancak of Hilla. A Chronicle of the Carmelites, 97; Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 323–4; İbrahim Hakkı Çuhadar, ed. Mustafa Sāfīʾnin Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīhʾi (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003), 50–1; Ziya Yılmazer, ed. Topçular Katibi Abdülkadir Efendi Tarihi (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003), 522–3. 20 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 70b.

18

Chapter 1

When you reach Baghdad, you will find people guilty of sedition and treachery, who do not submit to the authority of governors; they endeavor to be obstinate and defiant. It is necessary to not give any opportunity to this and to tackle these. Should they resist in their endeavor, I will mediate on your behalf as soon the court is notified. I will help you with whatever you might need in terms of arms and treasure. You must leave such a mark on that province that it be remembered till the Day of Judgment.21 Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi implies that Dilaver Paşa’s harsh and extortionist behavior, having received this warning, partly paved the way for the rise of Bekir Subaşı. He notes that Dilaver Paşa, upon taking up his post, subdued several eminent members of the ʿazebs (light infantry troops) and janissaries.22 He adds that no other governor had acquired such wealth as Dilaver Paşa had—some of this wealth came through gifts and tribute, and some of it was seized (niceleriñ dutub malını aldı).23 Dilaver Paşa’s extortionist behavior was a cause for concern in the city. This story also provides the Baghdadi author the occasion to describe Bekir Subaşı’s rise to power. According to this Baghdadi author, the story goes back further. He notes that the rebel Tavilzade Muhammed had killed Bekir Subaşı’s father forcing Bekir to flee to Aleppo—he does not provide a date for this, unfortunately.24 When, in turn, Tavilzade Muhammed was murdered by his

21 22 23 24

Ibid., fols. 70b-71a. Ibid., fol. 71a–b. Ibid., fol. 72. According to the Bodleian manuscript, Muḥammed had killed Ḥacı Burhan and his sons escaped to Aleppo after his death (Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 75a). The Nuruosmaniye manuscript, however, notes that it was when Muḥammed appeared in Baghdad, that Ḥacı Burhan’s sons escaped to Aleppo. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi Nuruosmaniye 3140, fol. 373b.

own confidant in 1608,25 Bekir and his brothers returned to Baghdad and reclaimed their father’s properties. Eventually, they became servants of the state. Bekir, known as Bekir Subaşı on account of his position as ṣubaşı (commander), was a member of the janissary corps. He had also acquired great influence in Baghdad. When the inhabitants of Baghdad were hard-pressed by the governor, Dilaver Paşa, they sought help from Bekir Subaşı so that under his care and protection, they would not allow submission to governors, saying “You, assume leadership over us, and under your protection, we will resist yielding to governors, for each governor takes our possessions.”26 Such comments, fed into the mouths of the populace by the author, evoke his cautionary notes to governors on how they should behave, and highlight the extant (and ongoing) tensions between the Ottoman capital and the provinces. The frontier province of Baghdad was distant enough from the capital for a number of actors to increase their power and wealth. Bekir Subaşı’s rise to power from ordinary janissary corps officer to the de facto ruler of Baghdad and a pawn in the contest between the Ottomans and the Safavids within a period of around ten to fifteen years is one example of the possibilities of acquiring rank and wealth and balancing one’s power among various 25

26

Mehmet Karataş, ed. Nazmi-zade Murteza: Gülşen-i Hulefā (Bağdat Tarihi, 762–1717) (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2014), 194; Abdurrahman Sağırlı, “Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rūmī (Edirneli)ʾnin Nuhbetüʾt-Tevārih veʾl-Ahbārʾı ve Tārīh-i Āl-i Osmanʾı (Metinleri, Tahlilleri)” (PhD diss., Istanbul University, 2000), 605. According to the Baghdadi author, Bekir Ṣubaşı accepts this. However, he notes that the ʿazebs were, in general, against them and tended to side with the governors. This foreshadows the extent of the antagonism between the janissaries and the ʿazebs in Baghdad. At this point in the story, though, the then leader of the ʿazebs, Meḥmed Ḳanber (the former leader having been killed by Dilāver Paşa), sided with Bekir Ṣubaşı. In the end, the issue with Dilāver Paşa was resolved, according to the Baghdadi author. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 75a–b.

Uncertain Loyalties

rivals. Bekir Subaşı was by no means the only janissary in the Arab provinces taking advantage of the numerous ways to supplement power and resources. The commercial hubs of Baghdad, Aleppo, Damascus, and Egypt in particular afforded janissary officers the chance to amass wealth.27 Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s detailed account summarizes the fragility, or perhaps the flexibility, of a balance of power that prevailed in the first quarter of the seventeenth century between the janissary corps, the ʿazebs, the segbāns, the governors appointed by the state to the provinces, as well as local Arab tribes and rival Safavids. Over time, the Baghdadi author tells us, Bekir Subaşı gained considerable influence. He made sure his sons had positions in the janissary corps. He and his immediate family had “acquired great wealth, such that their possessions were like that of Korah (Karun), as well as an army that could rival the sultan’s.28 Whenever renowned men would come in ships from Najd and Basra, they would present gifts to Bekir Subaşı and his sons.”29 “Out of vainglory,” writes the Baghdadi author, Bekir Subaşı’s son Derviş Mehmed (d. after 1624), “began to adopt a contumacious position towards appointed governors.”30 Following this comment, the Baghdadi author turns to the antagonism between Hafız Ahmed Paşa (d. 1632), former governor of Diyarbekir and appointed as governor to Baghdad, and the janissaries, particularly Bekir Subaşı. This initial antagonism would also have an impact, according to the Baghdadi author, on how the ­province was lost. In 1615, Hafız Ahmed Paşa arrived in the city, greeted by a great welcome procession. His 27

On the transformations of the seventeenth century and the position of janissaries in the Arab provinces see Jane Hathaway, The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule, 1516–1800 (New York: Pearson Longman, 2008), 59–79. 28 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 79a. 29 Ibid., fol. 79a–b. 30 Ibid., 79b.

19 e­ ncounter with Bekir Subaşı at this moment is worth quoting in full: When it was Bekir Subaşı’s turn [to pay respects to the governor], he [the governor] admonished him, saying: “O wretched soup slurper,31 viziers come to Baghdad on the royal order of the padishah, guardian of the world. Most of them find no gratitude here and leave injured and aggrieved by your misdeeds. Do not think those who come next will be as biddable. I would have cut off your head right here and now on behalf of the padishah. But I spare you, this time. [I advise you to] Rid yourself of the temptations of the devil. Don the girdle of zeal and fortitude and follow the right path. Do not be tactless; the sultan’s sword is long. All of a sudden you may face his mighty wrath. And even if you were to burrow into the earth and hide like a mouse, you still would not be safe from the great force of his fury.”32 Hearing this from the governor, Bekir Subaşı escaped from the citadel, where Hafız Ahmed was in residence. When he got back to his entourage, he vowed never to return there. Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi adds, however, that the governor was later greatly sorry for his leniency, “biting his finger a thousand times, and thinking, ‘Why did I delay this important matter?’”33 Indeed, with 31 The governor addresses Bekir Ṣubaşı as “çorbacı ḥażretleri.” This could refer to one who partakes of the sultan’s soup, which is distributed to the janissaries, highlighting his servant status. It also refers to Bekir Subaşı’s position as çorbacı within the janissary corps. Elsewhere in the account Muṣṭafa bin Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī notes that in Baghdad they call a “çorbacı” “ṣubaşı” and that this was the reason why Bekir was named “Bekir Ṣubaşı.” Thus it could also be translated as “master sergeant.” Ibid., fol. 75a. On the rank of “çorbacı” see Abdülkadir Özcan, “Çorbacı,” Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi Vol. 8, 369–70. 32 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 80b. 33 Ibid.

20

Chapter 1

hindsight, both Bekir Subaşı’s duplicity and Hafız Ahmed Paşa’s mismanagement would lead to the loss of Baghdad. Taking the story forward several years, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi suggests that the years 1619–1620 mark a turning point for Baghdad. He notes: “When, after some time, the hearts of the populace were joyful and at ease, like in the days of spring, wickedness and mischief all of a sudden awoke from their long slumber and caused ruin and anguish in the hearts of the people.”34 In addition to problems with local contenders to power in the areas between Baghdad and Basra, these were years of famine in Baghdad.35 The Baghdadi historian Nazmizade Murtaza (d. circa 1723) directly correlates the surge in prices and famine with Bekir Subaşı’s mutiny against the sultan, which, according to him, resulted in trade being interrupted, and migration out of Baghdad.36 Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan, on the other hand, lays the blame for the famine at the feet of the great number of 34 35

36

Ibid., fol. 88a. Famine appears to be an important issue in these years as noted by contemporary authors. Another author, who identifies himself as Şeyhoġlu (mentioned in the introduction), and who composed a short history of Baghdad from 1619 until the conquest of the province by Murād iv, writes of another famine that affected Baghdad soon after Bekir Subaşı executed Meḥmed Ḳanber. He writes that when the flocks of the local Bedouins died and all their means and sources of income were depleted, they proceeded to Baghdad to pillage the city and were the cause of the famine. Şeyhoġlu provides a very vivid description of the famine and writes that he himself was a witness of this when he came across some people who wanted to roast a cat. Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārüʾs selām-ı Baġdādʾıñ Başına Gelen Aḥvālleri Beyān İder fi Sene 1028 (1619) (The History of What Befell Baghdad, Abode of Peace, in 1619), Leiden University Cod. Schultens 1278, fols. 6b7a. Hereafter, Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Baġdād. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża adds that there was such famine that inhabitants would cry out, “the starvation, the starvation” in the markets and would eat putrid donkey meat that they could find in dumpsters. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża, Gülşen-i Hulefā, 195, 201.

segbāns and levends that had gathered around Derviş Mehmed, the son of Bekir Subaşı. The author voices the commonly held view that these irregular soldiers were a financial burden.37 The fact that Derviş Mehmed—for whom the ­father had previously arranged an office—acquired such wealth, whose indulgence is compared with, and even exceeds that of the Safavid shah, and who flaunted it at a time of famine, seemed to make things worse.38 The author adds that Derviş Mehmed also gathered around him such strong men and showed them such benevolence that those who were in the household of appointed governors, would want to leave them and enter the service of Derviş Mehmed.39 The author writes: When it comes to his pleasure and diversion, he kept a brilliant, precious, twenty-four oared ship, full of images, docked on the Tigris. On nights when the full moon shone bright, he would sit with many a boon companion on his ornamented seat, the envy of the house of Mani. Around him would be rose-cheeked beauties with the statures of cypress trees as if they were heart-stealing idols whose locks of hair were like chains to lovers’ hearts. He would drink wine from crystal cups served by sāqīs (cup-bearer) out of ­jewel-encrusted flasks … He had two singers: one was Zeynizade Hasan Çelebi, from Diyarbekir, and the other was Baghdadi ­Pirizade Ahmed Çelebi, each with a voice like that of David, a rarity of the age. After the Baghdad calamity, Zeynizade Hasan Çelebi became

37 38 39

Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥ­ nāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 96a. Ibid., fol. 91b. Taking the example of Cairo, Jane Hathaway presents a more flexible picture of the household, wherein the provincial governor and his household could face competition from local elites and their households. A ­similar case seems to arise in Baghdad as well. Jane Hathaway, “The Military Household in Ottoman Egypt,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 27 (1995): 39–52.

21

Uncertain Loyalties

an ­intimate of Murad iv, and ­Baghdadi Pirizade Ahmed Çelebi became Shah ʿAbbas’ favorite.40 Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s lengthy description of Derviş Mehmed’s wealth and his pleasure-making proves the possibility of upward mobility from the ranks of a janissary agha to acquiring wealth and a household, to claiming rivalry to the de facto ruler of Baghdad, his own father. It also shows the possibility of mobility among members of the household, from the service of governors or local authorities to the service of rulers. According to Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi, this wealth and pomp also led Derviş Mehmed to vainglory, for the son attempted to kill the father. What happens then shows—especially as Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan presents it—the fragility and fickleness of alliances. As Bekir Subaşı had left Baghdad to deal with certain complaints against an Arab tribe—for, as the next chapter will also show, there were endless skirmishes with Arab tribes in the area between Baghdad and Basra— the people of Baghdad expressed their overall displeasure to the nominal governor, Yusuf Paşa (d. 1623).41 The governor saw this as an opportunity to get rid of Bekir Subaşı. Added to this, Bekir Subaşı’s one-time ally, Mehmed Kanber, an émigré from Iran who had settled in Baghdad, and who was the leader of the ʿazebs, also turned against him—even though the ʿazebs and janissaries in 40 41

Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥ­ nāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 91b. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan notes that Bekir Ṣubaşı’s nephews feared the growing eminence of Derviş Meḥmed and collaborated with the Khazaʿel tribe and solidified their compact with a marriage alliance. When complaints against the Arab tribe and the nephews came to Bekir Ṣubaşı’s attention, he first sent them a letter to dissuade them. When the reply was negative, Bekir Ṣubaşı marched against them personally. Finding opportunity in Bekir Ṣubaşı’s absence, Governor Yusuf Paşa decided to collaborate with Meḥmed Ḳanber against the janissary. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan  ­el-Baġdādī, Tārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 92b–94b.

Baghdad were rivals, the two had once come to an understanding, one that did not last for too long. While Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan points to the initial understanding between Bekir Subaşı and Mehmed Kanber, writing of the disturbances in Arab Iraq, the Safavid chronicler Iskandar Munshi (d. ­1633–4) points to the antagonism between the two, particularly as they tried to get the upper hand in Baghdad.42 Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan paints a complicated picture of different levels of antagonism in and around Baghdad. Particularly, the problems appeared to be among the family of Bekir Subaşı, a number of state-appointed governors, Mehmed Kanber, and local Arab tribal leaders. When news of Mehmed Kanber’s plans to plot with Yusuf Paşa against Bekir Subaşı reached the janissary, Bekir Subaşı captured Mehmed ­Kanber’s son, ʿAbdullah Reʾis, and two other amirs, decapitated them, sent the heads back to Mehmed Kanber, and made his way back to Baghdad.43 In order to avenge his son’s death, Mehmed Kanber prepared to attack Bekir Subaşı as he entered Baghdad. In the skirmish, Governor Yusuf Paşa was struck by a bullet and died.44 Mehmed Kanber was also killed and his body and those of his sons were placed in a boat, released to the Tigris, and set on fire.45 Iskandar Munshi adds to this, noting that some shaykhs from the mausoleum of Abu Hanifa who had supported Mehmed Kanber, were also set aflame.46 The events up to now, as reflected in near-contemporary accounts, highlight the precarious balance of power—which often broke down completely—between the s­ tate-appointed  governors, the janissary aghas, the ʿazebs, the ­irregular soldiers, and the local Arabs. 42

43 44 45 46

Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great (Tārīkh-i ʿAlam-ārā-yi ʿAbbāsī), tr. Roger Savory (Boulder: Westview Press, 1978–1986), Book 2, 1208. Hereafter, Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol., 102b–103a. Ibid., fol. 103b; Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 517. Ibid., fol. 104b; Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 518. Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great, 1209.

22 Put to paper by the Baghdadi author, Bekir Subaşı’s first open declaration of his sole authority occurs right after these events. Up until that moment, the Baghdadi author had presented a rather evenhanded picture of Bekir Subaşı. In fact, the author had been critical of his son, as well as some governors who exploited the reʿayā. Mustafa b. Mulla Ridvan writes: Bekir Şubaşı said: ‘As of now, we do not need a governor. They should give Baghdad to me, for those governors that do come lust after our property and make attempts against our lives. [See how] in Basra Afrasiyab is the ruler; governors are not appointed there. Let them give Baghdad to us and we will send treasury and gifts/tribute (pişkeş) to the sultan yearly.’47 Having recounted Bekir Subaşı’s words, the author continues his chronicle with events that took place in the capital, including plans for the Battle of Khotyn (1621), the janissary uprisings in Istanbul, Sultan ʿOsman ii’s murder (1622), the enthronement of Sultan Mustafa I (r. 1617–8; 1622–3)—who would soon to be replaced by Sultan Murad iv— and the uprising of Abaza Mehmed Paşa (d. 1634) in Erzurum.48 Intermixed with the account of Abaza Mehmed Paşa’s uprising, the author relates how Baghdad was lost to the Safavids. Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi summarizes the situation and foreshadows future events, through the voice of the former governor, Kemankeş ʿAli Paşa (d. 1624), who was consulted regarding the matter. The author recounts the former governor’s words thus: [Baghdad] is a frontier province (serḥadd vilāye­ tidir). It is ʿArabistan. They did not kill Yusuf Paşa on purpose; his end being near, he passed away during the battle. The Qizilbash of the abject-sect is near that province. It is possible that there will 47 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 104b. 48 Ibid., fols. 104b–114b.

Chapter 1

be regret. [The sultan must] appoint another governor who would rule with ease.49 Similarly, the historian Ibrahim Peçevi (d. 1650), who was the keeper of the treasury register of ­Diyarbekir, notes in his history that he would often (futilely) warn Hafız Ahmed Paşa (who had already voiced discontent in Baghdad) that Baghdad was a frontier province and that its people were sympathetic to the Safavids. This view is shared also by Katip Çelebi.50 Additionally, one of Peçevi’s concerns was that Baghdad had, for some time, been dominated by the influence of the local or yerli regiments of salaried volunteer soldiers established in the province.51 This tension among the troops is also implicit in Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan’s account of the broader history of Baghdad. Following Kemankeş ʿAli Paşa’s advice, Süleyman Paşa was appointed as governor. At this point, Bekir Subaşı already considered himself to be the governor of the province. When the new appointee was refused entry into Baghdad, he returned to Diyarbekir to seek assistance from Hafız Ahmed Paşa.52 Süleyman Paşa, who was already suffering from a case of carbuncle, passed away before a combined force of governors and commanders from the provinces of Diyarbekir, Mosul, and Kurdistan could march against Bekir “Paşa,” as he is now described in the text.53 Because of their former antagonism, Bekir Paşa adamantly refused Hafız Ahmed Paşa when he 49

Ibid., fol. 115b. Kātib Çelebi, on the other hand, implicates Bekir Ṣubaşı in the murder of Yusuf Paşa. Zeynep Aycibin, “Katip Çelebi-Fezleke (Tahlil ve Metin)” (PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi, 2007), 693. Hereafter, Katip Çelebi, Feẕleke. 50 Ibid., 708. 51 Peçevī, Tārīh-i Peçevī, 391–4. 52 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 116a–b; Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 519. 53 In Süleyman Paşa’s stead, Bostan Paşa was appointed to Baghdad on Ḥāfıẓ Aḥmed’s suggestion. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 117b.

Uncertain Loyalties

heard that his army was approaching Baghdad, claiming: “If it were any other governor, I would ­allow him. It is the padishah’s domain (memleket). He can give it to whomever he wishes. But since Hafız is coming, I would not give a stone from Baghdad; I will strive as long as life remains in my body.”54 However, when Hafız Ahmed Paşa dealt him a blow, Bekir Paşa devised a plan to send a letter to Qasim Khan, ruler of Luristan. This man “was the Avshar tribe, and being close to the frontier, he associated with both the Qizilbash of the abject-sect and Baghdad.”55 Such a comment further points to the precariousness of alliances in the frontier province. Bekir Paşa wished to lure Qasim Khan toward Baghdad and then send him off with “gifts and tribute” (hedāyā ve pişkeş).56 Seeing the Qizilbash march toward Baghdad, Bekir Paşa hoped Hafız Ahmed Paşa would back off. In Iskandar Munshi’s narration, Bekir—when outnumbered by Hafız Ahmed Paşa’s troops—sought the assistance of the Safavid shah, as Baghdad had belonged to the shah by inheritence.57 From the point of view of the Safavid author, Baghdad had belonged to the Safavids, and it was the wish of Shah ʿAbbas I to show his devotion at the holy sites of Arab Iraq. The Safavid shah’s wish to repossess Baghdad was echoed by Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan. The shah, who had “night and day moaned, ‘Āh Baġdād, vāh Baġdād,’” seized the opportunity when, in a further plot twist, ʿAbbas Ağa, the messenger who was 54

The seventeenth-century Baghdadi writer Şeyhoġlu also testifies to the antagonism between the two, when he comments that Hafız Ahmed Paşa had formerly been governor of Baghdad and had left in grief and heartache (meger sābıḳen Ḥāfıẓ Aḥmed Paşa Baġdādʾa beglerbegi olmuş idi ve bunlarıñ ilinden cigeri kebāb ve baġrı hūn olub gitmiş idi). Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh, Leiden University, Or. 1278, fol. 8a; Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 119a. 55 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 122a. 56 Ibid. 57 Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great, 1219.

23 supposed to give the letter to Qasim Khan, ­instead delivered it to Shah ʿAbbas I.58 The shah sent an army led by Safi Quli Khan (d. 1633) to capture Baghdad.59 Fearing Baghdad would be lost, Hafız Ahmed Paşa gave in, and sent a letter to Bekir Paşa granting him the governorship of Baghdad, lest he give the province to “the heretics.”60 Bekir Paşa, still partly oblivious to ʿAbbas Ağa’s treachery, received Safi Quli Khan, who ordered him to hand Baghdad over to Shah ʿAbbas and to pledge fealty to the Safavids. Safi Quli Khan then posed (in the author’s words) a rhetorical question: “He [Bekir] does not give Baghdad to the Ottomans; he does not give it to the deviated shah. Does he think to claim the caliphate for himself, assuming this land will remain his? Does he think to claim sovereignty (pādişāhlıḳ) between two padishahs?”61 According to Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan elBağdadi, it is only then that Bekir Paşa realized what had happened, and regretted his actions, “for he was a Sunni Muslim of the Hanafi sect.”62 It seems, then, that is is only at this point that religious persuasions become an issue. Before—at least as Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi tells it—Bekir Subaşı had not seen any concern in leveraging the position of Baghdad between the ­Ottomans and the Safavids to acquire the province. While political negotiation is common, there comes a time when it is no longer feasible, and there are limits to the translatability of identities. Unable to defend Baghdad and rejecting the shah’s offer to spare his life in exchange for Baghdad, Bekir Paşa continued to fight. However, his son Derviş Mehmed—believing the cause was lost and hoping his life and possessions would be spared—betrayed his father and handed over the keys to the citadel.63 Bekir Paşa was killed before 58 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 122a–123a. 59 Ibid., fol. 123a. 60 Ibid., fol. 124b. 61 Ibid., fol. 125b. 62 Ibid. 63 Ibid., fols. 136b–138a. Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 530.

24 his son’s eyes.64 His body was taken by the one remaining son of Mehmed Kanber and burned in revenge for his father and brothers’ deaths. Bekir Paşa’s sons, Derviş Mustafa, Derviş Hasan, and Derviş ʿAli, were exiled to the Safavid lands.65 Safi Quli Khan was appointed as the Safavid governor of Baghdad. Chroniclers mention that those refusing the allegiance of the shah and the renunciation of their faith were killed while some of those who converted were exiled.66 The province was to  remain in Safavid hands for a decade and a half until Murad iv’s re-conquest, after which it c­ ontinued

64

The author includes an interesting story on Bekir Paşa’s death. Bekir Paşa and his wife were both captured and after much torture, when Derviş Meḥmed arrived to see their imminent execution, Bekir Paşa exclaimed, “I have not seen such an unfaithful son who has no mercy for his father and mother. He is not like our other children.” To this, the wife replied, “That is correct. According to the principle that ‘all things revert to their original source,’ [here, quoting a hadith] this son is not from your loin.” The author relates what had happened to Bekir Paşa’s wife. Apparently, she and her family lived in a village named Mandali, which was near the frontier with the Safavids. The two sides would at times take prisoners from the other. If the prisoner had relatives, they could free them by paying a ransom. This woman had once been taken captive by a Qizilbash. Her father freed her, but in the meantime, she had become pregnant, and Derviş Meḥmed was apparently from this man, according to the author. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 140b; Katip Çelebi, Feẕleke, 719. 65 Ibid., fol. 141a; Right after writing about Meḥmed Ḳanber and his son’s death, Naʿīmā notes that Bekir Ṣubaşı faced a very similar fate soon thereafter and he was “set on fire with naphtha and roasted, on the water.” However, in Naʿīmā’s account, it is not Meḥmed Ḳanber’s son but the Safavid shah and Derviş Meḥmed who executed Bekir Ṣubaşı in this manner. Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 518, 532. 66 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 139b–140a; Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 531–2.

Chapter 1

to be an Ottoman possession up to the end of the dynasty (until 1917).67 European travelers and consuls present at the time were aware of the disorder in the Ottoman lands. Louis Gédoyn, the French consul in Aleppo between 1623–25, then writing from Sofia, Bulgaria in February 1624 notes the “confusion and astonishment” that was prevalent: it was certain that Baghdad was lost. Abaza’s (Mehmed) forces were growing by the day.68 Writing from Goa in November 1624, the Italian traveler Pietro della Valle (d. 1652)—having heard in May that Shah ʿAbbas had taken Baghdad—was not surprised that Baghdad had been lost. He notes how the death of the sultan (wrongly identified as “Sulayman”), the janissary uprisings, the brief restoration of Mustafa I, and the deeds of “the tyrant Bechir Subasci” had served Shah ʿAbbas I the opportunity to make “himself master of Baghdad.”69 It is in the context of disturbances at court and in Baghdad, as well as the Portuguese and the Safavids’ attempts to seize control of Basra that one can see the fall of Baghdad, and its added importance to the Safavids.70 Pietro della Valle adds: “And this is a clear case, that if he [Shah ʿAbbas] hath Baghdad, he intends also to have the port of Bassora, which is of great importance.” Conquest of Baghdad and Basra by 67

Ṣafi Qulī Khān served as governor of Baghdad until 1633. From 1633 until 1638 Bektash Beg served as governor. Mirza Naqi Nasiri, Titles and Emoluments in Safavid Iran: A Third Manual of Safavid Administration, tr. Willem Floor (Washington, D.C.: Mage Publishers, 2008), 158. 68 Gédoyn, Journal et Correspondance, 53. 69 Pietro della Valle, The Travels of Sig. Pietro della Valle, a Noble Roman, into East-India and Arabia Deserta: in which, the Several Countries, Together with the Customs, Manners, Traffique, and Rites both Religious and Civil, of those Oriental Princes and Nations, are Faithfully Described, in Familiar Letters to his Friend Signior Mario Schipano: whereunto is Added a Relation of Sir Thomas Roe’s Voyage into the East Indies (London: J. Macock, 1665), 211–3. 70 Ibid., 211.

Uncertain Loyalties

the Safavids would have obstructed the Ottomans’ conduit to the Indian Ocean. In the end, while Baghdad and its hinterland held important spiritual sites for the Safavids, it was also its position as a trading port that made it valuable. Governors, rebels, tribal leaders milked this lucrative business in Baghdad and Basra. Contemporary accounts, particularly Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi’s history, thus present a complex picture of Baghdad, in which the socioreligious, political and economic transformations of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries allowed for different paths of mobility and a balance of power—one, that at times, broke down

25 completely—between local Arab tribes, janissaries, irregular soldiers and governors on the local level, and between the Ottomans and the Safavids on the inter-state level. These accounts show that there were possible, though not necessarily legitimate, paths to wealth and power, which would also allow a broadening base of patronage that is not restricted to the Ottoman capital. The lucrativeness of the port of Baghdad, along with its relative independence from direct control by the center, allowed for wealth to be accrued in the hands of a few assiduous notables, be they governors or janissaries. It was this wealth that underpinned support of the art market in Baghdad.

Chapter 2

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power Despite the general currency devaluation, governors of Baghdad received relatively generous annual sums (salyane), from which they had to pay for the military and administrative expenses of the province and remit a certain sum (irsaliye) to the central treasury.1 Some also seem to have increased their income through extortion, as noted by several European travelers.2 As the previous chapter showed, given the possibilities of manipulating Baghdad’s distinct geopolitical position, a ­sizable 1 Baghdad, along with Basra, Egypt, Abyssinia, Lahsa, Yemen, Tunus, Trablusgarb, Jazair, was administered in this manner in the seventeenth century. Salih Özbaran, “Some Notes on the Salyane System in the Ottoman Empire as Organised in Arabia in the Sixteenth Century,” Journal of Ottoman Studies 6 (1986): 39–45; Erdinç Gülcü, “Osmanlı İdaresinde Bağdat (1534– 1623)” (PhD diss., Fırat Üniversitesi, 1999), 77. 2 Traveling in 1574, the German botanist Rauwolff (d. 1596) had hinted at the extortion of governors, when he realized that the pasha of Baghdad wanted to “screw a present out of [him].” Some two decades later, the English merchant/ traveler Anthony Sherley (d. circa 1636) also reported that upon arriving in Baghdad the pasha seized their merchandise and returned only half the value of the requisitioned goods. It was also in his four-year post as governor of Baghdad that Ḳadızāde ʿAli Paşa (d. 1616) had acquired such wealth that he had more than three million filoris. The French consul Louis Gédoyn, who reports this, does not mention how the governor had achieved his wealth. Problems of extortion and embezzlement were also noted by the Ottoman bureaucrat Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī (d. 1600), who was appointed as finance minister to Baghdad in 1585–6. On European travelers to Baghdad, see Justin Marozzi, “Of Turks and Travelers,” in Baghdad: City of Peace, City of Blood (London: Allen Lane, 2014): 180–205; Louis Gédoyn, Journal et Correspondance de Gédoyn “le Turc,” consul de France à Alep, 1623–1625, ed. A. Boppe (Paris: Société d’Histoire Diplomatique, 1909), 138; Cornell Fleischer, ­Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa Ali (1541–1600) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 103–04, 120.

group, not necessarily just among the state-­ appointed officials, managed to become affluent; and several of the governors of Baghdad used their wealth to patronize works of architecture. Among these were: Maktul (executed) Ayas Paşa (governor of Baghdad between 1545–1547), Murad Paşa (governor of Baghdad between 1569–1572), Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa (governor of Baghdad between 1574–1576, 1582–1583, 1597–1598), Cigalazade Yusuf Sinan Paşa (governor of Baghdad between 1586– 1589, 1592), and Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa (governor of Baghdad between 1595–6, 1598–1602).3 While the particular location of Baghdad—at a nexus of major trade routes and distant enough from the central powers of both the Ottoman and the Safavid empires—afforded governors and upstarts alike the opportunity to increase their wealth and to showcase that wealth through their patronage, the only two patrons of illustrated manuscripts that we know of in this period are Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa and Çerkes Yusuf Paşa. In the case of the former, it is possible that his patronage extended beyond the two manuscripts that are securely attributed to his name—namely, the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (Collection of Biographies) (Topkapı Palace Museum Library H. 1369, H. 1230) and the Beng u Bāde (Opium and Wine) (Sächsische Landesbibliothek Dresden, Eb. 362). It is likely that an illustrated Dīvān (Compilation) of Baki (d. 1600) was also prepared for this governor.4 3 On the architectural patronage of Ayas Paşa and Murad Paşa see Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 470–71. Hereafter, Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan. 4 See Zeren Tanındı, “Transformation of Words to Images: Portraits of Ottoman Courtiers in the “Diwans” of Bākī and Nādirī,” res: Anthropology and Aesthetics 43 (2003): 131–45. Hereafter, Tanındı, Transformation of Words to Images. On Hasan Paşa’s copy of the Beng u Bāde, see Karin Rührdanz,

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

It is also possible that there were other governors or affluent people that commissioned luxury manuscripts, such as the illustrated Shāhnāma (Book of Kings) (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1486) or the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Garden of Purity) (British Library, Or. 5736).5 By the time Hasan Paşa and Yusuf Paşa were appointed as governors to Baghdad, the broader frontier region of Basra and Baghdad had been beset by a number of uprisings. The years leading up to the rekindling of war between the Ottomans and the Safavids in 1603 and the Safavid conquest of Baghdad showed signs of unease and both Hasan Paşa and Yusuf Paşa, among others, had to face rebellions in this region. As the previous chapter noted, the frontiers of both the Ottoman and Safavid empires afforded would-be insurgents and local power-holders a liminal geopolitical space from which to wrangle and agitate for regional control. However, the last decade of the sixteenth century in particular and the first few years of the seventeenth century were also a time of much lively cultural and artistic production, particularly in Baghdad, and it seems that both fostered this boom through their own patronage and further exploited it for gain. This chapter focuses on two texts that were composed for Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa and Çerkes Yusuf Paşa. These texts show similarities in their interest in the affairs of Baghdad and Basra. Yet, “Zwanzig Jahre Bagdader Buchillustrations–Zu Voraussetzungen und Spezifik eines Zweiges der Türkischen Miniaturmalerei,” in Mittelalterliche Malerei im Orient (Halle (Saale): Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberd, 1982), 143–59 and idem, “Islamische Miniaturhandschriften aus Beständen der ddr—iv. Illustrationen zu Fuduli’s “Bang wa Bade,”” Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift, Gesellschafts und SprachwissenschaftlicheReihe27(1978):107–14. 5 Three dispersed leaves (presently in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, No. 539.69, 622.69, 903.69) from the first volume of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ can also be attributed to Baghdad based on style. On these leaves see Rachel Milstein, “Nimrod, Joseph and Jonah: Miniatures from Ottoman Baghdad,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 1 (1987): 123–38.

27 the manuscripts are radically different in terms of size and scope. Among the corpus of texts that were illustrated in Baghdad, the two texts that were composed for Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa and Yusuf Paşa are new and unique works. Both were composed and illustrated in Baghdad. Appearing at a moment when non-royal patronage was becoming widespread at the Ottoman court, as well as a period of lively art production in the province of Baghdad, the works commissioned by the two governors portray different forms of illustrating power.6 The multi-volume universal history Camiʿü’s-Siyer, which portrays Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa almost like a sultan contrasts sharply with the short, rather personal account of Yusuf Paşa’s travels from Istanbul to Baghdad and Basra, and his deeds in and around Basra.7 While Hasan Paşa’s illustrated universal history plays on the idea of courtly universal histories and genealogies that presented the reigning sultan as the epitome and culmination of all history, Yusuf Paşa’s traveloguecum-campaign logbook is a modest work that nonetheless seeks to highlight the vizier’s piety as well as his audacity in handling various local uprisings in Basra. Hasan Paşa’s universal history was composed by Muhammad Tahir el-Sıddıki al-Najibi al-Suhrawardi, who was a member of the governor’s household.8 Yusuf Paşa’s travelogue, likewise, 6 On non-royal patronage in the late sixteenth century, see Emine Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013). Hereafter, Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court. 7 On Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s patronage, see Tülün Değirmenci, “Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padişahlık Rüyası: Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa ve Resimli Dünya Tarihi,” The Journal of Ottoman Studies 49 (2017): 171–203. Hereafter, Değirmenci, Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padişahlık Rüyası; Melis Taner, “Caught in a Whirlwind: Painting in Baghdad in the Late Sixteenth-Early Seventeenth Centuries” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2016), 164–212. Hereafter, Taner, Caught in a Whirlwind. On his career see Erhan Afyoncu, “Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa,” Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 37 (Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2006): 366–68. Hereafter, Afyoncu, Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa. 8 I have not encountered this author in biographical works. However, from internal evidence we can see that he

28

Chapter 2

was composed by a member of his household—by a poet named Muhlisi.9 Their works are very much a reflection of the hybridity and liveliness of early seventeenth-century Baghdad and convey the sense of tumult and uncertainty that pervaded the region in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. 1

Hasan Paşa’s Universal History

Hasan Paşa had had a long career beginning in the early 1570s. He served as district governor and governor-general in several provinces, including Bosnia, Rumelia, Aleppo, Diyarbekir, Anatolia (in Kütahya), Erzurum, and Damascus. He was among those who received the Safavid embassy bringing the hostage prince Haydar Mirza (d. 1595) as

­ followed the Sufi Suhreverdi path (a Sunni order founded by Żiyaʾ al-Dīn Abuʾl-Najīb as-Suhrawardī (1097–1168) whose luxurious khanqah in Baghdad was built for him by the Abbasid Caliph al-Nasir). In his text, he also states that he was a servant of Ḥasan Paşa, for whom he composed this universal history. 9 Other than the little the author provides us in this account, we do not know much about his life. Cihan Okuyucu tentatively suggests the Istanbulite Hıżır Çelebi as a possible contender. Mentioned in Riyāżī’s (d. 1644) tadhkira, this poet died in Mecca in 1618. While Okuyucu is skeptical about the author’s poetic skills (barring possible scribal errors), the couplet—emphasizing the pleasure of partaking of stimulants—Riyāżī chooses to include as an example of Muhliṣī’s work seems to align with some of the sources Muhliṣī provides, such as the shahrangiz (city-thriller) of Ḥalīlī (d. 1485), who composed his work when he fell in love with a youth from Izmit. In addition, that the Muhliṣī mentioned in Riyāżī’s account died in Mecca also seems to be a possible hint: often Baghdad served as a way station on the way to Mecca. Cihan Okuyucu, “Muhlisiʾnin Çerkes Yusuf Paşaʾnın Basra Valiliği Dolayısı İle Yazdığı Seyahatname,” Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları 67–69 (1990): 115–35, 116. Hereafter, Okuyucu, Muhlisiʾnin Çerkes Yusuf Paşaʾnın Basra Valiliği Dolayısı İle Yazdığı Seyahatname; Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 5a. Hereafter, Turc 127.

a guarantor of the peace treaty signed in 1590 between the Ottoman ruler Murad iii and the Safavid Shah ʿAbbas i (r. 1588–1626). Hasan Paşa was also appointed as commander in several battles, including the Ottoman-Safavid wars of 1578–1590 and the 1596 Eger campaign, during which the historian Peçevi (d. 1650) saw him and noted his striking appearance. Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa had managed to distinguish himself among his peers in the early to mid-1590s; the historian Selaniki (d. circa 1600) remarks on his poise and flair at a 1593 dīvān (council) meeting.10 But it was in Baghdad particularly—at a post that he considered a demotion (discussed further below)—that he came into his own with his patronage of art and architecture. This patronage would affirm his position as vizier and governor. Son of the eminent grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa (d. 1579) and stepson of princess Ismihan Sultan (d. 1585, daughter of Sultan Selim ii, r. 1566–74), Hasan Paşa appears to have embraced his lineage fully through flamboyant display. In Baghdad, observers noted that he proceeded to Friday prayers in sultanic habit and manner. Such behavior was a cause for concern, “lest news of this conduct should incur the sultan’s wrath.”11 As if his stately behavior and showy attire were not enough, the automated, silver, ornamented throne he commissioned when he was

10

Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vols. 1/2, ed. Mehmet İpshirli (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1999), Vol. 1, 315, Vol. 2, 707. Hereafter, Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī; Afyoncu, Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa. 11 İbrāhim Peçevī, Tārīh-i Peçevī (Istanbul: Matbaa-i Amire, 1865–7), 29. Hereafter, Peçevī, Tārīh-i Peçevī. Tülün Değirmenci raises the issue of luxury consumption and clothing in the early modern Ottoman world in her article on Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s illustrated universal history. She sees this as pushing the boundaries of cultural norms. In all respects, Ḥasan Paşa seems to be transgressing certain norms with his appearance and his art patronage and this becomes all the more obvious in his post in Baghdad. Değirmenci, Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padişahlık Rüyası, 178–82.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

governor of Baghdad attracted much attention.12 The ­governor also gifted a silver door for the prayer hall of the Mawlawi shrine in Konya.13 Nazmizade Murtaza (d. circa 1723) further identifies this governor as the patron of the portico of the mosque known as Hasan Paşa Camiʿi in Baghdad.14 The Portuguese traveler Pedro Teixeira (d. 1641) attributes a new ditch, market, khan, and coffeehouse in the city to Hasan Paşa.15 One anonymous petition, in which the petitioner complained about the dormancy of his own khan while merchants were routed to Hasan Paşa’s khan, also corroborates Hasan Paşa’s architectural patronage in Baghdad, as well as the lucrativeness of such institutions.16 In Baghdad, Hasan Paşa appears to have found fertile ground for his architectural and artistic patronage.17 Among his commissions, including a finely illustrated manuscript of the Beng u Bāde of Fuzuli, the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer composed by Muhammad Tahir stands out in its volume and ambition. 12 Ibid. 13 Serpil Bağcı, “Seyyid Battal Gazi Türbesiʾnin Gümüş Kapısı Üzerine Bazı Gözlemler,” in 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi: Bildiriler, 23–27 Eylül 1991 (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1995), 225–38; Mehmet Yusufoğlu, “Gümüş Kapı,” Anıt ½ (1949): 4–6. 14 Mehmet Karataş, ed. Nazmi-zade Murteza: Gülşen-i Hulefā (Bağdat Tarihi, 762–1717) (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2014), 193. Hereafter, Naẓmīzāde Murtaża, Gülşen-i Hulefā. 15 Pedro Teixeira, The Travels of Pedro Teixeira; with his ‘Kings of Harmuz,’ and Extracts From his ‘Kings of Persia,’ tr. William F. Sinclair (London: Hakluyt Society, 1902), 61. Hereafter, Pedro Teixeira, The Travels of Pedro Teixeira. 16 The anonymous petitioner complains that while merchants coming from Basra and its surroundings (presumbly the Indian Ocean as well) would bring the goods and indigo to his khan where they would be taxed, they were routed to Hasan Paşa’s khan instead. İbnüʾl Emin EV 5.610. 17 These are: Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Süleymaniye Ktb. Fatih 4321) dated 1002 (1593/4); Nafahāt al-Uns (Chester Beatty Library T. 474) dated 1003 (1594/1595); three Silsilenāmes (two are at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1521 and H. 1324, and one at the Chester Beatty Library, T. 423) all dated 1006 (1597–8).

29 As the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer has recently been studied by Tülün Değirmenci, and as I also have focused on this work elsewhere, I will provide a brief o­ verview of it here.18 This work of Muhammad Tahir— preserved today in two separate and incomplete volumes at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (H. 1369, H. 1230)—consists of six “books” (daftar). The first book begins with the creation of the universe. This is followed by stories of prophets, preIslamic philosophers and dynasties. Next are the stories of the Prophet Muhammad, his companions, and the martyrdom of Imams Hasan (d. 670) and Husayn (d. 680). The next two books are on the rise and fall of the Umayyad dynasty. The sixth book covers the Abbasids and other contemporary dynasties, and the Mongols and Ilkhanids following the fall of the Abbasids in 1258. According to an index provided in H. 1369, there was meant to be a concluding section on Hasan Paşa’s governorship in Baghdad. This structure mimics courtly universal histories that begin with the Creation and end with the reigning sultan. With its universal scope, the book as a whole—together with the paintings (six complete paintings in H. 1369 with further planned paintings, nine in H. 1230)—represents the grandiose vision of Hasan Paşa as the culmination of history, a point also made by Değirmenci.19 Paralleling the structure of courtly universal histories, Hasan Paşa’s Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer is an ambitious work. Seen together with his career path and his other artistic and architectural patronage, it highlights his lineage and his vizierial role. I would add to Değirmenci’s apt analysis of this work—which sees art patronage as a political tool—and suggest that the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer is also very much rooted in the local, in both the history and the present of early seventeenth-century Baghdad. With its universal scope and focus on several important viziers through history, Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer is a bold statement of 18 Değirmenci, Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padishahlık Rüyası; Taner, Caught in a Whirlwind, 164–212. 19 Değirmenci, Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padishahlık Rüyası, 197.

30

Chapter 2

legitimacy. After introductory accolades, the text in H. 1369 quickly turns to the praiseworthy qualities of the grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa, especially his tact and acuity in disguising the death of Sultan Süleyman (r. 1520–66) during the Szigetvár campaign in Hungary in 1566.20 A portrayal of the meeting of Süleyman and the grand vizier is shown in the first painting (fig. 1). The unfinished painting depicts the sultan seated on a throne and Sokollu Mehmed Paşa standing before him with his hands clasped. This painting comes at a critical point in the text, where Süleyman asked Sokollu Mehmed Paşa about the state of Szigetvár. Immediately below the painting, the author notes that when the battle gained intensity, the ruler fell ill and his condition worsened.21 The author highlights the grand vizier’s acute judgment in concealing the ruler’s condition until the fortress was captured and prince Selim, soon to be Selim ii, was notified. Using the common reference of the good judgment of Asaf, the vizier of the Old Testament prophet Solomon, the author exalts Sokollu Mehmed Paşa as the grand vizier of Sultan Süleyman. The importance of the Szigetvár campaign is further attested in the illustrated histories commissioned by ­Sokollu, who was also an important patron of art.22 The inclusion of this particular detail enhances Hasan Paşa’s role as the patron of this illustrated history and reinforces his patrilineal links. Muhammad Tahir writes that “as previously, the sultan [Murad iii, r. 1574–95] handed the keys of the treasury and rule to the cautious hands of that grand vizier with great respect.”23 The grand vizier, in turn, gave his all in “meeting all commands, replenishing the treasury and the army and m ­ ending

20 21 22

23

H. 1369, fol. 4a–5b. Ibid., fols. 6a–b. On Sokollu’s patronage of illustrated histories and the particular importance of the Szigetvár campaign, see Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court, especially Chapter 3. H. 1369., fol. 8b.

the state.”24 Without sparing too many words on the ruler, the author turns to the grand vizier’s assassination. He likens the assassination to what befell the companions of the Prophet M ­ uhammad, comparing Sokollu’s assassin to Ibn Muljam, the assassin of Caliph ʿAli. This is a potent metaphor that stresses the eminence of the grand vizier. Following an elegy for Sokollu Mehmed Paşa, the author then introduces his son Hasan Paşa, the patron of the history. Mirroring Selim ii and Murad iii’s entrustment of governance to Sokollu Mehmed Paşa, the newly enthroned Mehmed iii (r. 1595–1603) appoints Hasan Paşa as commander on the western front.25 Muhammad Tahir notes Hasan Paşa’s closeness to the sultan during the Eger campaign in 1596. Following an ornate account of the success of the Ottomans, the author turns to Hasan Paşa’s victory in subduing the rebellious Bedouins in the Lahsa and Basra region. Muhammad Tahir writes that “some bandits appeared in the vicinity of Baghdad and caused disorder in the cities and blockaded the paths of the people and looted the possessions of merchants and caravans.”26 One of these bandits was Sayyid Mubarak (d. 1616–7), the chieftain of the Shiʿi Mushaʿshaʿ tribe.27 The extremist Shiʿi Mushaʿshaʿ tribe had, since the first half of the fifteenth century, great influence in Basra, and was nominally subjected to the Safavids.28 Sayyid Mubarak had pledged 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid., fols. 10b–11a. 26 Ibid., fol. 13a. 27 On Sayyīd Mubārak, see Rudi Matthee, “Relations Between the Center and the Periphery in Safavid Iran: The Western Borderlands v. the Eastern Frontier Zone,” Historian (2015): 431–63; also by the same author, “Between Arabs, Turks and Iranians: The Town of Basra, 1600–1700,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies: University of London 69 (2006): 53–78. Hereafter, Matthee, Between Arabs, Turks and Iranians. 28 Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vol. 2, 745, 822, 828; Pietro della Valle, Viaggi di Pietro Della Valle Il Pellegrino con Minuto Ragguaglio di Tutte le Cose Notabiliti Osservate in Essi: Discritti da lui Medesimo in 54 Lettere Familiari (Rome, Appresso Vitale Mascardi, 1650), 705–06.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

a­ llegiance to Shah ʿAbbas i and had even sent his son Sayyid Nasir (d. 1617) to the Safavid court as a sign of his deference.29 His allegiance with the Safavid shah was even noted by Ganizade Nadiri (d. 1626–7) in his Şehnāme (Book of Kings) dedicated to the deeds of the Ottoman ruler Osman ii (r. 1618–22).30 Sayyid Mubarak’s acts of pillaging in the areas of Basra, Lahsa, and Baghdad, where he and his bandits looted the goods of travelers and merchants was widely known at the time.31 News of Sayyid Mubarak had also reached Faizi (d.  1595), third poet-laureate at the court of the Mughal emperor Akbar (r. 1556–1605), while traveling in Ahmednagar in the early 1590s. Indeed, the author of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer also notes that Sayyid Mubarak caused such fear that travelers and merchants from India and Iran were not able to travel. Sayyid Mubarak caught the attention of European travelers as well. Pedro Teixeira, who was traveling to Basra in 1604, writes that “Mombarek, son of Motelob [ʿAbd al-Muttalib]” held the northern plains of the Shatt al-ʿArab.32 Pietro della Valle (d. 1652), writing in 1616, notes Mubarak’s antagonism toward the governors of Baghdad and Basra.33 Particularly, Basra’s location at the fringes of both the Ottoman and Safavid empires was a particular feature by which local chieftains, such as Sayyid Mubarak, could hope to enhance their

29

30

31 32 33

Hereafter, Pietro della Valle, Viaggi di Pietro Della Valle; Tarik Nafi Hamid, “The Political, Administrative and Economic History of Basra Province” (PhD diss., Victoria University of Manchester, 1980), 5. Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great (Tārīkh-i ʿAlam-ārā-yi ʿAbbāsī), tr. Roger Savory (Boulder: Westview Press, 1978–1986), Book 2, 1130. Hereafter, Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great. Ġanizāde Nādirī, Şehnāme-i Nādirī, Bibliothèque nationale de France Supplément turc 160, fol. 52a. For a recent thesis on this work see Özlem Yıldız, “The Sultan and His Commanders: Representations of Ideal Leadership in the Şehname-i Nadiri” (MA Thesis, Sabancı University, 2017). Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vol. 2, 745, 822, 828. Pedro Teixeira, The Travels of Pedro Teixeira, 26. Pietro della Valle, Viaggi di Pietro Della Valle, 705.

31 power. Both Hasan Paşa and, as we will see, Yusuf Paşa struggled with the periodic raids of this Mushaʿshaʿ chieftain. While Sayyid Mubarak was not able to take Basra, his control over Huwaiza and the marshes near Basra, disrupted trade, blocking the Indian Ocean trade through the Persian Gulf. Until his death Sayyid Mubarak maintained control beyond Basra, and was “said to have maintained secret contact with Basra’s Arab population, playing on anti-Turkish or at least antiOttoman sentiments among them.”34 After Sayyid Mubarak’s death, his brother Sayyid Mansur, and later his son Sayyid Muhammad, were appointed as rulers of Huwaiza, pointing to the near hereditary rule in the broader border zones.35 In the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, it is at the point of the Hasan Paşa’s charge against Sayyid Mubarak that a design for a painting appears (fig. 2). This shows Mehmed iii seated on a throne. Facing the ­sultan—in the privileged audience given in his private residential quarters, rather than the ordinary hall in which private audiences were granted—is presumably Hasan Paşa.36 Like the first painting, this design appears at a crucial moment in the text in which Hasan Paşa was chosen by the sultan “after much serious thought and consideration” as the only official who could reclaim the region.37 He was thus sent to Baghdad and, “like the sun of felicity, the lustrous rays of [his] magnificence 34 Matthee, Between Turks, Arabs and Iranians, 60. 35 Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great, Book 2, 1234. 36 Stylistically the first unfinished painting and this underdrawing do not appear to be made in Baghdad. At least their style differs from the idiosyncratic Baghdad style paintings. Note, for example, the taller, thinner turbans and elongated figures. While any ­intermediary provenance is not known until the late eighteenthcentury inscription—the front flyleaf of H. 1369 contains a note of ownership with the date 1742/3 and the name of Küçük el-Ḥacc Meḥmed ibn Küçük Ḥacı ʿAli Aġa from the Bazarbeyli district of Dimetoka—these underdrawings appear not to have been executed later than the rest of the paintings. 37 H. 1369, fol. 14a.

32

Chapter 2

Figure 1

Meeting of grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa and Süleyman i before the siege of Szigetvár. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 6a

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 2

Meeting of vizier Hasan Paşa and Mehmed iii. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 13a

33

34 destroyed the darkness of tyranny; and the flashing light of his sanguinary sword broke the necks of the enemy. The blackness of sedition was routed from the great city. He brought the province from disorder to calm.”38 While Hasan Paşa’s successes at the Eger campaign are also highlighted in the text, it is this particular achievement in Baghdad, which gets illustrated, for it was on that occasion, according to the text, that Hasan Paşa was sent to Baghdad.39 Despite Hasan Paşa’s grander ambitions than a governorship of Baghdad, such a choice is a notable act of legitimacy. The author’s focus on sedition is all the more crucial in not only highlighting Hasan Paşa’s valor and control but also in pointing to the immediate struggles in Baghdad, where he composed the work. The potency of this drawing is further enhanced through textual and visual parallels with the first drawing of the manuscript. Specifically, both depict privileged private meetings between the ruler and his vizier and appear at moments of investiture, in which the grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa and his son, the Governor Hasan Paşa, show their courage against the enemy on either front of the empire. The drawings and the similar wording used to describe the grand vizier and the governor establish links between father and son. They are not just distinguished among their peers but also show efficacy in dealing with the enemies. After a lengthy account of Sokollu Mehmed’s acuity and Hasan Paşa’s valor in subduing the Mushaʿshaʿ chieftain, the author then turns to the purpose of the composition. He writes that Hasan Paşa wished to know the histories of the first four caliphs and the deeds of rulers in the ­Turkish language.40 He is careful to note that—while the governor was learned in Arabic and ­Persian—those 38 Ibid. 39 Similarly, Kātip Çelebi notes the uprising of Sayyīd Mubārak and the appointment in 1598 of Ḥasan Paşa to subdue him. Zeynep Aycibin, “Katip Çelebi-Fezleke (Tahlil ve Metin)” (PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi, 2007), 331–32. 40 tpml H.1369, fol., 15b.

Chapter 2

conversing with him would be deprived of conversation if the work were composed in either language. This implies that the text was meant to be read and discussed among the companions/­ attendants of Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, who were not necessarily conversant in Arabic or Persian.41 The resulting work, which is a compilation and translation of various Persian and Arabic sources, is titled Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer. The broad scope of this first “volume”—in fact, the books beginning with the Creation and ending with the Abbasids—was to be enhanced by more than thirty additional planned paintings.42 41 Değirmenci, Bir Osmanlı Paşasının Padişahlık Rüyası, 192. 42 A proem before the beginning of the first chapter gives an account of the creation of the firmament and the earth. A painting was planned to end the section on the celestial spheres, stations of the moons, the four elements and their effects on natural phenomena. While we do not know what the painting would have looked like, given its placement at the end of the section on the creation of the universe, we may imagine it to be a schematic depiction of the celestial spheres, like that found in the Tomar-ı Hümāyūn (Imperial Scroll) (tpml A. 3599) or the Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh. At the end of the section on the elements space is left (folio 27a) for a painting, which would correspond to the adjacent text on desert winds and the nature of water, fog, and smoke. Following this, the author turns to a brief description of the nature of plants and animals and thus ends the first chapter. The second chapter concerns Old Testament prophets and their contemporaries. This was to include thirteen paintings illustrating the stories of the prophets as well as another painting portraying the story of the death of Socrates (folio 134a). While these paintings were also not executed, several of the scenes that were meant to have paintings can be encountered in the Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh and Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ manuscripts. These include scenes from the story of Noah’s ark (folio 36a); Saleh and the camel (folio 40a); Gabriel in the pit with Joseph (folio 51b); Joseph’s imprisonment (folio 56b); Khidr taking the life of a young boy whose parents were believers (folio 72b); Moses helping women water their flocks (folio 80b) and his challenge before the magicians (folio 85b); Saul ordering his army not to drink from the water of the river (folio

35

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

­ nfortunately, H. 1369 is ­incomplete and the only U completed paintings (figs. 3a–e) belong to the section on pre-Islamic Persian kingdoms—in other words, the heroes of the Shāhnāma. Among the numerous choices for illustration of these Shāhnāma heroes, those in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer are, interestingly relatively rarely illustrated, including: the battle between Afrasiyab and Zav (appearing at a moment when Afrasiyab’s army is defeated by the Iranian army of Zav) (fol. 146b), Alexander receiving the ruler of China (fol. 162b); Bahram Gur hunting in India (fol. 178b);43 the death of Nushzad at the hands of Ram Barzin (fol. 252a); and Farrukh Hurmuzd killed on the orders of Azarmidukht (fol. 260a).44

43

44

97a); Solomon enthroned (folio 103a); Bilqis (Queen of Sheba) at Solomon’s palace (folio 109b); Jonah and the whale (folio 118a); birth of Christ (folio 126a) and the infant Christ speaking (folio 127a). In addition to these, the following sections were to include: paintings representing the Battle of Qadisiyya between the Muslim Arab and the Sassanid Persian armies (folios 215a, 235a); a painting representing the story of Mürsed ibn-i Külal and the girl who interpreted his dream (folio 273b); a painting representing the story of the encounter between Fatima bint Murr al-Hasʿamiyye and ʿAbdullah bin ʿAbd al-Muttalib (folio 386b); paintings representing battles between Imam ʿAli and Muʾawiya (folios 395b, 404b, 413b, 420a, 428b, 451a); the execution of Abu Salama (folio 549a); the meeting between Abu Muslim and Malik bin al-Haytham (folio 556b); the meeting of caliph Jaʿfar al-Mansur and a former Umayyad officer (folio 564b). While the story of the Sassanid ruler Bahram v (r. 420– 38), also known as Bahram Gur, is popular in Persian literature, particularly in Niẓāmī’s Haft Paykar (The Seven Princesses), Firdawsī’s Shāhnāma, and Amir Khusraw Dihlavī’s Hasht Bihisht (Eight Paradises), the majority of paintings related to the legends surrounding Bahram Gur depict him in the seven pavilions each with a different princess, hunting onagers, hunting with Fitnah, Azadeh or Dilaram, and battling lions to claim his crown. In the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, a different scene was chosen: Bahram Gur battling a massive rogue elephant in India. Like the particular choice of the episode of Bahram Gur killing the elephant, paintings representing the

The final forty-four folios of H. 1369 overlap with the beginning (until the middle of folio 30a) of H. 1230. However, this manuscript also includes a short introduction to this text. H. 1230 begins with the requisite encomium as follows: Discerning and far-sighted minds, whose hearts, like lanterns, shine ever-bright, cannot fail to notice that Muhammad Tahir al-Najibi, the composer of these fragrant writings—may God Almighty grant him success in his endeavor—began writing the second volume after the first volume of the histories on the august and fortunate prophets and caliphs and lofty sultans was completed. [This first work] had been adorned and extended with the name of Sultan Mehmed Khan—may the Merciful support him—center of the celestial spheres, shadow of the creator on earth, crown of the sultans, the fairest of the [living] rulers, king of kings on earth, possessor of the throne of Jam, heir to Solomon, protector of mankind.45 It then takes up the story of the Abbasids. The overlapping section begins with the Abbasid revolution and the reign of the first Abbasid caliph, Abu al-ʿAbbas al-Saffah (r. 750–54) and continues

45

deaths of Nushzad and Farrukh Hurmuzd are rarely illustrated in copies of the Shāhnāma. Nushzad, son of Khusraw i (r. 531–79) and a Christian mother, followed his mother’s faith, which displeased Khusraw i, who wanted to have Nushzad imprisoned. Nushzad then drew an army against his father. The painting shows the moment of Nushzad’s death after his rebellion. While several manuscript copies of the Shāhnāma include paintings of the episode of Nushzad’s death (see several at the database of the Shahnama Project at Cambridge University at http://shahnama.caret.cam. ac.uk/new/jnama/card/cescene:267497321. Last accessed 05/05/2019), the episode of the death of Farrukh Hurmuzd is rare. Farrukh Hurmuzd wanted to marry Azarmidukht, daughter of the Sassanid ruler Khusraw ii (r. 590; 591–628), in order to usurp the Sassanid throne. Unable to refuse him, Azarmidukht, instead, had him killed. tpml H. 1230, fol. 1b.

36

Chapter 2

Figure 3a Battle between Afrasiyab and Zav. Cāmiʿü’s-siyer

Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 146b

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 3b Alexander receiving the ruler of China. Cāmiʿü’s-siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 162b

37

38

Chapter 2

Figure 3c Bahram Gur hunting an elephant in India. Cāmiʿü’s-siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 178b

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 3d Nushzad killed in battle with Ram Barzin. Cāmiʿü’s-siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 252a

39

40

Chapter 2

Figure 3e Farrukh Hurmuzd killed at the orders of Azarmidukht. Cāmiʿü’s-siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, fol. 260a

41

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

until the beginning of the caliphate of Harun alRashid (r. 786–809). While this overlapping section was intended to have three paintings in H. 1369, these scenes are not selected for illustration in H. 1230. Instead, the first painting in H. 1230 shows the meeting of the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid (fig. 4) and his ­influential vizier Yahya b. Khalid (d. 806) of the Barmakid family. Even though toward the end of Harun al-Rashid’s reign the Barmakid family of viziers fell into disgrace, in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer the meeting of the caliph and the vizier appears at the moment when the latter is at the peak of his powers, having been “given the reigns of governance, and his sons given high rank and distinguished among [their] peers.”46 The painting depicts the caliph Harun al-Rashid, dressed in black with a historical sensitivity to the typical color of Abbasid caliphal attire. He sits cross-legged on a cushion and faces the v­ izier, who sits kneeling on the rug before the caliph. A youth, dressed in yellow and red, stands to the right, hands clasped before him. Others, including a dark-skinned, white-bearded man, sit around the caliph and the vizier, on either side of a water fountain. A youth wearing a wide ogival-patterned, brocaded white garment—a design typical of Ottoman silk brocade textiles at that time and often encountered in Baghdad paintings (also see fig. 3e)—stands right outside the enclosure as a darkskinned attendant peaks out from behind the curtains. A portly, mustachioed man, wearing a ­turban with a peacock feather aigrette, stands outside the enclosure, in the garden. The dark greens, the many flowers in the garden and the figures with almond-shaped eyes, squat figures with large turbans, are typical of contemporary Baghdad paintings, and appear in single-page paintings as well, discussed in Chapter 3. The second painting (fig. 5) in this manuscript portrays the Abbasid caliph al-Mutawakkil (r. 847–61) in discussion with a stocky, bearded man. The latter is depicted in profile, with open 46

Ibid., fols. 33a–33b.

hands gesturing toward the caliph. Two attendants stand on the left, one of them holding the caliph’s sword. Four men stare out from the gateway; two of them, on either side of a portly, dark-skinned man, look directly at the viewer, a feature often encountered in contemporary paintings from Baghdad. Right outside the caliph’s palace are several Jews and Christians, depicted here as contemporary Europeans. A turbaned attendant dressed in red holds one by the wrist and points toward him. From the upturned hands of the caliph and the man facing him to the figures in the garden, there is a sense of animated conference. Such interaction, often portrayed through gestures, facial expressions, and gazes, is also a common aspect of paintings from Baghdad during this time. This painting represents al-Mutawakkil’s imposition of sumptuary laws on the Jews and Christians in 850. That this particular scene was chosen for illustration may reflect the recency of imposition of sumptuary laws on Jews and Christians by the Ottoman ruler Murad iii, wherein Jews were ordered to wear red, instead of saffron-­colored, headgear.47 This is also the context in which the 47

Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī writes in the Künhüʾl Ahbār that the sultan’s imam, who is not named in the text, but whom Selānikī identifies as Mevlānā ʿAbdüʾl Kerīm (d. 1593– 94), was responsible for the sumptuary laws ordering Jews and other non-Muslims to put on red caps instead of “sky colored” and saffron-yellow turbans. Cemal Kafadar adds that among the imam’s arguments for strict regulations on non-Muslims’ headgear was that they drove up the price of muslin. See Cemal Kafadar’s dissertation for an outline of the events leading up to the 1589 execution of governor-general of Rumeli, Doğancı Meḥmed Paşa as well as the negative treatment of the Jewish population and the execution of the wealthy Jewish woman Esther Kira. On various sumptuary laws regarding non-Muslims in the sixteenth century see Ahmet Refik, On Altıncı Asırda Istanbul Hayatı (1553–1591) (Istanbul: Devlet Basımevi, 1935), especially 47, 51–52. Refik includes an order dated 23 Rajab 988 (3 September 1580) denoting that Jews must wear red headgear. This date corresponds to what is most likely a date given in Taqī Awḥadī’s account.

42

Chapter 2

Figure 4

Caliph Harun al-Rashid and Yahya b. Khalid Barmaki. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 33a

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 5

Caliph al-Mutawakkil ordering the Jews to put on distinct garments. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 54b

43

44

Chapter 2

poet Fazli wrote his “impertinent verse.” We will see that the headgear of the Shiʿi rebels in the account of Yusuf Paşa’s deeds in Basra is also likened to that of the Jews.48 While the first painting in this Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer manuscript highlighted the vizier of the caliph Harun al-Rashid and the second painting presented a somewhat murky view of al-Mutawakkil, the following two paintings that appear in H. 1230, interestingly enough, represent moments of defeat for the Abbasid caliphs. One of these (fig. 6) depicts the severed head of the caliph al-Muqtadir (r. 908–32) brought before his commander Munis al-Muzaffar (d. 933). The latter had been commander-in-chief during the reign of caliph al-Muʿtadid (r. 892–902) and later of al-Muqtadir; he had been influential in quelling a palace coup against the latter in 908.49 While two decades later Munis was to confront the ­caliph—this defeat of the caliph is illustrated in the ­manuscript—the author does not necessarily cast the commander in a negative light. Instead, he voices Munis’ indignation at the beheading of the caliph without his knowledge. The following painting (fig. 7) depicts yet another defeat: this time of the last Abbasid caliph, al-Musʿtasim Billah (r. 1242–58). In a relatively

48 49

Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Künhüʾl Ahbār, Dördüncü Rükn, 1599. Facsimile edition (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2009), 519b–520a, and Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, 348; Cemal Kafadar, “When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew and Bankers Became Robbers of Shadows: The Boundaries of Ottoman Economic ­Imagination at the End of the Sixteenth Century” (PhD diss., McGill University, 1986), 79, 107, 130. Turc 127, fol. 22b. On the role and influence of Munis in Abbasid administration see Ihsan Arslan, “Abbasi Devletiʾndeki Komutanların Siyasi ve İdari Sahalarda Etkileri, Munisüʾl Muzaffer Örneği (The Influence of the Commanders in the Abbasid State on the Political and Administrative Fields, the Example of Munisüʾl Muzaffer),” The Journal of International Social Studies 26 (2013): 57–76; Kennedy, The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates (London: Pearson, 2004), 191; tpml H. 1230, fols. 68b–69a.

short account, the author writes that this caliph had great wealth, property, splendid fabrics, gold and silver coins, and that his name was voiced in the khutba (Friday sermon) in the east and west. After this brief introduction, the author turns to a year-by-year account of his reign, in which there was an outbreak of the plague, flooding of the Tigris, and finally the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258. The painting shows the Mongol Ilkhanid ruler Hulagu Khan seated on a throne inside a tent. The Ilkhanids are portrayed with sensitivity to their particular headgear and Mongolian features. On the lower left, two officers of the army are beheading prisoners, whose severed heads and decapitated corpses lie on the ground. On the right, the caliph and his sons stand with their hands clasped. They are dressed in ceremonial black garments. Muhammad Tahir ends his account on the Abbasid caliphate with a brief overview of alMustaʿsim’s length of life and rule and a Persian poem regarding the names of the Abbasid caliphs.50 Interestingly, in several cases it is the role of the vizier or commander—rather than the Abbasid caliph—that is highlighted. This may be a subtle commentary on the role Hasan Paşa wished to claim for himself through his patrilineal link. While the second volume of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer is devoted to the Abbasids and their contemporaries, the history of the caliphate is not necessarily pictured in an overly positive light. The text itself is more or less neutral throughout but the images that are chosen focus more on relations between caliph and vizier. Following the history of the Abbasid caliphate, the author then offers an account of the imams of the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. Of 50

This poem, whose author is not named in the Cāmiʿü’sSiyer is by Hindushah Nakhjuvani. See Louise Marlow, “Teaching Wisdom: A Persian Work of Advice for Atabeg Ahmad of Luristan,” in Mirror for the Muslim Prince: Islam and the Theory of the Statecraft, ed. Mehrzad Boroujerdi (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2013), 122–60.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 6

The Head of al-Muqtadir brought before Munis. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 70a

45

46

Chapter 2

Figure 7

The last Abbasid caliph and his sons before Hulagu Khan. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 87a

47

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

these, the Baghdadi Abu Hanifa is distinguished through a more detailed narrative as the founder of the Hanafi legal school adhered to by the Ottomans. Next, the author presents the story of various shaykhs, some of whom were buried in Baghdad. Among them, ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Gilani (d.  1166), Ziya al-Din Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi (d. 1168), Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi (d. 1191), Bahaʾ al-Din Walad (d. 1231), Shams-i Tabrizi (d. 1248), and Farid al-Din ʿAttar (d. 1220) are highlighted with more detailed accounts. Paintings of ʿAbd alQadir al-Gilani (fig. 8), Bahaʾ al-Din Walad (fig. 9) and Shams-i Tabrizi (fig. 10) are included, indicating these shaykhs were held in particular esteem. The author notes that ʿAbd al-Qadir, who was originally from Gilan, went to Baghdad at a young age to acquire religious learning. Upon his death, his father had bequeathed eighty dinars, which were divided between ʿAbd al-Qadir and his brother. Their mother had sewn ʿAbd al-Qadir’s share of his inheritance into his quilt and sent him off to Baghdad, admonishing him to always be truthful. When the convoy he joined passed from Hamadan, they were accosted by a group of bandits. The bandits looted the merchandise of the convoy and then asked ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Gilani if he had any possessions, to which he replied saying he had forty dinars sewn in his quilt. Not believing him, the bandits took him to their leader. He repeated the same reply, and his money was found. This took the bandits by surprise and when they remarked that he could have kept this a secret, the young ʿAbd al-Qadir told them that his mother had warned him to always speak the truth.51 The scene that is here depicted is of the bandits repenting (fig. 8). ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Gilani—founder of the Qadiriyya order in Baghdad—was certainly an influential figure in the Abbasid capital, where he was eventually buried near his shrine, restored soon after the Ottoman Sultan Süleyman conquered Baghdad from the Safavids.52 Throughout ­Muhammad 51 52

H. 1230, fol. 106b–108b. Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton and Oxford:

Tahir’s account, there is a notable emphasis on the history of Baghdad and figures from, or based in, Baghdad, as well as references to sources from Baghdadi authors. Thus, it comes as no surprise that ʿAbd al-Qadir is highlighted with both a more detailed story and a painting. The anecdote of ʿAbd al-Qadir and the bandits paints a picture of the leader of the Qadiriyya order as a man with integrity and who can inspire even the vilest bandits to repentance. Given the context in which Hasan Paşa was appointed to Baghdad, this particular figure, who was also of great importance to Baghdad, is an apt exemplar for the governor to follow. Similarly, it is no surprise that Ziya al-Din Abu al-Najib al-Suhrawardi and Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi—to whose Suhrawardiyya Sufi order the author belonged—play a prominent role in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer. However, the particular episode of the bandits’ repentance may also have to do with the context in which Muhammad Tahir composed his universal history. The introduction to his Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer situated the patron’s appointment to Baghdad in the context of the Celali u ­ prisings— one such rebellion would eventually lead to Hasan Paşa’s death. The next two paintings portray Bahaʾ al-Din Walad (d. 1231), the father of Mawlana Rumi (d. 1273), who is preaching just before leaving Balkh (fig. 9); and Bahaʾ al-Din Walad’s son Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi meeting Shams-i Tabrizi (d. 1248) in Konya (fig. 10). Both paintings reflect contemporary interest in the deeds of Mawlana Rumi and the Sufi mystics. The Mawlawi order of dervishes—with its headquarters based in central Anatolia, at Konya—was in fact represented by a network of interdependent Mawlawi convents built in the capitals of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire, including ­Damascus, Aleppo, and Cairo. There was also a Mawlawi convent in Baghdad.53 The deeds of Rumi

53

Princeton University Press, 2005), 470. Hereafter, Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan. Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 2–3; Justin Marozzi, Baghdad: City of Peace, City

48

Chapter 2

Figure 8

Abd al-Qadir Gilani and the bandits. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer

Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 107b

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 9

Baha al-Din Walad preaching. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer

Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 112a

49

50

Chapter 2

Figure 10 Mawlana meeting Shams-i Tabrizi. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer

Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 121a

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

were popularized in Baghdad in the late sixteenth century, with illustrated copies of Aflaki’s Manāqib al-ʿĀrifīn (Merits of the Mystics), Derviş Mahmud Mesnevihan’s Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb (Translation of Stars of Legends),54 Jami’s Nafahāt alUns (Breaths of Intimacy), as well as Mawlana’s Mathnawī-yi Maʿnawī (Moral Poetry) produced in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. It has been suggested that members of the Mawlawi order were potential buyers of illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad.55 Hasan Paşa’s support of the order can also be evinced from his gifting of the silver door to the convent in Konya. The paintings in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer further support this. Following an account of the Abbasid caliphate and contemporary shaykhs and ulema, Muhammad Tahir then focuses on the contemporaries of

54

55

of Blood, 187–88; Filiz Çağman, “xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen Bir Minyatür Okulu,” in i. Milletlerarası Türkoloji Kongresi (Istanbul: Tercüman Gazetesi, 1979): 662–63. Hereafter, Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen bir Minyatür Okulu; Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, “The Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire,” in Sufism and Sufis in Ottoman Society, ed. Ahmet Yaşar Ocak (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2005), 501–31, 523; ʿAlī Enver, Semāhāne-i Edeb (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2013), 199–20; Sāḳıb Dede, Sefīne-i Nefīse-i Mevlevīyān, Vol. 2 (Bulak, 1283), 185; Naẓmīzāde Murtaża, Gülşen-i Hulefā, 194; Clément Huart, Histoire de Bagdad dans les Temps Modernes (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1901), 46; Richard Coke, Baghdad: The City of Peace (London: Butterworth, 1927), 193; ʿAbbās al-Azzawī, Tārīkh al-ʿIrāq, Vol. 4 (Baghdad: Maṭbaʿat Baghdād, 1935–49), 129–30; Erdinç Gülcü, “Osmanlı İdaresinde Bağdat (1534–1623)” (PhD diss., Fırat Üniversitesi, 1999), 195; Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, Mevlanadan Sonra Mevlevilik (Istanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1953), 334–35. Evliyā Çelebi, Seyahatname Vol. iv, 239. For a recent study on the illustrated manuscripts of the Manāqib al-ʿĀrifīn and Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, see Hesna Haral, “Osmanlı Minyatüründe Mevlanaʾnın Yaşam Öyküsü: Menakıbüʾl Arifin ve Tercüme-i Sevakıb-ı Menakıb Nüshaları” (PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, 2014). Filiz Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergah­ larında Gelişen Bir Minyatür Okulu, 662–63.

51 the Abbasids. This section contains two paintings, as well as a space left for a painting on the Mongol invasions (fol. 210a). One painting portrays a prisoner being paraded with a golden tray and ewer balanced on his head, as was the custom in eleventhcentury Gujarat, illustrating a story of Mahmud of Ghazni’s (r. 1002–30) conquest of ­Somnath temple in 1026 (fig. 70).56 The final p ­ ainting (fig. 11) shows the audience of the young Anatolian (Rum) Seljuk 56 In Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, Rachel Milstein points to the frequent portrayal of Indians and Europeans in Baghdad paintings. In addition to Indian figure types included in a number of manuscripts from Baghdad, tpml H. 1369 and tpml H. 1230 are also interesting in terms of their inclusion of paintings set in India, such as this particular painting, or Bahram Gur Hunting in India. In this painting (H. 1369, fol. 178b), it is also interesting to note that the Indian figures in the background not only appear with darker skin to represent their distinctness, but they are also depicted in an Indian manner. Ottoman-Safavid-Portuguese relations and the important role of Basra and Baghdad in the Indian Ocean trade may have to do with the prevalence of paintings set in India. In another work, Milstein briefly points out similarities between the Hümāyūnnāme (The Imperial Book) and Mughal copies of the Anwar-i Suhaylī (Lights of Canopus). With regards to possible links to India, Milstein also presents the example of an illustrated Yūsuf u Zulaykhā, possibly made in Golconda (Salar Jung Museum in Hyderabad) that is stylistically similar to Baghdad manuscripts. Additionally, she notes that among the group of Majālis al-ʿUshshāq (Assemblies of Lovers) manuscripts generally attributed to Shiraz, several were found in India. Milstein points to the need for further study with regards to connections between Shiraz, Qazvin, India and Iraq. I have not been able to find direct connections yet, except for several comments by the Mughal poet Faizi and Father Paul Simon (see above). Baghdad’s position as an outlet to the Indian Ocean as well as a point of transit trade makes these broad connections likely. Further research will shed light on relations among the Ottomans, the Safavids and the Mughals. For now, my reading of the text of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer at least allows for a more accurate identification of the painting than has been put forth in previous scholarship, and makes a direct connection with Gujarat.

52

Chapter 2

Figure 11 Audience of Kay Khusraw iii and Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 194a

53

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

ruler Kay Khusraw iii (r. 1265–84) and his chief minister Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh (d. 1277). Muʿin alDin Parvaneh was an influential statesman, who orchestrated the murder of Sultan Kilij Arslan iv (r. 1248–65). After giving a brief account of the reigns of the rulers of the Seljuks of Rum and the Mongol invasion of Anatolia, Muhammad Tahir writes that as Kay Khusraw iii was a child at the time of his succession, Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh was given charge of carrying out the affairs of state.57 This echoes how Sokollu Mehmed Paşa and later his son, Hasan Paşa, were also entrusted with carrying out of the affairs of state. Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh’s father Muhadhdhab alDin ʿAli al-Daylami was also a vizier, having served the Seljuk Sultan Kay Khusraw ii (r. 1237–46).58 Given the influence of the father and son in state affairs, this painting emphasizes the role of the vizierial figure, in effect heightening the role of Governor Hasan Paşa in this universal history. The paintings of H. 1230, in particular, emphasize the role of viziers. Yahya b. Khalid Barmaki, of the eminent Barmakid family of viziers, appears at a moment when he was at the height of his power (fig. 4). This painting can be seen along with the first two paintings of H. 1369 (figs. 1–2), which ­represented Sokollu Mehmed Paşa and his son Hasan Paşa in the private audience of the

57 58

Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Baghdad, 45, 65, 86; idem, “From South India to the Ottoman Empire—Passages in 16th Century Miniature Painting,” in 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi, Bildiriler: 23–27 Eylül 1991, Vol. 2 (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1991): 497–506. Also see Giancarlo Casale, The Ottoman Age of Exploration (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). tpml H. 1230, fol. 194a. J.A. Boyle, ed. The Cambridge History of Iran. [Online]. The Cambridge History of Iran. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: Cambridge Histories Online http:dx.doi.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard .edu/10.1017/CHOL9780521069366 [Accessed 24 November 2015]. On Muʿin al-Din Pervaneh see Nejat Kaymaz, Pervāne Muʿinüʾd-Din Süleyman (Ankara: Ankara Üniversite Basımevi, 1970).

s­ultan, highlighting their privileged position. In addition, the rather murky scene of the severed head of the caliph al-Muqtadir brought before the caliph’s commander, Munis, (fig. 6), and the latter’s indignation at the caliph’s murder, as well as the audience of Kay Khusraw iii and Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh (fig. 11) further emphasize the role of the vizier. Together with the text, which focuses on Baghdadi figures, the choice of illustrations, their subject matter, and mode of representation also present a localized view of universal history and highlight the position of the Governor Hasan Paşa. Necipoğlu points to the fact that the historian Peçevi, a relative of the grand vizier, accused Sokollu Mehmed Paşa of nepotism. That Sokollu’s sons, Hasan Paşa and Kurd Kasım Beg (d. 1571), were able to rise to important provincial positions even after the grand vizier’s marriage to the princess Ismihan Sultan shows the grand vizier’s influence in using his position to leverage the posts of his family and clique.59 In the case of Hasan Paşa, his immediate connection to Sokollu Mehmed Paşa is highlighted not only in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (in text and painting) but also in the colophon of Fuzuli’s Beng u Bāde, which remarks that the manuscript was copied for Hasan Paşa, son of Sokollu Mehmed. The small but richly illuminated manuscript with three paintings ends with a note saying it was commissioned on the order of the “great commander and governor of Baghdad Hasan Paşa, son of the deceased grand vizier Mehmed Paşa.”60 In the case of Hasan Paşa, his self-evident credentials, namely his direct connection to Sokollu Mehmed Paşa, and ­tangential 59

On Sokollu Mehmed Paşa’s relation and patronage with the princess İsmihan Sultan, see Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan, 330–45. On the complicated and competitive relations among high-ranking officials and court factions, see Börekçi, Factions and Favorites. 60 Fużūlī, Beng u Bāde, Sächsische Landesbibliothek Dresden, Eb. 362, fol. 28b Also see the illuminated copy of the Tercüme-i Şevahidü’n Nübüvve prepared for this governor in 1599. Hanna Sohrweide, Türkische ­Handschriften, Teil 5 (Verzeichnis der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland) (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1981), 21–2.

54 connection to Ismihan Sultan, make a direct statement of rightful rule. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer and Beng u Bāde are directly connected to Hasan Paşa’s patronage. His patronage of art and architecture can be seen along the lines of the broadening base of patronage in the late sixteenth century, as well as the increasing interest in collecting artworks that Mustafa ʿĀli points out in his Menākıb-ı Hünerverān (Epic Deeds of Artists).61 It is noteworthy that it is in Baghdad that Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s patronage peaks. Having had a more or less successful career, he seemed to consider his appointment to Baghdad a demotion, apparently having fallen out of favor after the Eger campaign. Hasan Paşa was demoted from the governorship of Belgrade, initially to Malkara, presumably to exile, but was able to remain in Istanbul. Following the death of Governor Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa in 1598, he was appointed to Baghdad, likely in an effort to distance him from the court. According to Selaniki, he was loath to go.62 Given the obviously less desirable choice of imprisonment, Hasan Paşa made his way to Baghdad.63 While it is not possible to say whether this had an influence on his extensive patronage (given he was already distinguished among peers), it is clear that he found the means for it in Baghdad, which was already a burgeoning center of art production. Considering the fact that Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa overshadows even his royal-blooded stepbrother Ibrahim Han with his art patronage, it is possible that Hasan Paşa, in a post that he thought unfavorable, nevertheless, found in it the means to exert his authority and legitimacy through art. Among his artistic and architectural patronage, the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, in particular, is a bold and explicit 61

Esra Akın-Kıvanç, Mustafa ʿAli’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); Serpil Bağcı, “Kitap Sanatları ve Mustafa Ali” in Gelibolulu Mustafa Ālī Çalıştayı Bildirileri (28–29 Nisan 2011), ed. İ. Hakkı Aksoyak (Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu, 2014), 25–41. 62 Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vol. 2, 722. 63 Afyoncu, Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa, 367.

Chapter 2

statement of power and legitimacy that is further enhanced by Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s demeanor. 2

The Travels and Deeds of Yusuf Paşa

Compared to Hasan Paşa’s grand visions of his position (as evinced in his universal history), Yusuf Paşa appears to have had more modest ambitions. However, it is interesting that along with Hasan Paşa, Yusuf Paşa is the only other securely known patron of an illustrated manuscript attributed to Baghdad. While differing in scope and ambition, the illustrated manuscript prepared for Yusuf Paşa is also a newly composed work, written for this governor. Yusuf Paşa’s travels are preserved in a unique manuscript (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127).64 The incomplete manuscript contains thirty-nine folios and seven paintings that are stylistically attributable to Baghdad.65 This incomplete account follows the travels of the vizier Çerkes Yusuf Paşa, who left Istanbul in 1602 to Basra and Baghdad, where he was to take up his gubernatorial post in 1605.66 Muhlisi traveled with him. Along the way he took notes of their journey. He later compiled the draft in Baghdad.67 The work in question thus spans a period of three years. It is, as planned by Muhlisi, a personal account that defies straightforward categorization into a certain genre. Rather, the text is an e­ yewitness report by a 64 65

66

67

I was able to only study a microfilm as the manuscript has been missing from the library for over two decades. For a detailed stylistic and iconographic analysis of Baghdad painting in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries see Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad. Cihan Okuyucu has published an introductory study and transcription of the first half of this manuscript. See Okuyucu, Muhlisiʾnin Çerkes Yusuf Paşaʾnın Basra Valiliği Dolayısı İle Yazdığı Seyahatname. More recently a Masters thesis has provided a full transcription of the text and analysis of the paintings. Coşkun Özdemir, “Fransız Milli Kütüphanesinde Bulunan “Sefernāme” (Turc-127) Elyazmasının Minyatürleri” (MA Thesis, Selçuk Üniversitesi), 2014. Turc 127, fol. 3b.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

member of Yusuf Paşa’s household to pay his debt of gratitude and meant to glorify the vizier, who is described as the “Plato of the time; Rustam of the field of war; Hatem-i Taʾi of generosity; Anushirvan of justice.”68 By comparing Yusuf Paşa with such demonstrably wise, ethical, courageous, generous and just figures, the author underscores the vizier’s praiseworthy qualities, to be elaborated further throughout the text. Muhlisi’s work is loosely divided into three parts. The first section deals with the travels of the vizier and his retinue. This is a remarkable and rare early example of an illustrated travelogue. The second section focuses on various uprisings in Basra and the vizier’s courage at quelling them. Unfortunately, this part ends abruptly mid-­sentence, as the manuscript is missing several folios, making it hard, at times, to reconstruct the chain of events. Nevertheless, it sheds light on the power dynamics in and around Basra. The third “section” or supplement/appendix (zayl), now lost, was to focus on the poets of Baghdad and Basra, including samples of their poetry and chronograms. Through this work, we get a rare insight into the life and deeds of Yusuf Paşa. In his reason for composition, Muhlisi addresses the dedicatee as a Circassian, Çerkes Ağa Yusuf Paşa.69 The brief career path provided in Muhlisi’s account suggests he was a court eunuch.70 This is corroborated by his stocky, beardless figure in the illustrations of the Paris manuscript. Hadım (eunuch) Yusuf Paşa had been governor of Van (1598/99) and muhafız (keeper) of Üsküdar (1607/8).71 Between these dates, Yusuf Paşa was sent to Basra and Baghdad, whereby he was also given his vizierial title.72 When Yusuf Paşa arrived in Basra in early 1603, the province had recently been turned over to the control of a 68 Ibid., fol. 3a. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid., fol. 2b. 71 Mehmed Süreyya, Sicill-i Osmani (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 1996), 1698; Mehmet Nermi Haskan, Yüzyıllar Boyunca Üsküdar, Birinci Cilt (Istanbul: Üsküdar Belediyesi, 2001), 37. 72 Turc 127, fol. 2b.

55 local power-holder. The former Ottoman governor of the province, ʿAli Paşa, had sold the government to Afrasiyab, who was to be subordinate to the Ottoman ruler.73 This, incidentally, is the same Afrasiyab that Bekir Subaşı gives as an example of the precedent of independence mentioned in the previous chapter. No mention is made of Afrasiyab, however, in Muhlisi’s text, which focuses on the military successes of Yusuf Paşa. Pedro Teixeira points out that when he and his company arrived in Baghdad in 1604, the recently appointed governor was “called Issuf or Iuçef Paşa, a eunuch, and a Xerquez [Circassian] by birth.”74 Just as the company was about to leave Baghdad, Teixeira writes, the Paşa was given a vizierial title.75 While Yusuf Paşa’s name does not appear in the list of governors of Baghdad provided by the eighteenth-century Baghdadi author Nazmizade Murtaza, Topçular Katibi ʿAbdülkadir (d. circa 1644) mentions that in 1601/2 Hadım Yusuf Paşa was governor of Baghdad.76 He was later appointed, sometime in 1603/4, for the eastern campaign against the Safavids.77 In addition, Mustafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Bağdadi, while not giving a date, mentions that Hadım Yusuf Paşa, who was displaced from Basra and appointed to Baghdad, was stopped by the rebel Tavilzade Muhammed from entering the city.78 Indeed, Tavil Ahmed and his sons had pestered Baghdad since the end of 73 Rudi Matthee, Between Arabs, Turks and Iranians, 59. 74 Teixeira, The Travels of Pedro Teixeira, 70. 75 Ibid. 76 Unfortunately, it is not always possible to pinpoint exact dates of appointment as governors often changed in the region and some served brief periods and some even returned to the same post after a while. Ziya Yılmazer, ed. Topçular Katibi Abdülkadir Efendi Tarihi (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003), 326. Hereafter, Ṭopçular Kātibi ʿAbdülḳādir, Topçular Katibi Abdülkadir Efendi Tarihi. 77 Ibid., 373. 78 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan adds that upon seeing their ferocious acts and the difficulty of requital, Hadım Yusuf Paşa returned to the capital. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıdvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Library Or. 276, fol. 65b.

56

Chapter 2

the sixteenth century and several commanders and governors had been appointed to subdue them. While Muhlisi does not mention Tavilzade Muhammed—the incomplete manuscript lacks an account of Yusuf Paşa’s affairs in Baghdad—the work is replete with stories of rebellions. In fact, Yusuf Paşa’s valor, and especially his relative courage vis-à-vis other governors in quelling rebellions, is continuously highlighted. Given Yusuf Paşa’s rather tenuous hold over Baghdad, his patronage of this illustrated manuscript may have been an attempt to consolidate his position against rebels contending for power, as well as other Ottoman officials vying for power in the region. Thus, Muhlisi’s account paints a commendatory picture of the vizier, whose recognition as governor of Baghdad, seems—according to the mid-seventeenth-­ century history of the city—to have been, at best, contested. Nonetheless, or perhaps because of this, the author highlights the atmosphere of rebellion, the vizier’s valor, and the fleetingness of power. After his return from Baghdad, Yusuf Paşa, among others, was sent in 1608 to Bursa to subdue the rebel Kalenderoğlu.79 We next read of the vizier, several years later when Sultan Ahmed i (r. 1603–17) traveled to Edirne for a hunting trip together with his retinue, which included the grand vizier Nasuh Paşa (d. 1614) and Yusuf Paşa, among others.80 According to the chronicler Topçular Katibi ʿAbdülkadir, Yusuf Paşa—then the sixth-ranking vizier—had

a household of some three hundred members.81 Upon his death in 1614, his vizierate and properties were transferred to Kalender Paşa (d. 1616), the second treasurer and building supervisor of the Sultan Ahmed Mosque.82 While Muhlisi’s text must be read in the context of the Celali uprisings, the author is as much interested in giving an account of the sites they see, in particular, the shrines they visit. This aspect is most evident in the first section of his work. Specifically, the sites and places of visitation along the road from Istanbul to Basra are featured prominently, and a keen interest in visiting ancient or holy sites—in the sense of both paying respect and general sightseeing—is evident. Visiting shrines was very important to Yusuf Paşa as he journeyed toward Basra. Indeed, pilgrimage to shrines is a foremost aspect of travel through Anatolia to the Near East and Arabia as can also be seen in the case of the commander Lala Mustafa Paşa’s (d. 1580) visitation of the tomb of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi in Konya on his way to an eastern campaign.83 Like Lala Mustafa Paşa, Yusuf Paşa visited the shrine of Rumi and took part in the samaʿ (whirling) with the dervishes. This occasion is illustrated by two facing paintings in the manuscript, viewed almost like a doublepage painting. Amidst whirling dervishes wearing tall, brown caps, there joins the beardless Yusuf Paşa, dressed in a yellow and orange garment and

79

81

Mehmet İpşirli, ed. Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, Vol. 2 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2007), 338. Hereafter, Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā. İbrahim Hakkı Çuhadar, ed. Muṣṭafa Sāfiʾnin Zübdetüʾt Tevārīhʾi, Vol. 2 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003), 71. Hereafter, Muṣṭafa Sāfī, Zübdetüʾt Tevārīh; Abdurrahman Sağırlı, “Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rūmī (Edirneli)ʾnin Nuhbetüʾt-Tevārih veʾl-Ahbārʾı ve Tārīh-i Āl-i Osmanʾı (Metinleri, Tahlilleri)” (PhD diss., Istanbul University, 2000), 607. Hereafter, Sağırlı, Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rūmī (Edirneli)ʾnin Nuhbetüʾt-Tevārih veʾlAhbārʾı ve Tārīh-i Āl-i Osmanʾı. 80 Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 338; Muṣṭafa Sāfī, Zübdetüʾt Tevārīh, 152; Sağırlı, Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rūmī (Edirneli)ʾnin Nuhbetüʾt-Tevārih veʾl-Ahbārʾı ve Tārīh-i Āl-i Osmanʾı, 634.

82

83

Ṭopçular Kātibi ʿAbdülḳādir, Topçular Katibi Abdülkadir Efendi Tarihi, 604. It is possible that as a steward at the Porte (ḳapu kethüdāsı) in the early seventeenth century, Kalender had a connection to Yusuf Paşa, a palace eunuch. However, the circumstances of the transfer are not further elaborated. Naʿīmā, Tārīh-i Naʿīmā, 418; Muṣṭafa Sāfī, Zübdetüʾt Tevārīh, 322. On Kalender’s career see Serpil Bağcı, “Presenting Vassāl Kalender’s Works: The Prefaces of Three Ottoman Albums,” Muqarnas (2013): 255–313; Sağırlı, Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rūmī (Edirneli)ʾnin Nuhbetüʾt-Tevārih veʾl-Ahbārʾı ve Tārīh-i Āl-i Osmanʾı, 654. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Künhüʾl Ahbār, fol. 484a.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 12A

Yusuf Paşa taking part in the samaʿ in Konya, Sefernāme Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 7B

57

58

Chapter 2

Figure 12B

Yusuf Paşa praying in Konya, Sefernāme

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 8a

59

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

­ earing a tall, white turban. His attendants obw serve the samaʿ from behind a low, brick wall. The close connection of memory, remembrance, and shrine visitation is solidified in text and image as the architectural edifices are described and depicted, while the author also cautions against the presumptions of permanence.84 The author points out that the city also boasted the shrines of the members of the Seljuk dynasty. On the next page, Yusuf Paşa is depicted praying in the mosque of Rumi’s shrine complex, whose turquoise-painted dome rising from a tall drum and tapering minaret—conveying thus in visual form the holiness of the site—are shown above the text block extending into the upper margin.85 The extension of architectural elements into the upper margin, the tall drum, and the tapering minaret are characteristic of Baghdad painting in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, as can be seen in several other contemporary examples.86 Likewise, the relatively squat figures and the distinctive, tri-lobed turbans are also characteristic of illustrated works produced in Baghdad in this period. Equally important for Yusuf Paşa was the architecture and the tales and myths surrounding it. The author notes that the traveling party viewed the arms and weapons of the warriors and sultans kept in the Konya shrines, which is depicted in the painting as well. Their souls were honored with prayers, and were commended, for “men of this 84 85

Turc 127, fol. 8a. On the ʿAla al-Din Mosque, see Scott Redford, “The Alaeddin Mosque in Konya Reconsidered,” Artibus Asiae 51 (1991): 54–74. 86 For example, see paintings of “Zayn al-ʿAbidin Preaching” in several illustrated manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Garden of the Blessed) (Brooklyn Museum of Art 70.143, fol. 506a and British Library Or. 12009, fol. 269b), or the dispersed page with a painting representing “The Entry of Prince Haydar Mirza” in a Dīvān of Bāḳī (Metropolitan Museum of Art 45.174.5). On this painting see Zeren Tanındı, Transformation of Words to Images, 131–45.

time [were] not capable of using the weapons.”87 According to the text, adjacent to the shrine, there was a mosque like that of Hagia Sophia; in the courtyard, it had two marble columns that were reportedly brought there by the prophet Khidr. Muhlisi adds that in that land a source of water sprung when the Seljuk ruler ʿAla al-Din dropped his ewer, which he used for his ablutions. That source neither overflowed nor diminished. In emulation of his Seljuk predecessor, and no doubt in an act of public propaganda, the vizier performed his ablutions at that source and prayed.88 By performing ritual prayer in these spaces, the vizier was inserting himself into a greater narrative of sanctity. By extension, Muhlisi’s narrative becomes a tale of an itinerant governor collecting tokens of legitimacy on the way to his new post. Perhaps the author’s emphasis on the Seljuk past and artifacts also relates to possible legitimacy struggles with Basra’s ruler, Afrasiyab—the figure that Muhlisi’s text fails to mention. Afrasiyab, in an attempt to bolster his legitimacy in Basra, crafted a Seljuk genealogy for himself.89 By focusing on the Seljuk past and Yusuf Paşa’s reverence for its artifacts, the author seems to be further highlighting his piety and legitimacy. From Konya, the vizier traveled to Tarsus in early October 1602. At the time, the region was beset by sūhte (madrasa student) uprisings, and Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg, governor of Adana, was charged with quelling the uprisings.90 Muhlisi does mention that the region had been unsettled by uprisings. However, bypassing the role of Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg, he only focuses on Yusuf Paşa’s statement that, “it is up to us to rid 87 88 89 90

Turc 127, fol. 8b. Ibid., fol. 9a. Jane Hathaway, The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule, 1516–1800 (New York: Pearson Longman, 2008), 68. For a history of the Ramazanoğulları, see Faruk Sümer, “Ramazanoğulları,” İslam Ansiklopedisi 34 (2007): 442– 45; Akdağ, Celali İsyanları, 1550–1603 (Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 1963), 226. Hereafter, Akdağ, Celali İsyanları.

60

Chapter 2

Figure 13 Yusuf Paşa in Tarsus, Sefernāme

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 11b

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 14 Meeting of Köse Sefer and Yusuf Paşa, Sefernāme

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 15b

61

62

Chapter 2

the said bandits from among the Muslim folk.”91 Having done so, Yusuf Paşa continues onward to Tarsus. There, he was received by Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg who hosted him and took him to see the famed place of visitation of the Old Testament prophet Daniel on the Ceyhan River.92 The painting (fig. 13) that represents his visit in Tarsus shows a close connection to the text (as was the case with the previous two paintings). It visualizes the main points of attraction in one frame—the river (under which Daniel is buried), the bridge, the mosque, and the well into which the first muazzin Bilal-i Habeshi allegedly disappeared, all of which are described in the text. Yusuf Paşa looms large, emphasizing his rank. His larger size—a general visual strategy of highlighting a figure’s importance, which is often encountered in Baghdad ­paintings—and placement together with Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg, along with the relative absence of the latter’s deeds in Tarsus, focus attention only on Yusuf Paşa. His juxtaposition with named and unnamed governors and local rulers points to a sense of competition and rank among governors. As with the previous site, warning verses on the transitoriness of the world follow the painting. As they continued their journey Yusuf Paşa was warned against entering ʿAyntab on account of possible uprisings. The ʿAyntab region had been shaken up by the revolts of the infamous rebel Karayazıcı (d. 1602) in the late sixteenth century. Its governorship had been given at the turn of the century to Karayazıcı in exchange for the governor-turned-rebel Hüseyin Paşa. Soon, Karayazıcı himself reverted to rebellion. He was dealt a blow by Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, who was aided by a

91 92

Turc 127, fol. 10a. On the history and topography of Tarsus, see Oya Pancaroğlu, “Visible/Invisible: Sanctity, History and Topography in Tarsus,” in Akdeniz Kentleri: Gelecek için Geçmişin Birikimi—Mediterranean Cities: Antiquity as Future (Mersin: Mersin University Press, 2013), 109–21.

number of governors and local rulers, including Mir Şeref, the ruler of Jizra.93 Governor and sometimes rebel Köse Sefer had stationed his men in order to protect Kızılhisar. The Celali rebellions had already destabilized ʿAyntab, providing an opportunity for various contenders to power to manipulate their hold over the region. At this point, when Yusuf Paşa entered ʿAyntab, Köse Sefer appeared to be siding with the Porte. Despite a brief initial altercation between Köse Sefer and some among Yusuf Paşa’s retinue, Muhlisi writes that Köse Sefer apologized and met the Paşa upon his entrance into the city, hosted a feast, and granted him camels and horses.94 The sense of a power play is captured in the painting that depicts the meeting of Köse Sefer and Yusuf Paşa (fig. 14). The painting reflects the procession of the two sides, armed, along winding green hills. The composition is balanced with Köse Sefer and Yusuf Paşa placed centrally. Köse Sefer wears a plumed turban wrapped around a red cap, while Yusuf Paşa is represented with his yellow and red garment and tall white turban. In her study on ʿAyntab in the seventeenth century, Hülya Canbakal points out that after 1609 Köse Sefer would “[wreak] havoc in the area of ʿAyntab for seven years.”95 While with hindsight we can follow Köse Sefer’s proclivity to rebellious behavior/opportunism, that Muhlisi chooses to 93

94 95

Günhan Börekçi, “Factions and Favorites at the Courts of Sultan Ahmed i (r. 1603–17) and his Immediate Predecessors” (PhD diss., The Ohio State University, 2010), 34–35. Hereafter, Börekçi, Factions and Favorites; Akdağ, Celali İsyanları, 190–201. Turc 127, fols. 15b–16a. Hülya Canbakal cites an Armenian chronicle from 1609 that notes that former governor of Erzurum, Köse Sefer, had turned rebellious. See Hülya Canbakal, Society and Politics in an Ottoman Town: ʿAyntāb in the 17 th Century (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 28; Yaghia Kasuni, “History of Aintab and its Environs” in Armenian History of Aintab, Patmutyun Antepi Hayo, ed. Kevord Sarafian (Los Angeles: Union of the Armenians of Aintab in America, 1953), 297–98.

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

Figure 15 Yusuf Paşa in Urfa, Sefernāme

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 17b

63

64

Chapter 2

Figure 16 Meeting of Yusuf Paşa and Mir Şeref, Sefernāme

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, fol. 19b

65

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

i­nclude the brief episode of an altercation between Köse Sefer and Yusuf Paşa’s retinue, and that he includes warnings about entering ʿAyntab and the possibility of rebellions, all point to the volatile environment of the region. In light of Yusuf Paşa’s previous encounters with rebels throughout his journey, the governor is depicted as someone who can maintain control. This is perhaps most crucial given the fact that he appears not to have been able to do so fully in Baghdad. Interestingly, a petition from the vizier to the Porte dated 1605–6 emphasizes his steadfast dedication in quelling the uprisings of the segbāns, bandits, and Qizilbash in the frontier of Baghdad, and his hopes for the good wishes of the sultan in return.96 The next station in the journey is Ruha (Urfa). Muhlisi points out that the prophet Abraham was born in this place and that his cradle was still present.97 It was also here that the tall, minaret-like posts used for the catapult from which Abraham was supposedly cast into the fire were still standing in the inner citadel.98 Muhlisi briefly relates that the fire became a rose-garden for Abraham; as the prophet bent down among the raging flames, water began to percolate from around his knees, shielding him. That source, Muhlisi writes, was full of fish. When the Ottoman ruler Süleyman i visited the spring, a white fish swam up to him. The sultan, aware of the sanctity of the water and its aquatic inhabitants, placed a golden earring on the fish. After the fish died, it was ceremonially interred before the mosque.99 The author writes that Yusuf Paşa made sacrifices, prayed in the mosque and distributed grants. Here, as previously, the vizier’s beneficence is highlighted. Muhlisi has the vizier comment upon seeing the relics and trophies of the great ones: “our token and stamp are our generosity and charitable deeds.”100 ­Noting 96

Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives, Ali Emiri-Ahmed i 321/4. 97 Turc 127, fol. 17a. 98 Ibid. 99 Ibid., fol. 18a. 100 Ibid., fol. 18b.

thus, Yusuf Paşa “granted such sums of money that from the coins that fell in the pool, the fish lined their own scales with silver” (şol ḳadar aḳça taṣadduḳ eylediler ki ṣuya düşen aḳçadan ol ḥavżıñ mahileri cübbe ve ḳabalarına gümüş pul dikdiler).101 While remarking on Yusuf Paşa’s generosity, Muhlisi’s pun on the silver scales of the fish and silver coins makes a connection between the vizier and the Sultan Süleyman. A further connection to this ruler is made later in the text, where Muhlisi compares the number of casualties in the al-Jazaʾir—the islands around the region of the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers— when the governor of Basra, Kubad Paşa, first conquered a fortress there during Süleyman’s reign to that of Yusuf Paşa’s siege of the same fortress, taking it back from the rebels.102 Yusuf Paşa’s visit to Urfa is further highlighted with a painting (fig. 15). Looming large over the others included in the composition, Yusuf Paşa stands before the spring, resting one hand on the trunk of a tree. An attendant dressed in yellow holds his sword, while a dwarf can be partially seen from behind the tree. In the distance, behind the green hills and purplish rocks can be seen two minaret-like towers—the posts used for the catapult as related in the text. As with the previous paintings, this painting also shows a close relationship with the text, summarizing in visual form the essential points of visitation in each station, while at the same time emphasizing the central position of Yusuf Paşa. Yusuf Paşa next traveled via Nusaybin to Jizra in Upper Mesopotamia, where he was hosted by the above-mentioned Mir Şeref, the ruler of Jizra. Like the assemblies with Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg and Köse Sefer, Yusuf Paşa’s meeting with Mir Şeref is illustrated with a painting (fig. 16). Wearing a tall, white turban, and dressed in a fur-lined green and blue garment, Yusuf Paşa sits facing Mir Şeref underneath a canopied tent. The latter is distinguished by his plumed turban. The portly 101 Ibid. 102 Ibid., fols. 28a–b.

66 and beardless Yusuf Paşa is depicted slightly larger than Mir Şeref, but there is an overall sense of balance between the two groups as they come together. While the author does not provide details about Jizra, he points to the reciprocal gift exchange between Yusuf Paşa and Mir Şeref. The choice to illustrate assemblies with different local power-holders, gift exchange, feasting, and advice-giving further highlights Yusuf Paşa’s own role as a power-holder or at least as a contender in his respective post in Baghdad. From Nusaybin, Yusuf Paşa and his retinue traveled to Mosul, and from there, to Baghdad. At this point, it seems a folio has been mis-bound and at least one folio is missing. As far as I have been able to reconstruct the order of the text, the company traveled to Baghdad, where they visited important sites and shrines, and sacrifices were made, as usual. Unfortunately, Muhlisi has left this list of sites incomplete, with space left for them in the text to be filled later. The governor of Baghdad at the time was, according to Muhlisi, Sinan Paşazade Mehmed (d. 1605), the son of the grand vizier Koca Sinan Paşa (d. 1596). Like Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, Sinan Paşazade Mehmed Paşa was the son of a grand vizier. The historians Solakzade (d. 1658) and Naʾima (d. 1716) hint at the competition between the fathers and sons, particularly over their sons’ governorships. The former suggests Sinan Paşa’s ambitions in promoting his son over Hasan Paşa, particularly wanting the governorship of Rumelia to be given to his son rather than Hasan Paşa.103 Yusuf Paşa’s gubernatorial post in Baghdad was to replace the vacancy left by such eminent figures with close connections. Ending the “travelogue” section of the work, Muhlisi notes the stations from Baghdad to Basra. 103 İbrāhīm Peçevī, Tārīh-i Peçevī, 31. On Sinān Paşazāde Meḥmed’s career in Buda and Rumelia, see also Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vol. 1, 263, 314–15, 331, 336–37, 369, 381, 390, 394–95, 397. Solakzāde, Ṣolakzāde Tārīhi, Vol. 2 (Istanbul: Mahmut Bey Matbaası, 1298 [1880/1]), 359; Günhan Börekçi, Factions and Favorites, 40–41, 120–21.

Chapter 2

As if to foreshadow the second part of his text, Muhlisi adds that while Basra belongs to the “wellprotected domains,” its periphery, Khuzistan, is under the control of the above-mentioned rebel Sayyid Mubarak, the chieftain of the Shiʿi Mushaʿshaʿ tribe. In the second section of this work, Sayyid Mubarak will appear as the figure to whom rebels turn for help against the Ottoman forces of Yusuf Paşa. The cursory introduction of this character and the Khuzistan region beyond the “well-protected domains” of the Ottomans prepares the reader for the second part of the work, which takes on a different tenor. The first section ends as the company reaches Basra proper. They celebrate the Ramadhan feast; they visit shrines— a list of these was to follow but remains unfinished in the manuscript—and make sacrifices there. This section ends with benedictions in Arabic on the saints (whose names were to be added to the manuscript), the Prophet Muhammad, and his followers. In a way, the first part of the work sets out the scenery, literally and figuratively. The description of the travels, the sites, and their stories not only provides a lively account of the stations visited but also act as a warning against worldliness. Furthermore, the frequent encounters with rebels or complaints about rebels as they coursed through Anatolia and Iraq introduce the reader to the second part of the work, which deals more closely with a number of uprisings in Basra. The second part of the work (as marked by the author) details Yusuf Paşa’s supression of local uprisings. His dauntlessness is highlighted here as well. However, unlike the first part of the manuscript, this section focuses mainly on a number of skirmishes in and around Basra. Here, as portrayed by Muhlisi, the focus appears to be both on local uprisings and rebellions but also on a clash between Sunnis and Shiʿis. Muhlisi writes that in Basra there was a group of heretics and Shiʿis, including several “bandits” from among volunteers in the local garrison (sing., gönüllü), as well as scribes and lieutenants. They would don red headgear (a reference to the Safavid Qizilbash turban) in the manner of Jews (Yahudiveş), topped with

67

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

bird feathers, and would always hold polo sticks in their hands. They acted contrary to the ways of the believers (ehl-i iman), gathered each day and gossiped, even reviling the companions of the Prophet. They also bullied those who complained about them, often pillaging others’ properties, going so far as forcing eminent men to marry off their daughters to whomever they wanted.104 When news of such behavior reached Yusuf Paşa he resolved “to rid their wretched bodies from the world.”105 He cautioned the council attendees to don the mücevveze, a tall, plaited turban worn by Ottoman grandees, differing from that of the Safavids. The heretics replied, in the words of Muhlisi: “God forbid! The mücevveze is an unbecoming headgear. Our impure heads are unyielding; it is appropriate for the illustrious, fortunate head, not our ill-starred heads.”106 Here, as elsewhere in the text, Muhlisi makes sure to denounce the pro-Safavid “heretics.” When matters escalated, the rebels reached out to Mubarak, the ruler of Huwaiza, and to Hicris, ruler of al-Jazaʾir, saying: “We, brigands, must rid the group of Sunnis from Basra; come at once and take the keys to the city.”107 At this point, Muhlisi highlights the inherent courage of Yusuf Paşa and the perseverance of his smaller army against the “rebels and heretics.” Thus confronted, the rebels decided to flee and were chased by ships and finally caught and beheaded. Muhlisi posits the execution as a warning and an example to anyone entertaining seditious thoughts. He adds: Chiefly, the padishah of Rum (i.e. the Ottoman sultan) is the protector of the boundaries of ­Islam from the wicked infidels; [he is] responsible for serving the Two Holy Places (Mecca and Medina). His sovereignty is the basis of the caliphate and his person is the pole of Islam; [he is] the ­manifest

104 Turc 127, fol. 23a. 105 Ibid. 106 Ibid., fol. 23b. 107 Ibid., fol. 24b–25a. I have not been able to find out about “Hicris” unfortunately.

aide with sublime caliphate, sovereignty, and piety.108 The representation of the Ottoman sultan as the protector of Islam is very potent, particularly in the frontiers of the empire (serḥadd). In addition to highlighting the role of the sultan in guarding the boundaries of the empire and the boundaries of orthodox Sunni Islam, the author notes that the Basran poet Zühdi had composed a qasida and that he himself had composed a chronogram to mark the event. The qasida and chronogram, Muhlisi notes, are recorded in the zayl, which, unfortunately, is missing from the Paris manuscript. The author notes that some escapees fled to seek help from Mubarak. At their bidding, he attacked several forts bordering al-Jazaʾir. The author adds that the Bedouins in al-Jazaʾir would “follow the path of mutiny”; some among them would claim the produce of the sub-province for themselves and threaten to hand over the area to the ruler of al-Jazaʾir.109 To highlight Yusuf Paşa’s military success, the author compares this victory to the previous siege of al-Jazaʾir during the reign of Süleyman, when there were seventeen thousand casualties. In contrast, the author points out, Yusuf Paşa succeeded in capturing the fortresses with no casualties.110 Muhlisi adds that the leader or protector chosen by the heretics in al-Jazaʾir was expelled upon the repossession of the fortress—for it was “the imperial ancient law (ḳanūn-u ḳadīm-i şehriyārī) to forbid handing out offices to Bedouin perpetrators of perdition, and it was disagreeable to those of understanding to appoint proprietors of heresy and heterodoxy to fortresses in the ­empire’s frontiers.”111 Such a comment points to the precariousness of the frontier, as well as other regions in turmoil, where, at times, a policy of appeasement and granting of offices was resorted to.

108 109 110 111

Ibid., fol. 26b. Ibid., fol. 27a. Ibid., 28a. Ibid., fol. 29a.

68

Chapter 2

Figure 17 Severed heads of the rebels brought before Yusuf Paşa, Sefernāme Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, 29b

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

At this point, a painting representing the victorious Yusuf Paşa appears. Muhlisi’s verses on the triumph of Yusuf Paşa, and of the “four friends” (çāryār, i.e. first four Sunni caliphs) over the “heretics” frame the painting (fig. 17). The vizier sits on a high-backed chair, while his victorious cavalry and soldiers arrive and present the severed heads of the vanquished rebels. As with the previous paintings of this manuscript, Yusuf Paşa is centrally placed and depicted larger than the rest of the figures. The painting reflects a close relation to the text where the author points out: When he sets out to subdue the enemy / Opportunity and assistance become his guide / It was as if conquest and victory were his companions / His sword would sever the enemy’s head / His lance would pierce hearts and lungs / This lion of a man seized five fortresses from al-Jazaʾir / He delivered tumult to the infidel / May the four friends be a friend to him; come pray / With dignity and glory and conquest / They returned to Basra / With victory came the takers of spoils / The Muslim soldiers came into the city / And the severed heads of the enemy were placed on the fortress.112 Defeated, Mubarak “promised to stay away from the Ottoman borders and to refrain from odious action, [whereupon] he escaped to his hellish abode.”113 The author is also careful to add that no Muslim (ehl-i İslam) was harmed in this battle.114 Following successful repressions of attacks, “the enemies on all sides heard [of the news]; fear striking their hearts, they showed loyalty and sent embassies and gifts.” Various tribes, from the Gulf to Hormuz and Najd, sent gifts and embassies to Basra. At this point, the manuscript abruptly ends. Even though the following sections are missing, Muhlisi’s detailed account on Basra provides a welcome addition to the history of early ­seventeenth-century Basra. The work as it stands 112 Ibid., fols. 29b–30a. 113 Ibid., fol. 34a. 114 Ibid.

69 today captures the gist of the environment of unease and rebellion throughout Anatolia and beyond—the sectarian clashes and contentions for power in the frontiers of the empire. The first section, which foregrounds shrine visitation, seems to prepare the reader for the second section, with its emphasis on sectarian clashes, thus heightening the effect of Yusuf Paşa’s piety. The short account emphasizes Yusuf Paşa’s valor in this uncertain environment and provides a personalized work that merges the genres of travelogue and sefernāme (account of an expedition). Set in a similar historical context, yet recounting different circumstances, Hasan Paşa’s universal history focuses on the role of the vizier through historic examples and shows the governor as the culmination of history. While the genre of universal history makes different claims to power than a personal account of travels and deeds, both Yusuf Paşa and Hasan Paşa seemed to need recognition in their posts in Baghdad, having dealt with a number of rebellions in eastern Anatolia and Iraq. In Baghdad, they found a lively cultural and artistic sphere—an illustrated Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Garden of the Blessed) (Süleymaniye Library, Fatih 4321) dated to 1593 points to the existence of art production there since the 1590s. The illustrated manuscripts of Hasan Paşa and Yusuf Paşa highlight their valor in different ways. In the case of Hasan Paşa, his patrilineal links, his success in various posts, especially his confrontation with Sayyid Mubarak, paved the way to the image of him as established by Muhammad Tahir as the culmination of history. In the case of Yusuf Paşa, who lacked Hasan Paşa’s grandeur and closely-knit network, Muhlisi’s account paints an image of a valorous, just, and pious leader. Compared with the voluminous and extensive universal history of Hasan Paşa, Yusuf Paşa’s account of his travels from Istanbul to Baghdad and Basra is more intimate. In the case of Yusuf Paşa, a performative narrative of pilgrimage attempts to legitimate the governor’s tenuous position in Baghdad, as his courage in an uncertain environment is constantly pointed out. As opposed to Hasan Paşa’s

70 bolder statements of power, Yusuf Paşa’s account takes on a more subdued voice. Yet, both are very much a product of the environment of unease and rebellion, particularly in the border zones of the empire. Both also highlight aspects of power and legitimacy as the two viziers strive to maintain and enhance their status quo in Baghdad. These two texts shed light on their patrons’ careers and on the challenges that they faced. As newly composed texts, they stand apart from other illustrated manuscripts produced in Baghdad. With clear dedications to their patrons, they also give firm evidence of the demand for illustrated manuscripts. Even though we lack concrete information about the organization/acquisition/­ distribution of materials, the place(s) of production and the names of artists or their salaries—as is also the case for other centers such as Shiraz, Qazvin or Tabriz—these two manuscripts allow us to raise questions about the production of illustrated manuscripts. The two separate copies of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, each copied in a different script (H. 1369 in nastaʿliq and H. 1230 in naskh) lead us to ask whether they were conceived as a whole, or whether they were each part of separate or missing/incomplete volumes. This would raise the further question of whether multiple patrons or owners were involved. Given the similarity in style and date—the calligraphy of H. 1230 closely matches that of the British Library Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ manuscript copied in 1599–1600 by ʿAli bin Muhammed el-Tustari115—it

115 Several detached leaves with illustrations depicting stories related to Old Testament prophets suggest that further volumes of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ were made. On these pages, see Milstein, Nimrod, Joseph and Jonah, 123. On the British Library Rawżat al-Ṣafaʾ, see G.M. Meredith-Owens, “A Copy of the Rawẓat al-Ṣafa with Turkish Miniatures,” in Paintings from Islamic Lands, ed. R. Pinder-Wilson (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1969), 110–24. He is the calligrapher of another manuscript produced in Baghdad: a Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā dated Ziʾl hijja 1008 (June–July 1600) at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara (Besim Atalay Env. 7294).

Chapter 2

would be quite peculiar to have a different patron for a text that was recently ­composed for someone else. What seems more likely is that different calligraphers and artists were involved in the simultaneous production of H. 1369 and H. 1230. Given Hasan Paşa’s unexpected death, the project may have been left incomplete. It is possible to ask whether the illustrated copy of the sixth volume of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ copied during the gubernatorial post of Hasan Paşa was also prepared for this governor. If so, the addition of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ in particular—whose text was one of the sources for the author of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer—would present an even grander image of Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa. Even though we do not know who the patron of this work is, these grand projects—along with a richly illustrated Shāhnāma, and several copies of the Hümayunnāme (The Imperial Book), the Ottoman translation of the Kalīla wa Dimna by Vasi ʿAli Çelebi (d. 1543)—show that there was very prolific art production in a relatively short time span.116 In addition to these richly illustrated manuscripts, there were multiple copies of smaller and less profusely illustrated manuscripts as well as singlepage paintings that point to the liveliness of this art market. Some of these works will be studied in more detail in the next three chapters. Did Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa’s presence and patronage in Baghdad boost this already existing market? And did his household include painters and calligraphers brought from Istanbul? Or did he employ local/resident artists? If the governor did indeed bring artists, would they have worked together 116 On the Topkapı Palace Museum Library Shāhnāma, see Zeren Tanındı, “Bağdat Defterdarının Resimli Şahnāmesi,” in Uluslararası Islam Medeniyetinde Bağdat Sempozyumu, ed. İsmail Üstün (Istanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi, 2008), 329–43; Lale Uluç, “The Shahnama of Firdausi in the Lands of Rum,” in Shahnama Studies ii, ed. Charles Melville and Gabrielle van den Berg (Leiden: Brill, 2012), ­159–80. On the Hümāyunnāme manuscripts see Şebnem  Parladır, “Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebiʾnin Hümāyūnnāmesi” (PhD diss, Ege Üniversitesi, 2011).

Two Governors, Two Paths to Power

with local artists? Here, Yusuf Paşa’s manuscript may also provide some clues to the peripatetic nature of artists and calligraphers. That this manuscript is also incomplete, and that the text follows Yusuf Paşa’s travels over three years from Istanbul to Baghdad to Basra allows us to consider this: Did Yusuf Paşa bring with him artists from Baghdad

71 to Basra? Could the paintings have been made in Basra? So far, none of these questions have answers, but they invite us to think about the processes of art production and look beyond localized schools of painting. In addition, the texts of these works, which were composed for these two governors, ­reflect local concerns and sensibilities.

Chapter 3

From the Capital to the Province In his Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān (Epic Deeds of Artists), the Ottoman bureaucrat Mustafa ʿĀli ­ (d. 1600) writes: Among penmen [there are] some depraved [persons], whose corrupt natures came out into the open, the sons of so and so, who are utterly deprived of talent having to do with bookkeeping or writing, devoid, like a blank page, of the blackness [i.e., ink] of the science of accounting (ʿilm-i ḥesāb), and ready, like court artisans (ehl-i ḥiref), to avoid the embarrassment of reading a [single] word. They obtained [their] certificates of literacy through reports that were jotted down thanks to the titles of their fathers. As for their revenues in their account books, [these] shrank day by day due to the craze for [purchasing] calligraphic works. So much so that, every new enthusiast painter sold the sketch that he drew in the pitch-black of the night to the aforesaid [men] saying it was a pencil drawing by Mani. In addition to buying [calligraphic pieces] from scribes with no name or fame, who forged on their works the signature of Mir ʿAli, some of [these ignorant men] spent a considerable amount of aspers on the gilding and illumination [of these pieces], squandered many thousand dinars in a year, and bought anything they found. And there are painters and dealers who, having sold [everything in their hands] to the ignorant among the aforementioned group, do not have left in their wallet even a rough sketch, and who wasted away forty or fifty filorins for a single album … [Furthermore there are] those who, as expected of [ones with] their distorted nature, produced books of fragmentary poems (cönk), ruining the corner of every page with incorrect couplets [that are scribbled] in the form of marginal notes (ḥāşiye) [executed] by breaking up each qitʿa into four parts, by separating each of its ­hemistiches

from the one to which it was connected, and by arbitrarily patching them.1 This lengthy diatribe, preceded by Mustafa ʿĀli’s hyperbolic “cries, a hundred thousand cries” (feryād, ṣad hezār feryād) for such rich men enamored with calligraphy, raises several issues: the interest in collecting calligraphy, paintings, and drawings; the increasing demand for albums in the latter decades of the sixteenth century when the author wrote his text; the production of works to match a non-courtly, albeit at times uninformed demand; and the making, re-making, or un-­making of meaning(s) where quatrains are taken apart and randomly put together in albums. Elsewhere, Mustafa ʿĀli complained about the sums squandered on court artisans as well as the high prices artisans charged for his own manuscript commission.2 ­Financially astute, and himself a part of this art market, Mustafa ʿĀli was well aware of the flourishing of the arts during the reign of the Ottoman Sultan Murad iii (r. 1574–95) and the interest in collecting calligraphic works. Recognizing the demand for calligraphies and albums, Mustafa ʿĀli judged that: It would be prudent to adequately investigate and examine the identities of [these] scribes of good penmanship, cutters, illuminators, decorativepainters, and portraitists, their origins, the masters under whom they excelled and the padishahs by whose favor they attained those [exalted] ranks, if 1 The translation is by Esra Akın-Kıvanç, Mustafa ʿAli’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), 236–37. Hereafter, Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds. 2 Ibid., 100–02.

From the Capital to the Province

the qitʿas, calligraphic works, paintings and illuminations acquired [by these aficionadors] are to be appreciated.3 His book provides a guideline for those interested in buying and collecting art through an outline of master-disciple lineages. Not a practitioner of art himself but a self-proclaimed connoisseur and struggling patron, Mustafa ʿĀli nevertheless ventures to compose this work at the insistence of his acquaintances and those who scattered their money on albums, since he has “many ideas that developed into various world-renowned texts.”4 His slightly younger contemporary, also not a practitioner of art but a physician and art collector, Giulio Mancini (d. 1630), shows a similar sensibility in his intention to offer and consider some advice by which a man, who enjoys such studies might readily judge paintings set before him and know how to buy, acquire and hang them in their places according to the time when they were done, the subject represented and the skill of the artisan who made them.5 While Mustafa ʿĀli does not directly deal with the display of art and calligraphy, his concern about the breaking up and arbitrary placement of quatrains (presumably in the context of an album) suggests a certain order and categorization of art. His organization of the Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān hints at this as well. Much like sixteenth-century treatises on art in the form of album prefaces, emphasis is placed on calligraphy—here, treated in separate chapters according to style—followed 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Quoted in Alberto Frigo, “Can One Speak of Painting if One Cannot Hold a Brush? Giulio Mancini, Medicine, and the Birth of the Connoisseur,” Journal of the History of Ideas 73 (2012): 417–36, 418. On Mancini, see Frances Gage, “Exercise for Mind and Body: Giulio Mancini, Collecting, and the Beholding of Landscape Painting in the Seventeenth Century,” Renaissance Quarterly 61 (2008): 1167–202.

73 by other forms of the art of the book including decoupage, painting, illumination, and binding.6 Mustafa ʿĀli’s comments on prices and forgeries show concerns with the issue of copies and originals and judging quality, even in a tradition where emulation and repetition was key to learning. Mustafa ʿĀli was also part of various interconnected circles of artists, patrons and connoisseurs of varying qualities. Always in search of patrons, the ever-disgruntled Mustafa ʿĀli had, or at times, attempted to have several of his works illustrated for presentation. Thus, in addition to claiming to be a connoisseur of the arts in the Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān, Mustafa ʿĀli was also a patron, whose Nuṣretnāme (Book of Victory) detailing Lala Mustafa Paşa’s (d. 1580) Shirvan campaign was illustrated.7 A presentation copy of his Cāmiʿüʾl Buhūr der Mecālīs-i Sūr (Gathering of the Seas on the Scenes of the Celebration) was prepared in Baghdad and was meant to have paintings with nine 6 On album prefaces and a historiography of art in the sixteenth century, see David J. Roxburgh, Prefacing the Image: The Writing of Art History in Sixteenth-Century Iran (Leiden, Brill: 2001); Wheeler Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents on the History of Calligraphers and Painters (Leiden, Brill, 2001); Yves Porter, “From the ‘Theory of Two Qalams’ to the ‘Seven Principles of Painting’: Theory, Terminology and Practice in Persian Classical Painting,” Muqarnas 17 (2000): 109–18. 7 There are two illustrated copies of this work. One is at the British Library (Add. 22011) and has six paintings, paid by Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī himself, according to Esra Akın-Kıvanç. The second copy, at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (H. 1365), is the presentation copy and has forty-six paintings. Esra Akın-Kıvanç, “Introduction,” in Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds, 23. On illustrated copies of the Nuṣretnāme, see Emine Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2013), esp. 193–209. Hereafter, Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court. On Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī and book patronage see Serpil Bağcı, “Kitap Sanatları ve Mustafa Ālī” (Book Arts and Mustafa Ālī) in Gelibolulu Mustafa Ālī Çalıştayı Bildirileri, 28–29 Nisan 2011, ed. İ. Hakkı Aksoyak (Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları, 2014), 25–41. Hereafter, Bağcı, Kitap Sanatları ve Mustafa Ālī.

74

Chapter 3

blank pages left for illustration.8 Like the Cāmiʿüʾl Buhūr der Mecālīs-i Sūr, the composition of the Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān was also begun during the author’s time in Baghdad when he was appointed as finance director of the province.9 It was also in Baghdad that the bureaucrat made the acquaintance of several poets and painters, likely including Fazli of Baghdad.10 His 1581 Nuṣḥatü’s Selāṭīn (Counsel for Sultans), copied in Aleppo where the author was an administrator of provincial fiefs, was also illustrated but left incomplete.11 In addition to the commission of these manuscripts, the author also endowed a fountain in Karbala.12 Mustafa ʿĀli’s commissions of illustrated copies of his texts, albeit mostly incomplete—as well as his financial acumen and comments on the 8

9

10

11

12

The presentation copy of this manuscript bears an illuminated dedicatory medallion in the name of Sultan Murād iii and belongs to the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (B. 203). The text was written in 991 (1583). Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī was appointed as finance director in 1585 but before reaching his post he was dismissed. However, he stayed in Baghdad until 1586. Esra Akın-Kıvanç, “Introduction,” in Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds, 21. Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa Ali (1541–1600) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 123. Hereafter, Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual. As testified by the painted decoration of the Aleppo Room, now in the Pergamon Museum (i.2862), Aleppo was also a center of art production, and as mentioned by Amy Landau in a recent article, there was a strong Armenian community in Aleppo, some of whom were trained artists. On the Aleppo Room see Julia Gonella and J. Kröger, eds. Angels, Peonies, and Fabulous Creatures: The Aleppo Room in Berlin (Rhema-Münster: Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, 2008); Amy Landau, “From the Workshops of New Julfa to the Court of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich: An Initial Look at Armenian Networks and the Mobility of Visual Culture,” in Metalwork and Material Culture in the Islamic World: Art, Craft and Text, ed. Venetia Porter (London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012), 413–26. Esra Akın-Kıvanç, “Introduction,” in Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds, 25.

f­ledgling calligraphers and artists sketching in the dark of the night and copying works of famed ­calligraphers—suggest the wider participation of actors in the open art market. This is already at a point when “various members of the ­bureaucraticmilitary class and imperial household servants participated in the patronage and production of … books.”13 While Mustafa ʿĀli’s comments in his Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān quoted at the beginning of this chapter most likely refer to those artists, calligraphers, and buyers in Istanbul, the Aleppine copies of the Nuṣḥatü’s Selāṭīn and Nuṣretnāme and the unfinished Cāmiʿüʾl Buhūr der Mecālīs-i Sūr also point to cities outside the capital, where artists could find work or patrons could find artists. Concurrently, illustrated and illuminated manuscripts from Shiraz found favor at the Ottoman court (as well as among Safavid and Turkmen governors), pointing to a broader art market that crossed the boundaries between empires.14 Mustafa ʿĀli’s comments as a connoisseur are grounded in the social and urban transformations of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the appearance of new places of gathering (such as the coffeehouse), interregional trade and exchange, and changing patterns of patronage.15 13 Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court, 5. 14 On Shiraz painting, see Lale Uluç, Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artists and Ottoman Collectors: Sixteenth Century Shiraz Manuscripts (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2006). 15 The subjects of sub-royal patronage and new themes in painting and entertainment culture in the capital have been of recent interest to scholars of art and literature. The reason why this scholarship has concentrated on the capital is partly due to the wealth of manuscript and archival material in various manuscript libraries in Istanbul and elsewhere. Major among these are the above-mentioned work by Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court; idem, “Love in the Album of Ahmed i,” Journal of Turkish Studies 34 (2010): 37–51; and “Enriched Narrative and Empowered Images in Seventeenth Century Ottoman Manuscripts,” Ars Orientalis 40 (2011): 243–67. Hereafter, Fetvacı, Enriched Narratives; Tülün Değirmenci, “Osmanlı Tasvir Sanatında Görselin ‘Okunması’: İmgenin Ardındaki Hikayeler

From the Capital to the Province

The transformations of social and urban life and the increasing prevalence of entertainment culture and new themes and tastes in art and literature inform a new kind of painting, particularly in the form of single-page painting. The image, particularly the album image or the single-folio image, was no longer an “illustration” of a text anchored to a narrative. It acquired a life of its own, in response to, and in tandem with an “implied context” that is shared by the cultural milieu that produced and consumed it or with popular stories that were current at the time.16 The polysemy of single-page paintings, whether on their own, in the immediate context of juxtaposition with a text, or in the slightly wider context of the album or an “implied context,”17 allows multiple readings of the whole, at times also combining the worldly and the religious. Thus, along with new audiences, new subject matters and alternative ways of engaging with painting appeared in this period.18 Amorous youths, single-figure paintings representing a broad swath of figure types, scenes of daily life or entertainment and compilations of stories typify the changing taste and changing market. The artistic boom of late sixteenth-century Baghdad is an expression of this larger trend, which entailed a broadening of the base of (Şehir Oğlanları ve Istanbulʾun Meşhur Kadınları) (Visual Reading or Reading with Images? Visuality and Orality in Ottoman Manuscript Culture (City Boys and Beautiful Women of Istanbul),” The Journal of Ottoman Studies 45 (2015): 25–55. Hereafter, Tülün Değirmenci, Osmanlı Tasvir Sanatında Görselin Okunması; Walter Andrews and Mehmet Kalpaklı, The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved in Early Modern Ottoman and European Culture and Society (Durham: Duke University Press, 2005). 16 See Farhad, Safavid Single-Page Painting, 1629–1666. See also Sussan Babaie, “The Sound of the Image / The Image of the Sound: Narrativity in Persian Art of the 17th Century,” in Islamic Art and Literature, ed. Oleg Grabar and Cynthia Robinson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 143–62. 17 I borrow this term from the work of Massumeh Farhad, Safavid Single-Page Painting. 18 Fetvacı, Enriched Narratives.

75 ­ atronage and changes in the conception of art. p However, the types of texts that were illustrated in Baghdad only tangentially resonate with currents in the capital, Istanbul, where official histories or texts on the deeds of campaign leaders were, for the most part, preponderant in this period. Broadly speaking, the kinds of illustrated works that were produced in Baghdad are those of popular religious literature, such as the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Garden of the Blessed), Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Killing of the Prophet’s Family), biographies of Sufi saints such as the Nafahāt al-Uns (Breaths of I­ntimacy) of Jāmī (d. 1492), or the Manāqīb al-ʿArifīn (The Virtues of the Gnostics) of Aflākī (d. 1360), as well as illustrated genealogies (an innovation that has its roots in the capital but takes on a regional guise in Baghdad, only to return to the capital decades later), and several works of literature (such as the Shāhnāma (Book of Kings) of Firdawsi or the Hümāyūnnāme (The Imperial Book)). On the other hand, single-page paintings produced in Baghdad closely reflect the new themes and aspects of an entertainment culture and a different engagement with painting. These works, preserved in several albums in the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (H. 2145, H. 2149, H. 2133–34, H. 2165, H. 2168, and H. 2169),19 have escaped scholarly attention, and emphasis has mostly been placed on manuscripts of popular religious literature. These single-page paintings and calligraphies (some of which contain notes that they were executed in Baghdad and Karbala) support the idea that shrines were centers of art production, and that there was a merging of the religious and the secular in early modern practices of representation.20 Such a merging of the worldly and 19 On H. 2165 see Banu Mahir, “Osmanlı Murakka Yapımcılığı,” in Uluslararası Sanat Tarihi Sempozyumu, Prof. Dr. Gönül Öney’e Armağan, 10–13 Ekim 2001, Bildiriler (İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi, 2002), 401–11. Hereafter, Mahir, Osmanlı Murakka Yapımcılığı. 20 The recent collection of essays edited by David Loewenstein and Michael Witmore on various aspects of Shakespeare’s engagement with religion sheds light on the multifaceted and often complicated relations with

76 the religious is attested partly in their immediate contexts within albums and in the multivalency of their readings. It also ties in with a discussion of the illustrated works of popular religious literature, where elements of the worldly permeate the compositions. While significant differences exist between the aesthetics of the capital and the province (in terms of style, taste, and choice of texts), single-page paintings allow us to reconsider the nature and extent of those differences. In a recent article, Emine Fetvacı has pointed to the Persianate aesthetic of some sixteenth—and seventeenth-century Ottoman albums (including H. 2165), at a time when the Ottomans, in a political gesture, consolidated their visual idiom, which was distinct from that of the Safavids.21 This was also the time when, at the Ottoman court, works of literature and history were mainly composed in Turkish, rather than in Persian. However, a Persianate aesthetic persisted in Ottoman albums in this period.22 A re-evalutation of albums and singlepage paintings, as well as the art of the p ­ rovinces, may shed light on our ideas of what we consider as “Ottoman” or “Safavid.” This, I hope, will also raise larger debates on questions of c­enter and regards to Catholic and Protestant ideals and their own engagement with art. David Loewenstein and Michael Witmore, eds. Shakespeare and Early Modern Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015). Also see Marcia Hall and Tracy E. Cooper, eds. The Sensuous in the Counter-Reformation Church (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013) and Pamela M. Jones, Federico Borromeo and the Ambrosiana: Art Patronage and ­Reform in Seventeenth Century Milan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). For a broader perspective on the visual secular see Suzanne Smith, “Religious Law and the Visual Secular,” Harvard Divinity Bulletin 43 (2015), last modified June 22, 2019, https:// bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/articles/winterspring2015/ religious-law-and-visual-secular. 21 Emine Fetvacı, “Persian Aesthetics in Ottoman Albums,” last modified September 10, 2018, https://www .ias.edu/ideas/2018/fetvaci-persian-aesthetics. Hereafter, Fetvacı, Persian Aesthetics in Ottoman Albums. 22 Ibid.

Chapter 3

­ eriphery, artistic centers, and mobility and difp fusion. The following is a preliminary look into several paintings and calligraphies that are attributable to Baghdad and Karbala. Among the contents of H. 2145, a calligraphic piece provides a direct connection to Baghdad. It is signed by Qutb al-Din Muhammad al-Yazdi in Baghdad in the year 1577–8 (fol. 26b).23 Mustafa ʿĀli references Qutb al-Din Yazdi’s treatise on calligraphers, Risāle-yi Quṭbiyya, and remarks in the Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān that Qutb al-Din had kept him company in Baghdad.24 Qutb al-Din Yazdi’s ability in calligraphy was also noted by the Baghdadi tadhkira writer ʿAhdi (d. 1593), who compares him to Mir ʿAli in the copying of qitʿas, and to Mir Muzaffer in the riqʿa style. ʿAhdi adds that Qutb al-Din also composed poetry.25 This Baghdadi tadhkira writer also had connections with Sadiqi Beg (d. 1610), painter, and librarian to the Safavid ruler, Shah ʿAbbas i (r. 1588–1629).26 In fact, ʿAhdi 23

H. 2145 has a brown leather binding that is partly covered with a fine brocaded, orange and red cloth with a leaf design, with the edges of the leather binding decorated with a chain design in painted gold. The marbledpaper doublure is matched with a marbled endpaper. The album opens with a double-folio painting of an outdoor encampment scene in Safavid style that can be attributed to the last quarter of the sixteenth century. The album mainly consists of calligraphic pieces and several paintings and drawings, mostly reminiscent of figures of youths by Walījan, in the style of Riża ʿAbbāsi, and Muḥammad Qāsim, as well as one painting which can be attributed to Baghdad (discussed below). There are presently no signs of ownership except for an illegible seal on folio 10a and unfortunately, we do not know when or by whom H. 2145 was compiled. 24 Esra Akın-Kıvanç, “Introduction” in Muṣṭafa ʿAlī, Epic Deeds, 38, 64, 84; Quṭb al-Dīn Muḥammad Yazdī, “Risala-yi dar Tārīkh-i Khatt va Naqqashān” ed. Ḥusain Khadiv-Jām, Sukhan 17/67 (1346/1967): 666–76. 25 Süleyman Solmaz, ed. Ahdi ve Gülşen-i Şuʿarası (İnceleme-Metin) (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2005), 485–86. 26 Sādiqī Beg, Majmaʿ al-Khawāṣṣ, ed. ʿAbd al-Rasūl Khayyampour (Tabriz: Akhtar-i Shumāl, 1948), 281. Hereafter, Sādiqī Beg, Majmaʿ al-Khawāṣṣ.

77

From the Capital to the Province

is a common acquaintance of both Mustafa ʿĀli and Sadiqi Beg. The Safavid poet and librarian was also an acquaintance of the Ottoman poet Baki (d. 1600), whom he met in Aleppo.27 As can be surmised from these networks (which possibly also included the poets Fazli and Mawlana Shani mentioned in the introduction) Baghdad was not just a center of lively art production, but a province that boasted much cultural capital, including local poets and poets from both the Ottoman and the Safavid courts.28 A calligraphic sample presenting a qitʿa by Abu Saʿid Abuʾl Khayr (d. 1049) written by Hasan ʿAli (d.  1592–3) in Karbala (preserved in H. 2145, fol. 23a), and another in H. 2169 (fol. 50a) suggest that it was not just the city of Baghdad that was a center for art production, but the broader province of Baghdad. In addition to these calligraphic samples, this Mashhadi calligrapher copied two other illustrated manuscripts (tpml R. 1046, H. 281)—­extracts from the Munājāt (Invocations) of the Sufi master and exegete ʿAbdullah Ansari (d.  1088)—in Karbala.29 In his Menāḳıb-ı Hünerverān, Mustafa ʿĀli mentions Molla Hasan ʿAli, who was a pupil of Mir Sayyid Ahmad Mashhadi (d. 1578–9). He praises Molla Hasan ʿAli for his competence in calligraphy and for “his attachment to his master’s calligraphic style.”30 Çağman and Tanındı add that Hasan ʿAli, who hailed from Khurasan, lived in Herat until the death of his patron, ʿAli Quli Khan Shamlu (d. 1589), the governor of Herat. Hasan ʿAli is one among many who 27 Bağcı, Kitap Sanatları ve Mustafa Ālī, 33. 28 When Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī came to Baghdad, a number of poets welcomed him, including the above-mentioned ʿAhdī and the poet Ṭarzī. Mustafa İsen, Künhüʾl Ahbarʾın Tezkire Kısmı (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayını, 1994), 319. 29 Çağman and Tanındı, “Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapı Palace Treasury in the Context of ­Ottoman-Safavid Relations,” Muqarnas 13 (1996): 132– 48, 142. Hereafter, Çağman and Tanındı, Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations. 30 Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī, Epic Deeds, 244.

t­raveled from the Safavid lands to the Ottoman lands in search of patronage. Following the death of his patron, Hasan ʿAli went to Baghdad and then to the Hijaz, where he passed away.31 The paintings of the manuscripts that he copied are stylistically different from the paintings attributed to Baghdad. The color palette of these Munājāt ­paintings— with pastel hues, light purples and blues, and bright oranges—and their distinctive tall, jagged hills contrast with the darker color palette of the Baghdad paintings, with their dark greens. In addition, the more elongated bodies of the figures further contrast with the relatively squat figures of many of the Baghdad paintings. A painting in the Album of Ahmed i (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, B. 408), a royal album prepared by Kalender Efendi (d. 1616) for Sultan Ahmed i (r. 1603–14), can also be stylistically located to Karbala (fig. 31, bottom right on the illustration).32 A youth riding a black horse and an attendant halberdier are portrayed in a mountainous setting, where the tops of the rocks are painted in orange, green, light purple and blue, and the sky and the grounds left tan, similar to the paintings in the two Munājāt manuscripts. While the Munājāt of ʿAbdullah Ansari and the qitʿa copied by Hasan ʿAli (H. 2145, fol. 23a) bear Sufi overtones, the painting in the Album of Ahmed i depicts a rider and an attendant, not tied to a particular text. In addition to these illustrated manuscripts copied by Molla Hasan ʿAli (whose paintings are stylistically different from those made in Baghdad) and the samples of calligraphy in H. 2145 and H. 2169, there is further evidence of art and calligraphy ­production in Karbala. A calligraphic piece appended to a Baghdadi Silsinenāme (genealogy) 31

32

Çağman and Tanındı, Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of ­Ottoman-Safavid Relations, 140. On this album see Emine Fetvacı, “The Album of Ahmed i,” Ars Orientalis 42 (2012): 127–39; idem, “Love in the Album of Ahmed i,” Journal of Turkish Studies 34 (2010): 37–51. Fetvacı is also currently working on a monograph on this album.

78 (­ Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, Rastatt 201) was copied by al-ʿAbd Kalim al-Hadim alHayrati “in the shrine of sultan of Karbala,” referring to the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala.33 These examples point to the possibility of multiple centers of production in the province of Baghdad—and perhaps even in Basra, as the ­ Sefernāme of Yusuf Paşa might suggest—to links between these centers (being preserved in the same works, as in the album or the Karlsruhe genealogy), and to shrines as places of art production. The Ottomans did not share the Safavids’ treatment of shrines as centers for book production, collection or sale, as for example in the case of the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil, to which Shah ʿAbbas i donated his collection of manuscripts and china.34 However, in the case of the shrine of Imam Husayn, we see that it was also a place of production of manuscripts and paintings at the time it was under Ottoman control. In addition to these calligraphic samples with clear references to Baghdad and to Karbala, there are several independent single-page paintings and paintings that appear to have come from illustrated manuscripts, which are preserved in several Topkapı Palace albums. For example, a painting (from H. 2145) showing two youths (fig.  18) ­illustrates the style associated with some Baghdadi manuscripts and reflects the contemporary 33 The sample by al-ʿAbd Kalīm al-Hadīm al-Hayrātī shares the page with another calligraphic sample by Muḥammad Sharīf al-Haravī (fol. 17a). Two other samples are signed by Muḥammad Ḥusayn and Muḥammad Zamān al-Tabrizī. To further the suggestion that Karbala is also a center of manuscript production, one can note the Dīvān of Anwarī (d. 1189) copied by Muḥammad b. Naṣr ʿAlī in the shrine of Imām Ḥusayn in 1026 (1617) (Istanbul University Library F. 358). 34 For a study of the role of the dynastic shrine in the Safavid empire see Kishwar Rizvi, The Safavid Dynastic Shrine: Architecture, Religion and Power in Early Modern Iran (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011). On the differences in the treatment of shrines between Safavids and Ottomans, see Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, Illustration and the Art of the Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire.

Chapter 3

Figure 18 Two youths

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2145, fol. 19a

i­ nterest in the depiction of single figures and fashionable and amorous youths. The painting is bordered by verses on four sides. While the verses in large nastaʿlīq above and below the painting are taken from a ghazal by Amir Khusraw Dihlavi (d. 1325), those on the right and left sides of the painting repeat the same verses by Abu Saʿid Abuʾl Khayr copied by Hasan ʿAli in this album (on folio 23a). The seated youth on the right is dressed in a red brocaded garment with a swan pattern of gold, over which is a fur-lined, black, gold brocaded outer garment with long, dangling sleeves. In his right hand, he holds a gold brocaded white handkerchief, while he is reaching out to a small blue-and-white porcelain cup that the standing

79

From the Capital to the Province

youth is offering him. The standing youth facing him is dressed more simply, in a light blue, brocaded garment, with a short-sleeved light purple, brocaded outer garment. He also holds a white handkerchief with its sash brocaded with gold. Their distinctive, tri-lobed turban is often encountered in Baghdad painting from this period. The figures are outside on a dark green grass spotted with flowers. The background is gold and a light purple carnation awkwardly floats above. Note the almond-shaped eyes of the youths. These figures with almond-shaped eyes and a slight cast and arching eyebrows that meet in the middle, characteristic of Baghdad painting, can be likened to two paintings added to the end of the abovementioned late ­sixteenth-century Silsilenāme (Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, Rastatt 201) produced in Baghdad.35 The painting that follows the diagrammatic genealogy shows the Ottoman ruler ­Mehmed iii (r.  1595–1603) enthroned on a golden throne encrusted with turquoise (fig. 19). Like the seated youth in album H. 2145, he wears an orange, swan-patterned garment, with a fur-lined, brocaded white garment with a pattern of large khaṭāʾī (“Cathayan”) design. He wears a tall turban with two bejeweled aigrettes. The enthroned sultan is depicted beneath a red arch and against a light blue background of geometric ornament. Above the border of the painting, there are two cartouches that closely resemble the ­compositions of sultans’ portraits in illustrated manuscripts of the 1579 Şemāʾilnāme (Book of Physiognomy), where hemistichs about the sultan would be written in the cartouches. The Karlsruhe genealogy includes another painting attributable to Baghdad. It depicts a youth holding a bird in one hand, while a falcon is perched on his gloved wrist (fig. 20). Quite like 35

For a brief description of this manuscript see Hans Georg Majer, “Das Buch Quintessenz der Historien,” in Die Karlsruher Türkenbeute: Die “Türkische Kammer” des Markgrafen Ludwig Wilhelm von Baden-Baden, Die “Türkischen Curiositaeten” der Markgrafen von BadenDurlach, ed. Ernst Petrasch (Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1991), 369–78.

the portrait of Mehmed iii in this manuscript, the falconer wears a distinctive turban, and a red garment with a fur-lined, wide-patterned, brocaded white garment, here with long, draping sleeves. Like the previous painting, there are two cartouches outlined with gold and left empty. Additionally, the wide-patterned garment of these two figures is also often found in Baghdad paintings, for example, in figures 3e and 4. These three paintings can be compared with a painting found in another album from the Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2133–4. This painting (fig. 21) depicts three youths standing in a dark green landscape against a gold background while an attendant pours a drink into porcelain cups. Two of the standing youths hold small, blue-andwhite porcelain cups. The figure on the left— whose turban closely matches that of the falconer in figure 20—is dressed in a purple garment and a sleeveless black outer garment. The end of his dagger juts out from the slit in his garment. He ­extends a porcelain cup to the youth standing next to him, who has reached out to him to hold his hand. This figure in the middle wears a sky-blue garment and a white, brocaded outer garment. The figure on the right, a slightly portly youth, wears a red and yellow garment and is drinking from the porcelain cup. A youth on the lower left is pouring a drink into cups placed on a gold tray. Like the Karlsruhe paintings and the H. 2145 painting, the figures in H. 2133–4 wear rich, brocaded garments. The figures are somewhat stocky, but with a slight sway to their bodies (as in figs. 3b, 4, 10, 11). The color scheme in these paintings is also similar to the previously mentioned composition. Like the painting in H. 2145 (fig. 18), the grass is dark green and dotted with flowers. Surrounding the painting are verses written in white ink on a gold ground. The verses above and below the composition possibly belong to Baba Fighani (d. 1519), while the verses written vertically on the sides are unidentified.36 36

Aḥmad Suhaylī Khvansarī, ed. Dīvān-i Ashʿār-i Bābā Fighānī (Tehran: Iqbal, 1983), 243.

80

Chapter 3

Figure 19 Portrait of Mehmed iii. Silsilenāme

Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, fol. 15b

From the Capital to the Province

Figure 20 Falconer. Silsilenāme, Rastatt 201

Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, fol. 16b

81

82

Chapter 3

The page as a whole with the verses surrounding the painting allows alternative readings of the composition. The verses above and below may reference the lavishly dressed youths standing side by side, leisurely drinking from their cups while the poet/beloved/observer is distraught to see them: “There are a thousand diamond daggers in my heart / From those wearing silk robes side by side.” The verses on the right and left comment further on the nature of love, suggesting that: “Love is not through means and materials but through moaning lamentation. / Whoever does not wail in lamentation is abhorred. / In this path, a good name is cause for reputation / Leave aside your reputation, for time is short. / Man needs humility, not riches.” Together with these verses on the sides, the painting may also act as a warning to anyone tempted by the superficiality of the material, heightened in fact, through the lavish use of gold in the background and borders, the brocaded garments of the youths and blue-and-white porcelain cups from which they drink. Ironically, it appears to be disavowing luxury through luxuriant use of gold. Another painting that uses gold lavishly can be found in the album H. 2169 (fig. 22).37 It seems that the gold background covers an arched shape underneath, suggesting, in this case, the repurposing or embellishing of images. The painting is juxtaposed with verses by Saʿdi (d. 1291), written in large nastaʿlīq and placed vertically, while above and below are verses comparing the beauty and stature of the beloved to lavish garments. Featuring a youth and a female attendant, both with almondshaped eyes and arching eyebrows, and wide hips, this painting can also be attributed to Baghdad. Donning a similar turban as in those in figures 20 and 21, this youth also wears a fur-lined outer garment with wide floral patterns in gold. With one 37

On this album, see Banu Mahir, “Album H. 2169 in the Topkapı Palace Museum Library,” in Thirteenth International Congress of Turkish Art, ed. Géza Dávid and Ibolya Gerelyes (Budapest: Hungarian National Museum, 2009), 465–77.

hand, he grasps the sash around the waist of the attendant; with the other, he holds a golden cup. The attendant, wearing a small, aigretted cap, golden earrings and a brocaded white and orange garment, holds a golden ewer in her hand, while gently touching and disrobing the youth. The subtly erotic tone of the painting contrasts with verses taken from the introductory section of Saʿdi’s Bustan (on just rule) on the right, while the verses above and below—insofar as they deal with the beauty of the beloved—seem to reflect the amorous quality of the painting. In addition to these, a painting placed on a finely decorated margin populated with animals—­ including a giraffe, elephant, ox, and a monkey climbing a tree—depicts riders shooting arrows at a pole (fig. 23), and shows stylistic affinity to Baghdad paintings. Specifically, the page on the lower left, with one knee bent and depicted in profile, the figures with almond-shaped eyes and eyebrows meeting, and particularly the mounted ruler on the upper left wearing an aigretted turban, remind one of Baghdad paintings. Interestingly, he, like the others, wears the Qizilbash tāj (the distinctive turban wound around a cap with a red baton worn by the Safavids). Could this painting have been geared toward a pro-Safavid owner? While we cannot make a concrete attribution, it is most likely a Baghdadi work. If so, this painting would point to the breadth of possible buyers of art in Baghdad. This painting appears in H. 2165 (fig. 23)—an album that has a predominantly Persianate aesthetic in its paintings, border decoration, yet containing mainly Ottoman content in its inclusion of texts,38 including letters and imperial warrants and a qasida of Fuzuli written on the occasion of Süleyman i’s conquest of Baghdad. Another painting (fig. 24) included in this interesting album (H. 2165) has a stronger connection to Baghdad. The painting (also stylistically attributable to the province) is surrounded by verses that complain about an unnamed governor of 38 Fetvacı, Persian Aesthetics in Ottoman Albums. On H. 2165 see Mahir, Osmanlı Murakka Yapımcılığı, 401–11.

From the Capital to the Province

Figure 21 Three youths and an attendant

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2133–34, fol. 20b

83

84

Chapter 3

Figure 22 Youth and attendant

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2169, fol. 22b

From the Capital to the Province

Baghdad. The verses highlight Baghdad’s peculiar place as hosting important shrines including those of Imams ʿAli and Husayn, the seventh Shiʿi Imam Musa al-Kazim (d. 799), founder of the Hanafi legal school of thought, Abu Hanifa (d. 772), Junayd of Baghdad (d. 911) and his disciple Shibli (d. 945), founder of the Sunni Qadiriyya order ʿAbd al-­ Qadir al-Gilani (d. 1166), and the tenth and eleventh Shiʿi imams, ʿAli al-Hadi (d. 868) and Hasan al-ʿAskari (d. 874). The unidentified author of these verses writes: “In such holy ground, o ruler / Its condition is tyranny, oppression, and injustice. / He has no regard for learning and the learned. / He is quite hostile towards the virtuous. / He has degraded both rich and poor. / He has disparaged the poor.”39 These verses echo the problems of tyranny in the border province. This strongly opinionated complaint aligns with the majority of the texts that are included in this album (H. 2165). These, for the most part, deal with battles, legal questions, imperial warrants, etc. and thus share a predominant concern with the Ottomans, while the paintings, as mentioned previously, share a Persianate aesthetic. While the author of these verses and the governor in question are unknown, the fact that a painting attributable to Baghdad and this text regarding Baghdad and its unjust governor (though showing no other connection to the painting’s subject matter) are juxtaposed is surely no coincidence. This identification of the sacred topography of Baghdad will be relevant for the next chapter as well, which raises the issue of the textual ramifications of a multi-cultural/religious landscape. Another painting attributable to Baghdad based on its style takes up the theme of hunting (like figure 24), and depicts a hunter and a falconer carrying their catch; a musketed hunter aiming at a gazelle; a finely caparisoned horse held by an attendant; a crouching man; and a standing youth wearing a plumed turban and holding a stick in one hand (fig. 25). The iconography does not immediately suggest a particular text or referent, but 39

tpml H. 2165, fol. 22b.

85 the painting representing a princely hunt highlights the emancipation of painting from text. In addition to these single-page paintings representing youths in pairs or trios, or in leisurely pursuits that reflect an interest in the emancipated painting and perhaps an engagement with multiple sources, there are several paintings that are stylistically attributable to Baghdad that may have been repurposed from manuscript illustrations. Several of these appear in albums H. 2149 and H. 2133–34. There is as yet no information as to when, or by whom, these albums were compiled. There are no notes of ownership in H. 2149, except for a seal on a calligraphic sample on folio 42a, which belongs to a certain Ahmed bin Halil, whose ­identity I have not been able to determine. H. 2149 includes samples of calligraphy and Safavid paintings and drawings from mid-­sixteenth to the early seventeenth centuries, as well as several paintings that can be attributed to Baghdad.40 ­Interestingly, 40 Calligraphic samples in this album feature verses from the works of eleventh-century Khurasani Sufi shaykh and exegete ʿAbdullah Ansārī, mid-tenth/early eleventh-­century Persian Sufi poet Abū Saʿid Fażl Allah bin Abūʾl-Khayr Aḥmad, twelfth-century poet Niẓāmī and sixteenth-century Safavid author Mīr Qārī Gilānī and other unidentified works. In terms of the choice for texts and calligraphers whose works are included, there is a certain overlap between H. 2145 and H. 2149. For example, verses by Abū Saʿid Abūʾl Khayr are also included in H. 2145. This poet was also among the sources of Muḥammed Tāhir’s Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (Collection of Biographies), discussed in Chapter 2. In terms of paintings in H. 2149, there seems to be an emphasis on school scenes or scenes of preaching and conversation. This is something we encounter quite often in Baghdad painting from the late sixteenth century, particularly in illustrated works of popular religious literature, which will be discussed in the next chapter. H. 2149 includes samples of calligraphy by calligraphers such as ʿAlī al-Kātib, Sulṭan ʿAlī al-Mashhadī, Muḥammad Amīn b. Ibrāhim al-Mudhahhīb, Aḥmad al-Ḥusaynī, Faḳir ʿAlī and Muʿizz al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Ḥusaynī. There are several examples from the work of Muʿizz al-Dīn al-Ḥusaynī, which also appear in H. 2145 (fols. 5a, 5b, 10a, 38b, 41b). For another work by this calligrapher see Ṣıfat al-ʿĀshiqīn, dated 978 (1570–71) (Walters Art

86

Chapter 3

Figure 23 Shooting arrows at a pole

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2165, fol. 6a

From the Capital to the Province

Figure 24 Youth on horseback with attendants

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H.2165, fol. 22b

87

88

Chapter 3

Figure 25 Courtiers and attendants in a landscape

The Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Los Angeles, CA, M.85.237.25

From the Capital to the Province

there is an almost p ­ ersistent use of the text of the Shāh u Dervīsh (The Shah and the Dervish) of Hilali Chaghatayi (d. 1529–30), its verses cut up and pasted around the samples of calligraphy and paintings.41 Most of the Baghdadi paintings in this album portray scenes of conversation (fig. 26), mostly with books, either inside (fig. 27) or in a garden (fig. 28). Note in the latter painting the dark green hue of the grassy hill dotted with flowers, and the golden background, a color scheme often encountered in single-page paintings from Baghdad, as seen above. The paintings feature animated figures wearing wide turbans; some of the figures have almond-shaped eyes and thin, arching eyebrows. Scenes of gatherings in an interior or a mosque are also common compositions in illustrated works from Baghdad. We will encounter these in many of the compositions in works of popular literature, which will be discussed in the next chapter. Another painting from H. 2149 (fig. 29a) can be linked to the Topkapı Palace album, H. 2133–34 (fig. 29b), both in terms of style and in terms of the surrounding text from the Shāh u Dervīsh. In the former, a cross-legged, seated ruler appears to be in conversation with a bearded man dressed in green. A youth wearing a long-sleeved red and yellow garment stands on the right, while an attendant brings a bare-footed dervish-like captive on the lower left. In this painting, two vases with flowers stand on either side of a pool. This is a common feature for Baghdadi paintings where they appear in several audience scenes. On the

41

Museum W. 656). More research needs to be done on albums and on the choice of calligraphies, whether we can discern a particular choice as to content, calligrapher, style of writing, but it is worth noting that H. 2145 also contains an excerpt from the text of the Ṣıfat alʿĀshiqīn of Hilālī-yi Chagātāyī, the author of the Shāh u Dervīsh featured in H. 2149. On Hilālī, see Michele Bernardini, “Helali Astarabadi Jagataʾi” Encyclopaedia Iranica, xii, 152–54. Available online http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/helaliastarabadi-jagatai-mawlana-badr-al-din (accessed online at 11 May 2019).

89 top and ­bottom of the composition are verses from the Shāh u Dervīsh. Representing audience scenes with a narrative content, and sharing much in common compositionally with other contemporary Baghdadi audience scenes, these paintings were likely repurposed from illustrated manuscripts—in fact, in these paintings the texts that originally ­accompanied the paintings were pasted over with cut-out verses from the Shāh u Dervīsh. Similarly, fig. 29b shows a seated ruler wearing aigretted crowned headgear. Several men, one of whom holds a book in his hands, are seated around him. A bouquet of flowers in a golden vase can be seen before the ruler. A white-bearded man, dressed in maroon and orange and carrying a dagger and sword at his belt, leans on a stick and stands by the gate while a short, beardless figure portrayed in profile gestures toward him. An attendant dressed in yellow and wearing a fur cap lined with a gold-colored turban stands to the left of the seated ruler. As with the painting in H. 2149, this one is also bordered above and below with cut-out verses from the Shāh u Dervīsh, while the original text that accompanied the painting has been covered up. Interestingly, this album (H. 2133–34) also contains a Baghdadi painting that portrays a scene from the Shāh u Dervīsh—the beggar, a dark-skinned man wearing a short blue tunic and fleece, and a skull cap, presents a ball to the young prince on horseback (fig. 30). This chapter introduced previously unexamined paintings preserved in several Topkapı Palace albums. Even though we do not know where, when, or by whom these albums were compiled, these pages, especially those that do not appear to have come out of illustrated manuscripts, show that in addition to illustrated manuscripts, there was also a demand for single-page paintings in Baghdad. They demonstrate that, in addition to the corpus of manuscripts known to be from Baghdad (most of which are also different from the types of works produced and consumed in Istanbul in terms of subject matter), single-page paintings were produced in Baghdad. Some of these paintings partake of the new themes current

90

Chapter 3

Figure 26 Discussion in an interior setting

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol. 7a

91

From the Capital to the Province

in the capital, Istanbul. Similar to the changing means and markets in the capital at the end of the late sixteenth century, and in line with the newly rich trying to acquire single-page paintings, these album paintings show that there was a similar demand in Baghdad for such small-scale works. In addition, the calligraphic pieces copied by Hasan ʿAli in Karbala, as well as the two manuscripts of the Munājāt of ʿAbdullah Ansari, confirm that the

Figure 27 Two scenes of discussion indoors

shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala was a center for copying manuscripts. This reflects a practice more akin to that of the Safavids than the Ottomans. While more research is needed about the particularities of manuscript production in the provinces, these examples suggest that it was not only in the provincial center of Baghdad that there was art production.

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fols. 10b–11a

92

Chapter 3

Figure 28 Gathering outdoors. Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol. 8b

From the Capital to the Province

Figure 29a

A prisoner brought before a ruler

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2149, fol.19a

93

94

Figure 29b

Chapter 3

Audience scene

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2134, fol. 19b

From the Capital to the Province

Figure 30 The beggar presents the ball to the prince

Album, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2134, fol. 20a

95

Chapter 4

The Garden of the Blessed The previous chapter suggested that there were thematic similarities with the currents in the Ottoman capital and Baghdad when it came to single-page paintings. However, the majority of the illustrated manuscripts produced in Baghdad were thematically and stylistically different from those produced at the Ottoman court. Specifically, Ottoman courtly works focused for the most part on official histories, the deeds of sultans—and later, in the sixteenth century and the early seventeenth centuries on the deeds of commanders and viziers—and world histories that represented the Ottoman sultan as the culmination of history. The majority of works from Baghdad, however—­ especially those produced in multiples—were mainly popular religious stories. The propitious moment of a balanced supply of and demand for art in the sacred topography of Baghdad engendered multiple copies of illustrated works of a religious nature. While to some extent intersecting with public interest in the lives of prophets (note the corpus of illustrated manuscripts of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ (Stories of Prophets), and particularly of the Prophet Muhammad (e.g. Siyer-i Nebī (The Biography of the Prophet) produced at court), it was the Karbala tragedy that catalyzed the production of multiple illustrated texts in Baghdad.1 In addition to works on the Karbala tragedy, there were also several copies of illustrated works produced in late sixteenth-century Baghdad on the lives of Sufi mystics—particularly on the life and deeds of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273). With regard to the coexistence of illustrated texts on the Karbala tragedy and texts on the lives of 1 On the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ, see Rachel Milstein et al., Stories of the Prophets: Illustrated Manuscripts of Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ (Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1999). On the Siyer-i Nebī, see Zeren Tanındı, Siyer-i Nebī: İslam Tasvir Sanatında Hz. Muhammed (Istanbul: Hürriyet Vakfı Yayınları, 1984).

Sufi mystics, and the life and deeds of Rumi, Baghdad is unique. This uniqueness reflects (and is reflected by) the multi-cultural, multi-confessional nature of early modern Baghdad, the members of the Shiʿi Bektashi convents and the Sunni Mawlawi lodge in Baghdad being two possible instigators or consumers of these works. The central lodges of both Sufi orders were based in the Ottoman mainland in central Anatolia (Kırşehir and Konya respectively), with sub-branches proliferating in various Ottoman urban centers in this period. This chapter takes as a case study an early seventeenth-century manuscript of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā of Fuzuli of Baghdad (d. 1556) (Brooklyn Museum of Art 70.143), a manuscript with a secure attribution to Baghdad. Seeing this manuscript in connection with other illustrated copies of this text and other related texts, this chapter proposes that the popularity of works on the Karbala ­tragedy—likely read by the local Bektashi circles and ­others—stems from the very geography of Baghdad as a shrine center and that these works may have acted as visual reminders of the Karbala tragedy. Second, it considers how these works coexisted with works on the lives of Sufi mystics and of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi, with the latter probably having been commissioned by state-­ appointed governors, who had connections with the Mawlawi order. The proliferation of Mawlawi convents in this period in such cities as Cairo, Aleppo, and Baghdad was part of a process of Ottomanizing the Arab provinces of the empire, which had only been conquered recently, in the early century. The province of Baghdad was important not only for its location at a crossroads between the Indian Ocean through the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean, and mainland trade routes, but also for being a center of shrine visitation of importance to both the Ottomans and the Safavids. The Topkapı Palace Museum Library album page

The Garden of the Blessed

(fig.  24) d­ epicting a young hunter on horseback (discussed in the previous chapter) juxtaposes the painting to a poem complaining of the injustice of an unnamed governor of Baghdad. The poem highlights the sacred topography of Baghdad, which necessitates a certain type of behavior. The poet thus finds the unjust and tyrannical behavior of the governor unworthy of a province that contained the holy shrines of such eminent figures. For the city and its environs housed the shrines of Abu Hanifa (d. 767), Musa al-Kazim (d. 799) and Muhammad al-Jawad (d. 835), Hasan al-ʿAskari (d. 874) and ʿAli al-Hadi (d. 868), Salman Farisi (d. 656) and of the Sufi saint Maʿruf al-Karkhi (d. circa 815– 20). Within the citadel were the shrines of Shaykh Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi (d. 1234) and ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Gilani (d. 1166). With this conglomeration of shrines, Baghdad was known as the burc-u evliyā (bastion of saints). The province’s places of visitation (ziyāretgāh) are also highlighted in Nazmizade Murtaza’s (d. 1723) Teẕkire-yi Evliyā-yı Baġdād (Biographical Dictionary of the Saints of Baghdad), a work dedicated to the accounts of various saints and shaykhs buried in Baghdad, as well as Evliya Çelebi’s (d. after 1685) travelogue, which includes a list of shrines in and around Baghdad and places of burial and visitation, particularly of the seventy-two martyrs of Karbala.2 Shrines in the province of Baghdad were, not surprisingly, also highlighted in the illustrated account of Matrakçı Nasuh’s (d. 1564) Beyān-ı Menāzil-i Sefer-i ʿIraḳeyn (Description of the Stages of the Campaign in the Two Iraqs), which focused on the stops en route to Baghdad during Ottoman ruler Süleyman i’s (r. 1520–66) eastern campaign in 1534–36.3 2 Tahsin Özcan, “Nazmizade Murtaza Efendi,” Diyanet Islam Ansiklopedisi 32 (Ankara: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2006), 461–63; Yücel Dağlı and S. Kahraman, eds. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap Topkapı Sarayı Bağdat 305 Numaralı Yazmanın Transkripsiyonu–Dizini (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2000), 247–65. Hereafter, Evliya Çelebi, Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap. 3 Hüseyin G. Yurdaydın, Naṣūḥü’s Silāḥī (Maṭraḳçī), Beyān-ı Menāzil-i Sefer-i ʿIrāḳeyn-i Sulṭān Süleymān Hān (Ankara: Üniversite Basımevi, 1976).

97 Patronage of shrines, particularly in Najaf and Karbala, was important to the Safavids, as well as to the Ottomans. In 1574, the Safavid princess Pari Khan Khanum (d. 1578) sent several carpets and censers to the shrines in Baghdad.4 These shrines drew many Safavid visitors, who wanted to pay respect to saints, to contemplate, and to bury their dead, which at times became an issue. An order sent from the Ottoman capital to the governor of Baghdad in 1564–65 notes that pilgrims should use the Damascus and Egypt routes and that those wishing to visit the shrines in Baghdad must return after completing their spiritual duties; that burying their dead in the shrines was still prohibited and that it would only be allowed for the relatives of the shah. Another order from the same date asks for further information about whether the mother of the Safavid prince, Ismaʿil Mirza, who had fallen ill during her visit to the shrines, had recovered and returned or was putting off her departure. An order sent almost a decade later, in 1573–74, reiterates that corpses were not to be interred in the shrines and that care must be taken to follow this prohibition strictly. This suggests that, despite the ban, such practices continued.5 Evliya Çelebi, writing in the seventeenth century, adds that every year people came from the lands of ʿAjam to bury their dead in the shrine of Imam Musa al-Kazim, the Shiʿi imam to whom the Safavid dynasty traced its lineage.6 Shrines as places of visitation and contemplation were important both locally and interregionally. However, in the frontier context especially, they could also raise suspicion. A number of mühimme registers (registers of important affairs) from the 1560s onward testify to the precarious position of shrines in Baghdad. These shrines were viewed by the Ottoman central administration with suspicion as hubs of pro-Safavid activity in the frontier

4 Prime Ministry Archives, Mühimme Defteri 22.234.88. 5 Prime Ministry Archives, Mühimme Defteri 6.39.17, 6.665.313, 22.288.144. 6 Evliya Çelebi, Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap, 242.

98 province.7 Karakaya-Stump shows that Bektashi convents in the courtyards of the shrines of Shiʿi imams or those that were independent in Baghdad, Kazimiyya, Karbala, Najaf, and Samarra “functioned primarily as rest houses for those visiting the Shiʿi pilgrimage sites in these locations.”8 Drawing on a number of sources (not all of which come from the period in question in this book, but which make use of later oral reports as well) Karakaya-Stump hypothesizes that some dervishes in Bektashi convents in Iraq may have acted as “mediators between the Safavid shahs and their followers in Anatolia.”9 In addition, a letter from Sayyid Baqi—a Sufi from the line of Hacı Bektaş, and resident at the Bektashi convent in Karbala— to Sayyid Yusuf in Malatya, congratulating Shah ʿAbbas i’s conquest of Baghdad, further shows the pro-Safavid sentiments among some members of the convent.10 Regardless of Sufi affiliation, the border region of Baghdad (and particularly Basra) housed a sizable Shiʿi population. Regardless of possible pro-Shiʿi activities within Shiʿi shrines and Bektashi convents in Baghdad and its environs, the shrine centers drew many visitors. Some, like the poet Hamdi of Bursa, were inspired upon visiting the shrine of Imam Husayn to compose elegies; others visited Baghdad and 7

Colin Imber, “The Persecution of the Ottoman Shiʿites According to the Mühimme Defterleri, 1565–1585,” Der Islam 56 (1979): 245–73. 8 Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2008), 130. Hereafter, Karakaya-Stump, Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah. See also the more recent publication by Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, Vefailik, Bektaşilik, Kızılbaşlık: Alevi Kaynaklarını, Tarihini ve Tarihyazımını Yeniden Düşünmek (Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2015). 9 Karakaya-Stump, Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah, 168. 10 Karakaya-Stump, “Kızılbaş, Bektaşi, Safevi İlişkilerine Dair 17. Yüzyıldan Yeni Bir Belge (Yazı Çevirimli MetinGünümüz Türkçesiʾne Çeviri-Tıpkıbasım),” Journal of Turkish Studies 30/ii (2006): 117–30.

Chapter 4

its shrines during wider travels, like the sixteenthcentury poet Laʿli of Kayseri, who traveled through Egypt, Damascus, and Aleppo.11 Baghdad was a way station on the pilgrimage route; many visited this city and its shrines on the way to or from the Hijaz.12 Particularly during the Ottoman-Safavid wars of 1578–1590 and 1603–1618 the issue of pilgrimage routes through Baghdad was a major concern. Pilgrims were rerouted through Aleppo and Damascus, as Baghdad and Basra were deemed unsafe. In addition to safety concerns, possible suspicions of pro-Safavid activity within Shiʿi shrines and convents as well as the major Shiʿi population in Baghdad may have been reasons for such control over pilgrimage routes via Baghdad and Basra. However, this had to be balanced with the need to protect pilgrims’ right to pilgrimage. Also a vibrant cultural center, Baghdad drew many artists and poets in search of patronage. Hasan ʿAli Mashhadi, mentioned in the previous chapter, was one example. This is a particularly interesting case, for, as mentioned in the previous chapter, Mashhadi’s oeuvre suggests that shrines could also function as places for artistic activity. The tadhkira writer ʿAhdi (d. 1593) of Baghdad mentions that the poet Kelami (d. 1595–96)— who had traveled to the lands of ʿAjam, and had a Dīvān and a prose work titled Ḳıṣṣa-ı Ebū ʿAlī Sīnā (Story of Abu ʿAli Sina)—was connected to a certain Hüseyin Dede of the convent of the Abdals of Rum in the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala.13 Kelami, who was an acquaintance of ʿAhdi, Ruhi 11 Süleyman Solmaz, ed. Ahdī ve Gülşen-i Şuʿarāsı (İndeksli Tıpkıbasım) (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2014), 78b–79a, 173a. Hereafter, ʿAhdī, Gülşen-i Şuʿarā. 12 See Willem Floor and E. Herzig, Iran and the World in the Safavid Age (London and New York, I.B. Tauris, 2012), 84–85; Suraiya Faroqhi, Pilgrims and Sultans: The Hajj under the Ottomans (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 1994), 137–38. 13 Mustafa Karlıtepe, “Kelāmī Divanı” (MA Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi, 2007); Cihan Okuyucu, “Kelāmī Mahlaslı İki Divan Şairi: Kelāmī Cihan Dede ve Kelāmī-i Rūmī,” Divan Edebiyatı Araştırmaları Dergisi 1 (2008): 205–40; ʿAhdi, Gülşen-i Şuʿarā, 167a–b.

The Garden of the Blessed

(d. 1605), and Mustafa ʿĀli, was also named as the mütevellī (administrator of the pious endowment) of a fountain in Karbala founded by Mustafa ʿĀli.14 In addition, a letter sent from the Baghdadi poet Ruhi and included in his Dīvān, is addressed to this Kelami in Karbala.15 Contemporary accounts, such as Mustafa ʿĀli’s Künhüʾl Ahbār and biographical dictionaries, elucidate the networks of poets in Baghdad. Shrines, convents, and Mawlawi lodges were also centers of production of art and literature. For example, the Thawāqib al-Manāqib (Stars of the Merits) was adapted/translated by Derviş Mahmud (d. 1602) in 1590 in the Mawlawi lodge of Konya.16 The Baghdadi poet Fuzuli, receiving wages from the Ottoman waqf administration, worked as candle-lighter (çerāġcı) at the Bektashi convent in the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala, and after his death he was buried on the grounds of the convent.17 In the early seventeenth century, 14

15

16

17

On Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī’s foundation see Cornell Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa ʿAli (1541–1600) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), 124. Coşkun Ak, ed. Bağdatlı Rūḥī Dīvānı, Karşılaştırmalı Metin, 2 Vols. (Bursa: Uludağ Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2001), 159, 161, 271. Hereafter, Ruhi, Bağdatlı Ruhi Divanı. The translation by Derviş Maḥmud is based on the Persian abridgment of ʿAbd al-Wahhāb b. Muḥammed Hamadānī, which itself is based on the work titled Menāḳıbüʾl ʿĀrifīn by Aḥmad Aflāqī (d. 1360). On the Persian texts and the Turkish translation see Gönül Ayan, “Sevakıb-ı Menakıb ve Mevlana,” in iii. Uluslararası Mevlana Kongresi, 5–6 Mayıs 2003: Bildiriler (3rd International Mevlana Congress, 5–6 May 2003: Papers), ed. Nuri Şimşekler (Konya: T.C. Selçuk Üniversitesi, 2004), 79–84; Süheyl Ünver, Sevakıb-ı Menakıb, Mevlanaʾdan Hatıralar (Istanbul: Organon, 1973); Ahmet Yaşar Ocak, Kültür Tarihi Kaynağı Olarak Menakıbnameler: Metodolojik Bir Yaklaşım (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1992); Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, tpml R. 1479, fol. 4a. According to oral reports, Ayfer Karakaya-Stump notes that the “shaykhs of the Karbala convent had historically functioned as the çerağcıs for the shrine of Imam Husayn.” This is noted by ʿAlī Suʿād in his travels, who found out about this function from the shaykh of the convent, ʿAbdülḥüseyin Dede. The convent, according

99 the calligraphers Nusayra Dede (d. 1640) and ʿAbd al-Baqi al-Mawlawi worked at the Mawlawi lodge in Baghdad; the dedicatory panels of the lodge, which was built in 1599, were by the latter.18 Nusayra Dede was trained by Cünuni Dede (d. 1621) who lived in Baghdad in the early seventeenth century, and who then founded the Mawlawi lodge in Bursa. Nusayra Dede belonged to the line of ʿAbd al-Wahhab al-Hamadani, who had composed the Thawāqib al-Manāqib. He was in Baghdad as shaykh of the Mawlawi order, when Shah ʿAbbas i

to Karakaya-Stump, was in the courtyard of the tomb complex of Imam Ḥusayn. ʿAbdülḥüseyin Dede also notes that the convent was established five hundred years ago (reported in the early twentieth century). However, the connection between Fużūlī and the Bektashi convent is questioned by Bülent Yorulmaz and by Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı. Additionally, Halil İnalcık, referring to a Persian qasida of Fużūlī, opines that he worked in the shrine of Imām ʿAlī in Najaf. To date, there have been many studies regarding Fużūlī, some of which provide contradictory views based on the limited nature of documents regarding the poet. Karakaya-Stump, Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah, 135, 142–45; ʿAlī Suʿād, Seyahatlerim (Istan­bul: Kanaat Matbaası, 1916), 97; Mustafa Nihat, Metinlerle Muasır Türk Edebiyatı Tarihi (Istanbul: Devlet Matbaası, 1934), 523–25; Halil İnalcık, Şair ve ­Patron: Patrimonyal Devlet ve Sanat Üzerine Sosyolojik Bir İnceleme (Ankara: Doğu Batı, 2003), 59. Hereafter, Halil İnalcık, Şair ve Patron; Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, Fuzūlī Dīvānı (Istanbul: İnkılap, 2005), xxxv. Bülent Yorulmaz, “Kerbela ve Fuzuliʾye Dair,” in I. Uluslararası Hacı Bektaş Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Ankara: Hacı Bektaş Anadolu Kültür Vakfı, 2000), 371–401. 18 Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 2–3; Justin Marozzi, Baghdad: City of Peace, City of Blood (London: Allen Lane, 2014), 187–88; Filiz Çağman, “xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen Bir Minyatür Okulu,” in I. Milletlerarası Türkoloji Kongresi (Istanbul: Tercüman Gazetesi, 1979): 662–63. Hereafter, Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen Bir Minyatür Okulu; Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, “The Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire,” in Sufism and Sufis in Ottoman Society, ed. Ahmet Yaşar Ocak (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2005), 501–31, 523.

100

Chapter 4

took Baghdad 1623.19 Likewise, Nazmizade Murtaza mentions that Muhammed Çelebi, the scribe and confidant—and later murderer—of the rebel Tavilzade Muhammed (discussed in Chapter 1), was the founder of the Mawlawi lodge in which Nusayra Dede and ʿAbd al-Baqi Mawlawi were active.20 Evliya Çelebi also mentions a Mawlawi lodge in Baghdad, as well as a Bektashi lodge. In writing about the bridge that spans the Tigris near the citadel, Evliya writes, “all the heart-captivating beauties of Baghdad dip into the river from this bridge. A pleasure outing of Baghdad is at the foot of this bridge. It is a sight to behold, this bridge, adorned with coffeehouses and Mawlawi lodges.”21 19

20

21

ʿAlī Enver, Semāhāne-i Edeb (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2013), 199–20; Sāḳıb Dede, Sefīne-i Nefīse-i Mevlevīyān, Vol. 2 (Bulak, 1283), 185. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża, Gülşen-i Hulefā: Bağdat Tarihi, 762–1717, ed. Mehmet Karataş (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2014), 194; Clément Huart, Histoire de Bagdad dans les Temps Modernes (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1901), 46; Richard Coke, Baghdad: The City of Peace (London: Butterworth, 1927), 193; ʿAbbās al-Azzawī, Tārīkh al-ʿIrāq, Vol. 4 (Baghdad: Maṭbaʿat Baghdād, 1935–49), 129–130; Rachel Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 3; Erdinç Gülcü, “Osmanlı İdaresinde Bağdat (1534–1623)” (PhD diss., Fırat Üniversitesi, 1999), 195; Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı, Mevlanadan Sonra Mevlevilik (Istanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1953), 334–35. Evliyā Çelebi, Seyahatname Vol. iv, 239; Naẓmīzāde Murtaża mentions a coffeehouse built by Governor Ciġalazāde Sinān Paşa, and adds that a poem was composed for the building of the coffeehouse. The seventeenth-century Safavid tadhkira writer, Taqī Awḥadī, writes that Mir ʿAbd al-Bāqī Nayrizī, poet and calligrapher, had spent some time in Shiraz, and later settled in Baghdad. He notes that he was well respected in Baghdad. In Baghdad, the poet was greatly in love with a coffee vendor. It is possible that Mīr ʿAbd al-Bāqī Nayrizī was a frequenter of Ciġalazāde’s coffeehouse in Baghdad, where he encountered the youth. It is also interesting to think of possible connections and networks taking place in the coffeehouses. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża, Gülşen-i Hulefā, 191–93; Taqī Awḥādī, ʿArafāt al-ʿAshiqīn wa ʿAraṣat al-ʿArifīn (The Places of Assembly for the Lovers and the Open Spaces for the Mystics), Vol. 5 (Tehran: Mīrās-ı Maktub: Bā Hamkārī-i Kitābkhānah,

Most likely, these centers also housed painters who produced illustrated copies of popular religious texts, and members or supporters of the Mawlawi order in Baghdad were also patrons of these works. Filiz Çağman was among the first to suggest that illustrated manuscripts of popular religious literature, and particularly of manuscripts of saintly biography, may have been made for a Mawlawi audience in Baghdad and Konya. Later studies, such as Milstein’s seminal study on Baghdad painting, as well as others, including those by Justin Marozzi and Tülay Artan, concur.22 Circumstantial evidence does point to the importance in Baghdad of the Mawlawi order, a Sunni order that counterbalanced the predominantly Shiʿi landscape of the city in the Ottoman period, to the supply and demand of these illustrated manuscripts. Unfortunately, there is little information on the activities of the Mawlawi order in Baghdad. However, it appears that governors appointed from the capital had connections to the Mawlawi order and they may have been agents in the production of illustrated Mawlawi texts. An additional historical note is that Governor Hasan Paşa (d. 1602), the son of the grand vizier Sokollu Mehmed Paşa (d. 1579) and patron of architecture and illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad (discussed in Chapter 2), gifted a silver door for the prayer room of the Mawlawi lodge in Konya. This point of fact further supports a connection between the patronage of the supporters of the Mawlawi order and the illustrated copies of p ­ opular

22

Mūzih va Markaz-i Asnād-i Majlīs-i Shūrā-yi Islāmī), 2853. Filiz Çağman, xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahla­ rında Gelişen Bir Minyatür Okulu; Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad; Justin Marozzi, Baghdad: City of Peace, 187–88; Tülay Artan, “Arts and Architecture,” in The Cambridge History of Turkey, Vol. 3, ed. Suraiya Faroqhi (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 408–80, accessed January 08, 2016, http://universitypublishingonline.org.ezpprod1.hul.harvard.edu/cambridge/histories/ebook. jsf?bid=CBO9781139054119. Hereafter, Artan, Arts and Architecture.

The Garden of the Blessed

religious texts, particularly on the life of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi.23 Hasan Paşa’s Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (Collection of Biographies) bears further evidence of a Mawlawi connection in its inclusion of two paintings, one depicting the final sermon of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi’s father, Baha al-Din Walad (d. 1231) in Balkh (fig. 9), the other, depicting Mawlana meeting Shams-i Tabrizi (d. 1248) (fig. 10). Çağman and Tanındı point out the uniqueness of the inclusion of these figures when compared to illustrated books of history produced in Istanbul.24 In addition, the illustrated campaign logbook of Governor Çerkes Yusuf Paşa (d. 1614) also includes paintings representing the governor among whirling dervishes in Konya, and paying his respect at the shrine of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi and at the tombs of Seljuk rulers (fig. 12).25 Visiting the Mawlawi shrine in Konya regardless of one’s religious affiliation, was popular, as encountered in the case of commander Lala Mustafa Paşa (d. 1580) and Mustafa ʿĀli (d. 1600), who paid their respects, and had a prognostication based on the Mathnawī of Rumi, on the way to the campaign against the Safavids.26 This visitation was given heightened emphasis in the Nuṣretnāme (Book of Victory) with the inclusion of a painting representing the commander, the author, and the shaykh of the convent in the tomb of Rumi in the background, and whirling dervishes in the foreground.27 The importance of the province of Baghdad as a spiritual center that drew many visitors of various backgrounds and religious inclinations is relevant 23

Serpil Bağcı, “Seyyid Battal Gazi Türbesiʾnin Gümüş Kapısı Üzerine Bazı Gözlemler,” in 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi: Bildiriler, 23–27 Eylül 1991 (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1995), 225–38; Mehmet Yusufoğlu, “Gümüş Kapı,” Anıt ½ (1949): 4–6. 24 Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, The Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire, 519. 25 Artan, Arts and Architecture, 430. 26 Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 64. Hereafter, Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan. 27 For a reproduction of this painting see ibid., 66.

101 for understanding the popularity of illustrated manuscripts of religious literature. The coexistence in Baghdad of the more aristocratic Mawlawi branch of Sufi orders, shrine centers of ­importance for Sunnis and Shiʿis alike, and Bektashi convents, with possibly pro-Safavid inclinations, is one aspect of the convergence of multiple identities. As suggested by the banter between the poet Fazli and Mawlana Shani in Baghdad, coexistence at times came with disputation. However, the dispute also points to the multifaceted cultural life in Baghdad, particularly in the period after the peace settlement between the Ottomans and Safavids, and at the auspicious conglomeration of enough wealth and interest in illustrated manuscripts and their supply. Especially in the case of illustrated manuscripts of religious literature, the different genres of texts and their multiple copies suggest a broad clientele. Multiple illustrated copies of works on the Karbala tragedy in a region that housed the shrines of Imams ʿAli and Husayn and the site of the martyrdom of the seventy-two members of Husayn’s family and followers appear together with texts dealing with the lives of Sufi mystics and of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi. It is not only in texts relating the life and deeds of Rumi and of Sufi mystics that figures associated with the Mawlawi order appear, but in other paintings from Baghdad as well, where the text does not necessarily call for their inclusion. A similar tendency can also be observed in the Album of Ahmed i, where an album page (B. 408, folio 9a) juxtaposes a painting of a Mawlawi dervish holding a book and a fan, to paintings of a possibly Wallachian youth, two youths with turbans on their heads and thin daggers hanging from their belts, and two women, one holding a flower, the other nude but for a transparent cloth held around her waist. Another painting portrays two Mawlawis seated outside drinking from porcelain cups (fig. 31). In the foreground, there is a youth partially reclining on a pillow as a page serves him a drink. Another youth stands on the right while two sit opposite.

102

Chapter 4

Figure 31 Page from the Album of Ahmed i, central image showing in the foreground a youth being offered coffee, and Mawlawis in the background drinking coffee Topkapı Palace Museum Library, B. 408. fol. 17a

These paintings are interesting for the inclusion of Mawlawi figures in seemingly unlikely contexts. Consequently, one may justifiably interpret these as pointing to the inklings of a proliferation of Mawlawi culture in the visual arts not only in Baghdad but also in Istanbul. Additionally, around the time when copying of the Mathnawī became more widespread in Istanbul, we come across multiple paintings of Mawlawi figures in the circa 1620 costume album, The Habits of the Grand Signor’s Court (British Museum 1928.0323.0.46.1–122). The Mawlawi order had close ties with the ­Ottoman state. Among the governors of Baghdad, Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa and Çerkes Yusuf Paşa had connections with the order, at least as evidenced

through their patronage. The fewer, yet more copiously illustrated, texts on the lives of Sufi mystics and on Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi may have been commissioned either by governors or by eminent members or supporters of the Mawlawi order perhaps in an effort to counterbalance the popularity of illustrated texts on the Karbala tragedy. The appearance and coexistence of these different types of texts point to the multiplicity of confessions in Baghdad. The majority of the illustrated manuscripts produced in Baghdad are works of popular religious literature. Works of saintly biography and those on the Karbala tragedy composed in Turkish and Persian abound. Among these are the Nafahāt al-Uns

103

The Garden of the Blessed

(Breaths of Intimacy) of Jami (d. 1492), Manāqib al-ʿĀrifīn (Merits of the Mystics) of Aflaki (d. 1360), and Tercüme-i Sevāḳıbü’l-Menāḳıb (Translation of the Stars of the Merits) of Derviş Mahmud Mes­ nevihvan. These are works of saintly ­biography. In addition, the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ (Garden of Martyrs) of Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi (d. 1504–5), Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā of Fuzuli, and Maḳtel Āl-i Resūl (Killing of the Prophet’s Family) of Lamiʿi Çelebi (d. 1533) are devoted to the Karbala tragedy.28 Some of the illustrated works from Baghdad are relatively new works, several of them dating from the mid-to-late sixteenth century in their time of composition/translation. In addition to their newness as texts, the majority of the compositions are also remarkable for their originality, marking the liveliness of Baghdad as a place of artistic creation. Several included compositional innovations that stemmed from their subject matter. While these works also speak to a wider pre-occupation with stories of the lives of prophets, in particular of the Prophet Muhammad, as well as concerns with the expected arrival of the Apocalypse, the popularity of illustrated copies of works on both the Karbala tragedy and lives of Sufi mystics is unique to Baghdad. 28

Several studies have been devoted to this group of popular religious literature. Among these are works by ­Rachel Milstein, “Nimrod, Joseph and Jonah: Miniatures from Ottoman Baghdad,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 1 (1987): 123–38; Naʿama Brosh and R. Milstein, Biblical Stories in Islamic Painting (Jerusalem: Israel Museum, 1991); Oben Lale Kalgay, “Lamiī Çelebiʾnin Maktel-i Āl-i Resūl Adlı Eserinin Tasvirli bir Nüshası: Istanbul Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesi T. 1958” (MA thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 2015); Hesna Haral, “Osmanlı Minyatüründe Mevlanaʾnın Yaşam Öyküsü: Menākıbüʾl Ārifīn ve Tercüme-i Svākıb-ı Menākıb Nüshaları” (PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, 2014). Hereafter, Haral, Osmanlı Minyatüründe Mevlanaʾnın Yaşam Öyküsü. On Kāshifī’s oeuvre, see Maria Subtelny, “Husayn Vaʾiz-i Kashifi: Polymath, Popularizer, and Preserver,” Iranian Studies 36 (2003): 463–67 as well as this volume of the journal for articles on various works and aspects of Kāshifī’s literary output.

While the majority of the surviving manuscripts do not include patrons’ names, we may speculate that—given the possibilities of a rise in wealth and rank in this period—wealthy individuals, officials, and governors may have commissioned or purchased these works. The social and economic transformations observed in the capital in the late sixteenth century were also felt in Baghdad as well. The art market in Baghdad, which emerged in the late sixteenth century, can be seen as a reflection of these broader changes. As the first and second chapters suggested, several governors, as well as upstarts in Baghdad, acquired great amounts of wealth and some became patrons of architecture and art. Lesser officials also owned books, albeit unillustrated, as the case of a certain Hasan Çavuş, who was among the chief sergeants of Governor Cigalazade Yusuf Sinan Paşa and who owned an unillustrated copy of the Hümāyūnnāme (The Imperial Book) shows.29 Moreover, a late ­seventeenth-century governor of Baghdad, Ahmed Paşa, appears to have amassed a sizable treasury of porcelains and celadons, exceeding that of the queen mother and the grand vizier.30 In addition to Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa, Çerkes Yusuf Paşa, and Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa (whose victories against the Safavids in 1583 in the border regions were recounted and illustrated with two maps),31 the rare, illustrated copy of the 29

30

31

Şebnem Parladır’s extensive research on illustrated and non-illustrated copies of ʿAlī Çelebi’s Hümāyūnnāme show that in addition to the illustrated copy of this work produced in Baghdad, there were several unillustrated copies, the colophons of which show Baghdad as the place of copying. Şebnem Parladır, “Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebiʾnin Hümāyūnnāmesi” (PhD. diss, Ege Üniversitesi, 2011), 83. Hereafter, Şebnem Parladır, Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebiʾnin Hümāyūnnāmesi. Julian Raby and Ünsal Yücel, Chinese Ceramics in the Topkapı Saray Museum Istanbul: A Complete Catalogue, Vol. 1 (London: Sotheby’s Publications, 1986), 89. Ẓafernāme-i ʿAlī Paşa, Millet Kütüphanesi Ali Emiri Tarih Nu. 396; Hamza Üzümcü, “Niyazī ve Zafer-nāme-i

104

Chapter 4

Mathnawī of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi, presents us with further evidence of a named patron. The colophon of the manuscript provides the date (28 February 1603) and the name of the patron Imam Verdi Beg b. Alp Arslan Dhuʾl Qadr, whose identity remains unknown.32 In ­addition to this illustrated Mathnawī, a genealogy at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara (discussed in the final chapter) also shows that it was not only Ottomans who were patrons of art in Baghdad. Like the vogue for luxury Shiraz manuscripts among Ottoman, Turkmen and Safavid elites, the Mathnawī and the Ankara genealogy suggest a broader clientele for manuscripts produced in Baghdad. However, unlike Shiraz manuscripts purchased by a metropolitan elite, the smaller corpus of Baghdad manuscripts appears to have been geared toward (and sustained by) the local market. In comparison to the single, illustrated copy of the Mathnawī, Fuzuli’s translation/adaptation of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, titled Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, was quite popular. Illustrated manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā were copied more widely than any of the other above-mentioned works.33 It appears to be the most popular among the illustrated works of religious stories and saintly biographies. Together with the illustrated genealogies, the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā copies constitute the majority of the illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad in the late sixteenth century.

32

33

Ali Paşa,” Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi 4 (2015): 105–20. On this manuscript, see the catalogue entry by Barbara Schmitz, Islamic Manuscripts in the New York Public Library (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 265–67, and Melis Taner, “Caught in a Whirlwind: Painting in Baghdad in the Late Sixteenth-Early Seventeenth Centuries” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2016), 130, footnote 315. For an overview of illuminated and ­illustrated copies of the Mathnawī as well as patronage of art by the Mawlawi order, see Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, “Illustration and the Art of the Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire,” in Sufism and Sufis in Ottoman Society, ed. Ahmet Yaşar Ocak (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2006), 501–27. For a list of the manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā that can be attributed to Baghdad see the Appendix.

1 Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā The Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā was composed by Fuzuli as a translation/adaptation of Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi’s Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ. The date of the composition of this work is not known. However, Fuzuli notes that this work was composed for Mehmed Paşa, one of the officials of Süleyman i.34 Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi’s Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ and the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā both deal with the sufferings of Prophet Muhammad and his family, and particularly the Karbala tragedy. As such, they can be considered in the wider context of works composed in Arabic and Persian on the Karbala tragedy.35 Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā follows the structure and 34

35

Şeyma Güngör, Hadikatü’s Süeda (Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 1987), xxxi. Hereafter, Güngör, Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā; Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Turkish Manuscripts in the British Museum (London: British Museum, 1888), 19, 40. Abū Mikhnaf Lūt b. Yahya’s (d. 774) Kitābu Maḳteliʾl Ḥusayn (Book of the Killing of Husayn) is among the first works in Arabic on the Karbala tragedy and is one of the sources for Fużūlī’s work as well. Abūʾl Faraj al-Isfahānī (d. 967) and Abū Iṣḥaḳ Isfarāyinī (d. 1027) have also composed works on the Karbala tragedy in Arabic. Ḥusayn Vaʾiz Kāshifī’s Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ is the most well-known Persian work on the Karbala tragedy. Several works of maqtal literature have also been composed in Ottoman Turkish (from at least the mid-fourteenth century onwards), one of the most popular being Lāmīʿī Çelebi’s Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl. Before the composition of Lāmīʿī Çelebi’s maqtal, we can also note the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin of the fourteenth-century author, Şazī from Kastamonu. On maqtal literature see Güngör, Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā, xxii–xxix; Abdülkadir Karahan, Anadolu Türk Edebiyatında Maktel-i Hüseyinler; Ferdinand Wüstenfeld, Der Tod des Ḥusein ben ʿAlī und die Rache (Göttingen, 1882); Ursula Sezgin, Abū Mihnaf: Ein Beitrag zur Historiographie der Umaiyadischen Zeit (Leiden: Brill, 1971); Sebastian Günther, “Maqātil Literature in Medieval Islam,” Journal of Arabic Literature 25 (1994): 192– 212; Saliha Karataş, “Kastamonulu Şāzīʾnin Maktel-i Hüseynʾi Üzerine Tahlil ve İnceleme” (MA Thesis, Fatih Üniversitesi, 2012); Metin And, Ritüelden Drama: Kerbela-Muharrem-Taziye (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2002). Hereafter, Metin And, Ritüelden Drama.

105

The Garden of the Blessed

organization of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ—both are works in prose interspersed with verse.36 Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā consists of ten chapters and ends with a conclusion. It makes use of early ­examples of maqtal literature and histories (such as that of Tabari) in Arabic as well as the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ.37 Important to note is the fact that the concluding section of Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā differs from that of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ: Fuzuli adds a section on the story of the surviving women and children from Husayn’s family being taken to Damascus and ends with an elegy for Imam Husayn. Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi’s concluding section, however, concerns the story of the Twelve Imams, which Fuzuli provides in his work only in summary form. In his biographical dictionary, the tadhkira writer Kınalızade Hasan Çelebi (d. 1604) notes the difference of Fuzuli’s work. ­Specifically, Kınalızade Hasan Çelebi suggests that it is no mere translation, but that “he [Fuzuli] had planted such saplings of eloquence in that delicate garden, which bore fruit of a kind that Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi had never seen.”38 In addition to slight variations in the text and conclusion, the two authors’ reasons for composition also differ. While Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi’s 36



37



38

Cem Dilçin points out that several of the Turkish verses included in the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā are also included in his Turkish Dīvān. Cem Dilçin, Studies on Fuzuli’s Divan (Cambridge, MA: Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, 2001), 136. While Fużūlī refers to other works, such as the maqtal of Abū Mihnaf, the Shawāhīd-i Nubuwwat (The Witnesses of Prophecy) of Jāmī and the Kanz al-Gharāʾīb (Treasure of Wonders), Abid Nazar Mahdum shows that these references are also found in the Rawżat alShuhadāʾ in the same instances. Abid Nazar Mahdum, “Ravzatü’ş Şüheda ile Hadikatü’sSüeda Mukayesesinin Işığında Eski Türk Edebiyatında Tercüme Anlayışı” (PhD diss., Istanbul Üniversitesi, 2001), 135–36. Hereafter, Abid Nazar Mahdum, Ravzatü’ş Şüheda ile Hadikatü’s-Süeda Mukayesesinin Işığında Eski Türk Edebiyatında Tercüme Anlayışı. Kınalızāde Ḥasan Çelebi, Teẕkiretü’ş Şuʿarā, ed. İbrahim Kutluk (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1981), Vol. 2, 759. Hereafter, Ḥasan Çelebi, Teẕkiretü’ş Şuʿarā.

r­ eason for composition is to create a comprehensive and detailed account of the lives of prophets and martyrs, which he finds lacking, Fuzuli’s aim for composition is to provide the story of the martyrs of Karbala in the Turkish language. Fuzuli’s linguistic goal is indicative of his interest in the story and remembrance of the Karbala tragedy in Baghdad. Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā reiterates the ­importance of remembrance and grieving for the martyrdom of the Prophet’s family and particularly for the Karbala tragedy. He notes that every year, in the month of Muharram, people go to Karbala to renew the observances of mourning.39 He adds, however, that: whereas Arab and Persian nobles were able to ­benefit from listening to the tales of battles in Karbala, venerable Turks, who were a considerable part of the congregation, would be deprived of understanding the truth of the matter; they would be left out of the ranks of the assembly like needless lines on the pages of a book.40 Thus, the author was incited to compose a work in the “renewed style” (ṭarz-ı mücedded) so that eloquent men speaking Turkish would also benefit from hearing it.41 While there are conflicting accounts regarding Fuzuli’s birthplace (Baghdad, Karbala, Hilla or Najaf), it appears from the extent of his writings, as well as from tadhkiras, that he did not leave ʿIraq-i ʿArab. Fuzuli’s particular choice of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ (which had, for the most part, supplanted earlier examples of maqtal literature) for translation into Turkish in Baghdad and his reasons for the translation/adaptation collectively point to the interest in the remembrance of the Karbala tragedy in the very topography in which it took place. It is hardly surprising that this text, composed by a native-born son of the very bloodsoaked planes of such potent sacred memory, became especially popular in Baghdad. 39 Güngör, Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 16. 40 Ibid. 41 Ibid.

106

Chapter 4

It is germane at this point to once again highlight the Baghdadi author’s reason for composition. Given his background, as well as in light  of the religious-political landscape in which ­Fuzuli’s text is ineluctably inscribed, we can identify a multi-ethnic and possibly multi-confessional ­target audience that listened to the performance of the s­ tory of the Karbala tragedy. Thus, Fuzuli’s text, while immortalized in writing also suggests an oral and performative aspect in its language. Though manuscript copies of the text were numerous (pointing to the popularity of the work in its circulation), the division of the work into ten chapters points to the possible performance of this work through the reading/listening of a chapter each day over ten days of Muharram.42 Some four decades after the composition of this work, the text took on a new appearance and renewed 42

Muḥarram rituals and celebrations have been of interest to a number of scholars, ranging from scholars of anthropology to drama. Emphasis has mainly been on Muḥarram rituals in Iran. See Jean Calmard, “Les Rituels Shiites et le Pouvoir,” in Études Safavides, ed. J. Calmard (Paris: Institut Français de Recherche en Iran, 1993), 109–50; Jean Calmard, “Shiʿi Rituals ii,” in Safavid Persia, ed. Charles Melville (London: I.B. Tauris, 1996), 139–90; idem, “Muḥarram Ceremonies and Diplomacy (A Preliminary Study),” in Qajar Iran: Political, Social and Cultural Change 1800–1925, ed. Edmund Bosworth and Carole Hillenbrand (Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1983), 213–28; Peter Chelkowski, ed. Taʿziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran (New York: New York University Press, 1979); Peter Chelkowski, “Shia Muslim Processional Performances,” Drama Review 29 (1985): 18–30; Babak Rahimi, Theater State and the Formation of Early Modern Public Sphere in Iran (Leiden: Brill, 2012); Heather Empey, “The Shiʿi Passion: Taʿziyeh, Tragedy and the Sublime” (PhD diss., McGill University, 2004). Ali J. Hussain, “The Mourning of History and the History of Mourning: The Evolution of Ritual Commemoration of the Battle of Karbala,” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 25 (2005): 78–88. For a preliminary study on muḥarram rituals in eastern Anatolia, see Erkan Beder, “Iğdır İlinde Muharrem Ayı Törenleri” (MA thesis, Atatürk Üniversitesi, 2011).

popularity through the addition of paintings. The animated compositions, and scenes of preaching most often with expressive and affectated audiences in illustrated copies of this work, hint at the performative aspect of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā. Almost a century after the death of Fuzuli, the t­raveler Evliya Çelebi noted the performance of Fuzuli’s “unfavorable” (nā-pesendīde) work in Dergezin in the month of Muharram. In the following, Evliya Çelebi writes of his observations of the Muharram commemoration, when people gathered in and around tents outside the town of Dergezin: All the Shiʿis, heretics, revilers, cursers, tülüngīs, dervishes, qalandaris, kharijites sat side by side in the tent enclosure to listen to the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin (Killing of Husayn). A four-foot, motherof-pearl bench and a five-stepped pulpit were then brought. Then, when a turbaned, donkey-eared, camel-lipped, disgusting ‘shaykh’ with puttees on his legs and eyes blackened with kohl and all his facial hair shaved, appeared from behind the tent enclosure, all stood up to greet him. Receiving their greetings, the ‘shaykh’ ascended the pulpit and began with a Fatiha and blessings on the malicious shah; when he reached the section on the martyrs of Karbala, speaking preposterous words from the unfavorable work Fuzuli of Baghdad’s Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin, what life remained in those listening! Such shrieking and wailing came from that group of ʿAjam soldiers that one would think Judgment Day had ­arrived…When the khan said: “Oh Evliya Agha, rise and look!” the lowly one stood and readied himself for the show (temāşā). When the ‘shaykh’ reached the part where Husayn was martyred, the curtain behind the pulpit parted and a man brought out an effigy of Imam Husayn, blood trickling down his neck, his noble head severed, blood spurting forth. When the image of Husayn and his offspring and martyrs of Karbala were portrayed, all the lovers of the house of the ahl al-bayt cried out “Ah Husayn, Shah Husayn!” and held their arms out to the barbers, who, like butchers, knicked their arms with razors and cut

107

The Garden of the Blessed

their chests in pieces and let their blood flow for the love of Husayn.43 In his description of the commemoration, Evliya Çelebi is careful to emphasize that the population of Dergezin was Shiʿite (ammā cümlesi Şiʿi meẕheblerdir); his view on Fuzuli’s work is outright negative, particularly in his vivid description of the rawża-khwān (reciter of the Garden [of the Martyrs]). While implicit, Evliya’s portrayal of the shaykh as a man with a shaved head and face brings to mind the exonymous dervishes that the sixteenth-century Bursa preacher Monla ʿArab associated with the readers of the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin. Evliya Çelebi’s description of the gathering and performance also points to the continued interest in Fuzuli’s work and its theatrical performance in the border region of Dergezin. Theatrical performance of the taʿziyeh commemorations became more established during Safavid rule; especially during the reign of Shah ʿAbbas i, it became an important public event attended by the shah himself.44 While found unfavorable by Evliya Çelebi, Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā was quite popular.45 The mid-sixteenth-century Baghdadi tadhkira writer ʿAhdi noted that the work was currently well known.46 While the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā was widely According to Robert Dankoff, tülüngī is a term for Safavid followers or an assumed name for Safavid spies and cevellaki is used for Safavid dervishes. Robert Dankoff, Evliyā Çelebi Seyahatnāmesi Okuma Sözlüğü (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2008), 82, 230; Evliya Çelebi, Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap, 200. 44 Rahimi provides an overview of the development of the Muḥarram rituals from the seventh to the seventeenth centuries, from a rather esoteric practice into a state sponsored public spectacle. Babak Rahimi, Theater State and the Formation of Early Modern Public Sphere in Iran, 199–234. 45 Güngör has identified 229 manuscript copies of the work, not including possible copies in private collections Güngör, Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, LV. 46 ʿAhdī, Gülşen-i Şuʿarā, fol. 156a.

read and copied, it was in Baghdad that this work took on a new appearance in the late sixteenth century with the addition of paintings. Manuscript copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā appear in commodity lists and probate inventory lists of eminent officials. Among them, we can point out the late eighteenth-century governor of Baghdad, Hafız Mustafa Paşa (d. 1778) as an example. This governor’s commodity list includes a large number of books. Notable among them is a copy of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Menākıbüʾl Evliyā, as well as an Akhlāq-ı Muḥsinī (Virtues of the Benefactor). The other included books are mostly works of history. The inclusion of the Akhlāq-ı Muḥsinī of Husayn Waʾiz Kashifi is particularly interesting. The list does not note whether the manuscripts are illustrated or not. However, there is an illustrated copy of this work (attributable to Baghdad) in the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (R. 392).47 This chapter describes and analyzes the paintings of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā manuscript in the Brooklyn Museum of Art (70.143) with the aim, first, to point out the repetition of compositions in these manuscripts, and second, to point to certain innovations in these compositions where previous models were available. 2

43

The Brooklyn Museum of Art’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

The reason for my particular emphasis on the Brooklyn manuscript is on account of the fact that the colophon of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā denotes that the manuscript was copied in Baghdad. This is the only manuscript of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā that contains a colophon stating its place of production. This manuscript was copied by ʿAzizullah al-Husayni al-Kashani in 1602 (Jumada ii 1011) in Baghdad. It was this manuscript that allowed Çağman to localize the rest of the corpus of 47

“Bağdad valisi Hafız Mustafa Paşaʾnın Eşya Listesi,” tpma D. 6460.

108

Chapter 4

s­ tylistically distinct Baghdadi works. The Brooklyn Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā has nine paintings. As most copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā produced in Baghdad in this period are similar in format, decoration, and choice of paintings, a brief description of the paintings in the Brooklyn Museum of Art manuscript will give a sense of the painting scheme in Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā manuscripts. Using this manuscript as a basis from which to consider the corpus of illustrated copies of this text as well as comparable texts, this chapter, on the one hand, calls into question the use of models and conditions under which illustrated books are made; on the other, it suggests that these manuscripts were produced speculatively. The first painting that appears in the Brooklyn manuscript depicts the Expulsion from Paradise (fig. 32). Almost all of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā manuscripts begin with a painting depicting the expulsion of Adam and Eve from Paradise, situated at the very moment they are cast out.48 In the Brooklyn Museum of Art manuscript, the pair is depicted half-naked, with wide leaves covering their loins. Adam holds Eve’s hand as they face the Archangel Gabriel, who is standing at the gate of a two-story structure. Two angels stand outside in the Paradise garden dotted with cypresses, a flowering tree and a pomegranate tree, while three angels peer down from a balcony. One of them, with an index finger brought to the lips, seems to reach out toward a pomegranate from the tree. On the lower left the dark-skinned Iblis (Satan), wearing a yellow garment and a red cap, appears along with a peacock and a snake. Fuzuli writes that Adam and Eve had been allowed to reside in Paradise and could eat everything except fruit from the forbidden tree (mīve-i şecere-i menhiyye). When Iblis learned of this, he became envious and entered Paradise with the 48

Paintings of the Expulsion from Paradise can also be found in the British Library Or. 7301 and Or. 12009, fol. 7b; Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi Fatih 4321, fol. 9a; BnF Supp. Turc 1088, fol. 9b; and Talaat 81 Tarikh Turki, Dar al-Kutub Cairo, fol. 7a.

help of a snake and peacock and tempted Adam. Fuzuli’s narrative account is interspersed with verses and the painting in the Brooklyn Museum of Art comes at the end of the verse: “To the Lord God my bad deed / Made me vile and abject when I was honored. / This is the penalty for the one who goes against You / who gives into worldly temptation.”49 Adam’s recognition of his sin, composed in verse in the first person, acts at the same time, as a warning to the reader/listener. Adam and Eve then cover themselves with fig leaves, portrayed as well in this painting, and exit Paradise. While Fuzuli gives a brief overview of the reasons for Adam and Eve’s expulsion and Adam’s repentance, this section, and subsequently the first chapter, establishes a typology whereby the sufferings of Adam—and the pre-Islamic prophets, Zechariah, John the Baptist, and Jesus Christ—are consistently compared to the toils of Imam Husayn. Additionally, in the case of Adam, Fuzuli emphasizes the predestination of Muhammad as the Prophet. He notes that the reasons for the acceptance of Adam’s penitence were three-fold: his penitence, lamentation, and prayer. Adam’s prayers and conversation with God prefigured the prophethood and distinction of Muhammad. This is a recurrent theme in the text, whereby the Prophet Muhammad and his family, and particularly Imam Husayn, are distinguished among all. Breaking his narrative on the murder of Abel, son of Adam, and God’s order that Cain would remain forever in pain and punishment, Fuzuli warns: “Oh noble ones, as such punishment has befallen one who has forgone respect for Adam and murdered his son, it should be obvious what pains one who does not respect and revere Muhammad, who is loftier and greater than Adam, and murders his offspring, deserves.”50 Fuzuli ends this section with the comments that the sufferings and troubles of Husayn are greater than that of Adam. This comparison continues in the subsequent sections 49 50

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum, 70.143, fols. 13b–14a. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 29.

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 32 Expulsion from paradise. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 14a

109

110 as well. Throughout the text, the Karbala tragedy is foreshadowed and prefigured through anecdotes. The second painting (fig. 33) represents the ­Sacrifice of Ishmael. This scene is illustrated in several other manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā as well. The painting shows Abraham dressed in a brown garment and turban wrapped around a green cap, pinning down his son as he is about to strike him with a knife. Ishmael is bareheaded. His turban and brocaded blue garment rest on top of the light purple rocks per his request to keep his clothes clean as related by Thaʿalabi—a detail missing in Fuzuli’s account but included in all versions of this painting.51 One of Ishmael’s last requests was for his father to tie his hands and feet firmly lest he resist and give his father trouble if his weak body moved involuntarily in anguish from the pain of the sword.52 In the painting, as well, Ishmael is shown with hands and feet tied. A flaming halo encircles Abraham and Ishmael. The scene is set outside, on a grassy landscape with light purple hills on the right. There are two angels on the left; one hovers above Abraham and Ishmael holding a flaming platter. On the right, the Archangel Gabriel descends, holding a ram. On the lower left, the bust of the dark-skinned, red-capped Iblis appears. As is often the case, Iblis is represented with a snake wrapped around his neck. A similar composition—with Abraham pinning Ishmael down (both facing right), Ishmael’s garments either resting on a rock or on a tree branch, and angels surrounding the pair—is repeated in the Cairo,53 Paris (fig. 34), Istanbul (fig. 35), Ankara (fig. 36) and London manuscripts.54 One of the London manuscripts (fig. 37) has the blindfolded Ishmael kneeling, with one knee bent and one extended, rather than depicting him pinned down.

51 Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 14. 52 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Brooklyn Museum, 70.143, fol. 32b. 53 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Dar al-Kutub, Cairo, Talaat 81 Tarikh Turki, fol. 20b. 54 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, British Library Or. 12009, fol. 19b and Or. 7301, fol. 19b.

Chapter 4

Iblis appears in several of these compositions. He is particularly prominent in the Brooklyn copy where he sits crouching. In the London and Paris copies, he is portrayed as a dark-skinned, grimacing figure lurking behind the rocks. In the Istanbul copy, a dark-skinned, large-nosed Iblis appears in profile—grinning grotesquely—from one corner. Important to note is that the Ankara copy does not include the figure of Iblis. It situates the figures of Abraham, Ishmael, Gabriel, and an angel on the right side of the composition, while ­Ishmael’s ­yellow cloak hangs from a branch of a tree that dominates the left side of the composition. The choice of particular events or moments in the story of Old Testament prophets or the life of the  Prophet Muhammad and his family is more or less the same in illustrated copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, as can be seen in this abovementioned example of the Sacrifice of Ishmael. In terms of the composition, the seven manuscript copies that include this scene are almost the same. It is most likely that these works—which were produced over a short span of time, from circa 1595 to 1605—repeated models. Important to note is that the earlier representations of the Sacrifice of Ishmael found in manuscripts of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ—which provide the essential figures of Abraham and Ishmael, Iblis, and the angel bringing the ram in Ishmael’s stead—as well as the large-scale illustrated courtly copies of the Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh (Quintessence of Histories) of Seyyid Lokman all present the bare essentials of the story in a legible manner. In contrast, the compositions of the Baghdadi representations are more complex. While the iconography of the Sacrifice of Ishmael had its precedents in the illustrated copies of texts—such as Tabari’s (d. 923) Tārīkh al-Rusūl waʾl Mulūk (History of the Prophets and Kings), the Tārīkh-i Balʿami (History of Balʿami, a loose translation into Persian of Tabari’s Arabic text), the Jāmiʿ al-Tawārīkh (Compendium of Chronicles) of Rashid al-Din Fadl ­Allah Hamadani (d. 1318), and particularly, the numerous ­illustrated copies of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ manuscripts produced in the last quarter of the sixteenth ­ century—the late sixteenth-century

111

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 33 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 38a

Baghdad c­ opies add a new element, as noted by Milstein. This is the inclusion of several angels ­carrying bowls of fire around Abraham and Ishmael.55 Milstein sees in this ­detail a reflection both of Fuzuli’s text, which mentions the intercession of angels to stop the sacrifice, and of Sufi ideas

of nearing the presence of God.56 She compares these paintings with scenes of the Ascension of the Prophet. Indeed, Fuzuli emphasizes the steadfastness of both Abraham and Ishmael in their readiness for the s­ acrifice. As with Adam’s r­ epentance and ­communication with God, here too, at the

55 Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 14.

56 Ibid.

112

Chapter 4

Figure 34 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 20b

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 35 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, T. 1967, fol. 19b

113

114

Chapter 4

Figure 36 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Museum of Ethnography, Ankara, Besim Atalay Env. 7294, fol. 36a

Milstein’s emphasis on the innovation of the “Baghdad school” hinges on her understanding of the text as bearing Sufi overtones. However, one must be careful not to read all details with the same understanding, especially in the works of a poet who is not associated with any particular Sufi path.58 Regardless of whether or not these ­details bear Sufi overtones, or are artistic choices, the ­inclusion of the angels carrying trays in this composition is an innovation that appears in Baghdad in the late sixteenth century. This can also be aligned with other types of paintings produced in Baghdad in this period, which in general are more crowded in comparison to the more legible Istanbul paintings. As with Adam and Abraham’s lamentation over the loss or readiness to lose a child, Fuzuli’s text builds the typology in the story of Jacob and Joseph as well. Jacob’s constant lamentation is compared with that of Imam Zayn al-ʿAbidin following the battle in Karbala. According to a report, Zayn al-ʿAbidin, son of Husayn, was beside himself with grief. As his tears fell in endless streams, a man came to him and pleaded with him to bear the 58

critical ­moment of the acceptance of the ram as a ­sacrifice, Fuzuli notes the communication between Abraham and God. God asks whether he loves himself or the Prophet M ­ uhammad more and whether he loves his own child or ­Muhammad’s. Abraham’s ­response to both is that he loves Muhammad and his family more, upon which God proclaims that Muhammad’s family will be martyred in Karbala and that the recompense for his lamentation for the martyrs of Karbala is greater than that for his own son.57 This further s­trengthens the ties with the stories of prophets as both exemplars and scales by which to judge the Karbala tragedy. Fuzuli’s text highlights this connection throughout. 57

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 42.



There is controversy regarding Fużūlī’s ethnic origin, place of birth and his religious affiliation. Some of these controversies are fed by nationalist efforts to assert “ownership” over Fużūlī. While Fuad Köprülü, Haluk İpekten and İbrahim Aşki suggest that Fużūlī was a Shiʿite, Süleyman Nazif suggests that he was a Sunni. On the other hand, summarizing several controversies regarding this issue, Abdülkadir Karahan is of the opinion that Fużūlī followed a mild form of Twelver Shiʿism. Halil İnalcık also contends that Fużūlī followed Twelver Shiʿism. Additionally, Haluk İpekten argues that while mysticism is an important part of Fużūlī’s works, it was, for him, not an end but rather the means to one. See Fuad Köprülü, Fuzuli, Hayatı ve Eseri (Istanbul: Yeni Şark Kütüphanesi, 1924); İbrahim Aşki, Fuzuli Hakkında Bir İki Söz (Istanbul: Ali Şükrü Matbaası, 1919); Abdülkadir Karahan, Fuzuli, Muhiti, Hayatı ve Şahsiyeti (Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1996); Halil İnalcık, Şair ve Patron, 54–71; Haluk İpekten, Fuzuli (Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları, 1996), 27–31. Hereafter, İpekten, Fuzuli.

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 37 Sacrifice of Ishmael. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol.19b

115

116

Chapter 4

tragedy with forbearance. Zayn al-ʿAbidin replied: “[When] Jacob became separated from his son / The rush of tears had blinded his eyes. / Is it a wonder that I should cry / Having been separated from many a Joseph-like innocent?”59 Further comparisons between prophets and the martyrs of Karbala are made. For example, the case of the brothers of Joseph denying him water is presented as a simile of the denial of water to the martyrs of Karbala.60 Such theological-paraenetic paradigms taken from sacral history emphasize the predestination of the Karbala tragedy. We can also consider the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā in the context of cultural interest in the stories of the prophets, universal histories and their synopses in the form of genealogies, and popularization of illustrated copies of the Qiṣaṣ alAnbiyāʾ in the 1570s and 1580s. When seen together with such texts, Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā may take on another meaning, where the stories of the pre-Islamic prophets almost prefigured what was to befall Husayn and his family in Karbala. These seemingly different genres share much in common. Moreover, the illustrated Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā copies also appear at a moment when illustrated copies of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ were widespread, providing a wealth of possible models. While the Brooklyn manuscript does not contain a painting representing the story of Jacob and Joseph, several manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā, as well as the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ and Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ, include scenes from this tale. Fuzuli’s longer account of the sufferings of the father and son is likely drawn from the interest in the story of Joseph and Zulaykha and illustrated copies of this story and the inclusion of their tales in other works, such as Saʿdi’s Bustān (Rose-garden). In several manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā we encounter paintings from the story of Joseph, such as the appearance of Archangel Gabriel in the guise of Jacob to console Joseph (fig. 38), Joseph

59 60

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 60. Ibid., 51.

found by the merchants (fig. 39) and Joseph sold in the slave market. As with the previous sections, Fuzuli ends the story on the toils of Jacob and Joseph with a quatrain highlighting the incomparable toils of Husayn.61 The sufferings of Moses, Christ, and Job are mentioned only briefly, and emphasis in these accounts is again on direct comparison to the toils of the martyrs of Karbala. In the illustrated manuscripts of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, the scenes that are illustrated the most in the section on prophets are that of the Expulsion from Paradise, the Sacrifice of Ishmael, and, as we shall now discuss, the Martyrdom of Zechariah. This third painting of the Brooklyn manuscript depicts the Martyrdom of Zechariah (fig. 40).62 The painting appears in the last section of the second chapter of Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, which deals with the calamities faced by Zechariah and his son Yahya. According to Fuzuli’s account, when Yahya did not give consent to the marriage of the ruler Herod Antipas to his stepdaughter Salome—unnamed in the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā—the ruler’s wife sent her daughter (from another marriage) to him. Herod, inebriated one night, finally succumbs to his stepdaughter’s wish to have Yahya beheaded. When the executioners resisted killing Yahya because of the eminence of his father, it was decided that both Yahya and Zechariah would be killed. Yahya was caught while Zechariah hid inside the trunk of a tree. However, Iblis pulled the hem of Zechariah’s garment out and exposed him to the executioners. They sawed the tree in half, severing Zechariah in two in the process. 61 62

Ibid., 69. On images of the Martyrdom of Zechariah, see Barbara Schmitz, “Some Comments on the Development of ­Religious Iconography in Turkey in the Second Half of the 16th Century Based on Illustrations of the Martyrdom of Zakariya (Zacharias),” in Seventh International Congress of Turkish Art, ed. Tadeusz Majda (Warsaw: Polish Scientific Publishers, 1990), 207–13.

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 38 Archangel Gabriel appears to Joseph in the guise of Jacob. Ḥadiḳatü’s-Süʾedā British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 30b

117

118

Chapter 4

Figure 39 Joseph found by the merchants. Ḥadiḳatü’s-Süʾedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 31a

119

The Garden of the Blessed

The painting in the Brooklyn Museum of Art manuscript is dominated by the centrally placed tree, which two men—depicted here as Europeans wearing black hats—are sawing through. On the lower right, Iblis, dressed in a long brown garment and a European hat, his face rubbed off, pulls Zechariah’s hem. Those watching the execution are also portrayed as Europeans. On the left, Yahya is depicted dressed in a light green and blue garment, with a flaming halo around his head. His hands are tied and he is led by a man wearing a conical cap, who points to the tree, in which his father was hidden. The inclusion of Yahya, a “double martyrdom” in the words of Milstein, is also a new element, which stems from Fuzuli’s text.63 Yahya is included in almost all copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā manuscripts that portray the Martyrdom of Zechariah. The only exception to this is the Konya manuscript (MS 101, fol. 50a), which, like the other versions of this subject, portrays the executioners and onlookers as Europeans. It is worth noting here that the faces of the executioners have been rubbed off, as is the case in the Brooklyn and Ankara copies.64 The appearance of European figures in paintings attributed to Baghdad can also be found in a picture of the Fire Ordeal of Abraham (fig. 41), in which those throwing Abraham from the catapult as well as onlookers are portrayed this way. The predominance of Europeans as well as Jews (fig. 4) in a negative light, as mentioned in these ­examples above and in Chapter 2, is quite frequent in Baghdad paintings.65 The martyrdom of Yahya and Zechariah ends the first chapter. The following chapter deals with the sufferings of the Prophet Muhammad. Here, 63 Milstein, Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad, 18. 64 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Etnografya Müzesi Besim Atalay Env. 7294, fol. 41a. 65 It is not only Europeans that appear in Baghdad paintings but a wide variety of figure types, from Indians to figures depicted with Shirazi headgear or Ottoman headgear, Bedouins, beggars, etc.

Fuzuli provides a conceptual link by suggesting that prophets among all humankind are those that face affliction and trouble and can bear it with patience, and that among them, the Prophet Muhammad is distinguished by the amount of his suffering and patience.66 Among his sufferings, according to Fuzuli, were: becoming an orphan, opposition to his call to faith, and the death of his son, Ibrahim. Quoting the Shawāhīd-i Nubuwwat (The Witnesses of Prophecy) of Jami, Fuzuli writes that when faced with the choice of either his son Ibrahim’s or his grandson Husayn’s death, Muhammad chose to bear the pain himself. He did so by giving his consent for the death of his son, for “if Ibrahim dies, most of the pain will be mine, whereas if Husayn dies, I and ʿAli and Zahra will be in pain.”67 In the Brooklyn manuscript, there are no paintings in the second chapter. However, a 1594 copy of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā includes a rare instance of the illustration of the martyrdom of Jaʿfar ibn Abi Talib in Muʿtah (Süleymaniye Library Fatih 4321, fol. 66b), a story also included in this chapter. The following painting in the Brooklyn manuscript belongs to the third chapter of the work and depicts the Prophet Muhammad preaching before his death (fig. 42). The Prophet Muhammad is dressed in brown and green and wears a green turban. A veil covers his face and a flaming halo engulfs his head. He sits on the pulpit with the Archangel Gabriel facing him. The congregation, including his son-in-law ʿAli, and grandsons Hasan and Husayn seated on the right—also adorned by a flaming halo—listens to the Prophet’s final sermon. At the entrance, three men dressed in brown 66 67

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 84. It is also worth pointing out that Lāmīʿī Çelebi translated Jāmī’s Shawāhīd-i Nubuwwat, which was among his sources for the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl. Ibid., 108; Kenan Özçelik, “Lāmīī Çelebiʾnin Kitāb-ı Maktel-i Āl-i Resūlʾü,” in Bursalı Lāmīī Çelebi ve Dönemi, eds. Bilal Kemikli and Süleyman Eroğlu (Bursa: Bursa Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2011), 273–79, 279.

120

Chapter 4

Figure 40 Martyrdom of Zechariah. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 82a

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 41 Fire Ordeal of Abraham. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʾedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 17a

121

122

Chapter 4

and blue and wearing wooden clogs can also be discerned. One of these anonymous men gazes straight at the viewer, as is typical of many paintings found in manuscripts from Baghdad. Two other copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā include representations of the Prophet’s Final Sermon. These appear in the Paris (fig. 43) and the Ankara copies.68 Compositionally these three paintings are quite similar. In each we have a scene with the Prophet preaching from the pulpit on the right, as a wide variety of people, including beggars and Bedouins, listen, seated in a circle. Meanwhile, ʿAli and his sons sit next to the pulpit. Important to note is that all three paintings depict different moments in the story according to their placement within the text. The Ankara painting uses the layout of the page, the text, and painting to suggest the interior of the mosque and its exterior on the margins. This is made all the more clear with the help of the green colored dome on the upper margin, signifying holiness. Here, the Prophet is giving his final sermon to the congregation, telling them that he, like every prophet, is not immortal, and asking them not to forget him. Next, he asks whomever he has wronged to come forth and claim his recompense from God’s final messenger to mankind. A man named ʿUkkaşe stands and points out that during the battle in Tabuk (in 630), the Prophet Muhammad had struck his camel with a lash, but had missed and struck him instead. It is a touching, if unexpected, scene from Islamic sacral legend. In the Paris manuscript (fig. 43), we see ʿUkkaşe standing before the Prophet, with a whip in his hand. Not giving in to the crowd’s pleas that he direct the punishment to them instead of the Prophet, ʿUkkaşe further demands that the Prophet ­Muhammad strip, as he himself had been bare when Muhammad’s blow had (accidentally) struck 68

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Ankara Etnografya Müzesi, Besim Atalay, Env. 7294, fol. 68a.

him. When the Prophet Muhammad complies and takes his garment off, ʿUkkaşe sees the seal of prophethood on his shoulder. Overwhelmed, ʿUkkaşe bows before him and immediately drops the lash. In a state of heartfelt c­ ontrition, he explains that his reason for such merciless excess was two-fold: to show the congregation the Prophet’s justice and to bow before and touch his blessed body to save himself from hellfire.69 The Brooklyn manuscript juxtaposes the scene of the Prophet Muhammad’s final sermon with the story of the moment of his death. Fuzuli writes that the Angel of Death appeared at the door disguised as a Bedouin and asked for his permission to take his life. The Prophet asked him to wait until the arrival of Gabriel, who is portrayed as kneeling before the Prophet. In the majority of the paintings in this and other copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā we can note a close relationship between Fuzuli’s text and the compositions, some of which show certain innovations when compared to possible models. Some of the examples mentioned above—such as the Expulsion from Paradise or the Sacrifice of Ishmael—were repeated in several copies, and multiple copies of the text were prepared within a short period of time. Some of the models encountered in the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā also appear in another text dealing with the Karbala tragedy, the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl. Here, however, the composition depicting the Prophet preaching before his death in the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā takes on a different meaning in the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl of Lamiʿi Çelebi and emphasizes the role of the Prophet Muhammad as the foundation of the faith. Composed in verse in the first quarter of the sixteenth century in Bursa, this work differs from Fuzuli’s in its approach to the tragedy. Lamiʿi Çelebi’s Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl was, according to ʿAşık Çelebi and Hasan Çelebi’s (d. 1604) mid-and late sixteenth-century tadhkiras, accepted by the ulema of Bursa at a time when the reading and 69

Ḥadīḳātü’s-Süʿedā, BnF, Supp. turc 1088, fols. 64b–65a.

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 42 The Prophet preaching before his death. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 70.143, fol. 144a

123

124

Chapter 4

Figure 43 The Prophet preaching before his death. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 65a

The Garden of the Blessed

the possible performance of maqtal literature in gatherings was frowned upon.70 In his Maḳtel-i Āl-i 70

Ḳınalızāde Ḥasan Çelebi notes that the preacher Mulla ʿArab (d. 1531) was of the opinion that reading of the maqtal of Ḥusayn in gatherings was misbelief (küfr). ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi’s Meşāʿirü’ş Şuʿarā also sheds light into the initial doubts about this work. According to Filiz Kılıç’s critical edition of this text (which makes use of five manuscript copies), Mulla ʿArab found the reading of maqtal literature appropriate to the exonymous folk (“ışıḳlara maḥṣūṣ”). This phrase is missing in the one illustrated copy of the text (Fatih Millet Kütüphanesi 772, fol. 154b). In this version, the copyist has omitted Mulla ʿArab’s signification of the maqtals as (only) worthy of those who remain outside of the orthodox society or central state. Instead, it is written: “Ve Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin vaʾiẓ Mulla ʿArab Burusa’da ḳażı-yı vaḳt Aşçızāde Ḥasan Çelebi ve Mulla ʿArab’ı ve sāʾir ʿulemāʾyı cemʿ idüb maḳtelin oḳudub ʿulemāʾ ḳabul itmişlerdir” (And he has gathered Mulla ʿArab, the judge of the time Aşçızāde Ḥasan Çelebi and other members of the ulema in the mosque of Bursa and had them read the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin and accept it). What is also missing in this illustrated version is the note that Lāmīʿī Çelebi based his work on historical facts and presented it to the ulema, who then accepted it. Thus, in Kılıç’s critical edition the following is added: “Ve Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin vaʾiẓ Mulla ʿArab Burusaʾda ışıḳlara mahṣūṣ Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin oḳınmaġı menʿ itdükde merḥūm Lāmīʿī Çelebi tevārīh-i ṣaḥīḥadan cemʿ u tertīb idüb Burusaʾda ḳażı-yı vaḳt Aşçızāde Ḥasan Çelebiʾyi ve Mulla ʿArab-ı vaʾiẓi ve sāʾir ʿulemāyı cemʿ idüb maḳtelin oḳıdub ʿulemā ḳabūl itmişlerdür” (And the deceased Lāmīʿī Çelebi, collected and composed his Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin based on approved historical accounts when the preacher Mulla ʿArab had deemed the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin to be intended for exonyms and thus prohibited its reading [and] he gathered the judge of the time Aşçızāde Ḥasan Çelebi, preacher Mulla ʿArab and other members of the ulema in the mosque of Bursa and had them read the Maḳtel-i Ḥüseyin, [which] they accepted). Mulla ʿArab’s opposition to maqtal literature and his identification of its readers as “ışıḳ” needs to be ­considered in the context of the early sixteenth-century power dynamics between the Ottomans and the Safavids (particularly during the reign of Selīm I) as well

125 as Shiʿi sensitivities in Anatolia in this period. Helga Anetshofer considers the “ışıḳ” to suggest exonymous persons, that is to say those that stand in opposition to central authority and are found inappropriate by the central authorities. Anetshofer analyzes the use of this term through time, first encountered in the dīvān of Yūnus Emre, used in a derogatory way to denote a begging wandering dervish, later, used also in a derogatory manner, to suggest wandering dervishes of various propensities of faith. Anetshofer notes that the term “ışıḳ” is used by ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi himself on two occasions and in reports from others on three occasions. She notes that while not explicit, there is a connection to the Abdals in ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi’s usage. In the above-mentioned example, ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi refrains from voicing his judgment. Lāmīʿī Çelebi’s Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl is dedicated to Sinan Bey, finance director of Süleymān I (r. 1520–1566). It appears that even in the context of dispute regarding the reading of maqtal literature, Lāmīʿī Çelebi was able to gain the support of the court. Various other works of his are dedicated to Ottoman rulers. Among them are several translations from Persian, including Fattāhī Nishabūrī’s (d. 1448) Ḥusn u Dil (Beauty and Heart) and ʿAlī Shīr Nevāī’s Farhād u Shīrīn, both presented to Selīm I (r. 1512–1520) and Vāmiq u ʿAzrā (Vamiq and Azra) and Vīs u Rāmīn (Vis and Ramin) presented to Süleymān I. Both ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi and Ḥasan Çelebi provide a comprehensive list of Lāmīʿī Çelebi’s works in their tadhkiras. ʿĀşık Çelebi and Ḥasan Çelebi also note him as the Jāmī of Rum (Cāmī-i Rūm) on account of the fact that he has translated several of Jāmī’s works. Muṣṭafa ʿAlī counters this likening, however, deeming them incomparable. In addition to his translation of Jāmī’s works, Lāmīʿī Çelebi also followed the Naqshbandi Sufi order. On the term “ışık” used in the context of this text, see Helga Anetshofer, “Meşāiru’ş Şuʿarāʾda Toplum-tanımaz Sapkın Dervişler,” in Āşık Paşa ve Şairler Tezkiresi Üzerine, eds. Hatice Aynur and Aslı Niyazioğlu (Istanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2011), 88–93; For a brief biography of Lāmīʿī Çelebi see Günay Kut, “Lāmiī ­Çelebi,” Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 27 (Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2003), 96–97, and by the same author, “Lamii Chelebi and his Works,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 35/2 (1976): 73–93. On Mulla ʿArab see Tahsin Özcan, “Mulla Arap,” Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 30 (Istanbul: Türkiye ­Diyanet Vakfı, 2005), 240–41; Ḥasan Çelebi, Teẕkiretüʾş

126

Chapter 4

Resūl, Lamiʿi Çelebi emphasizes the work’s close adherence to historical facts, a possible f­actor in its acceptance.71 However, compared to Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Lamiʿi Çelebi’s Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl was not as popular, at least as it appears from the surviving manuscript copies.72 Lamiʿi Çelebi’s text emphasizes the Prophet and his family and defines them all as Sunnis in opposition to their enemies, who are identified as kharijites. There is greater emphasis in Lamiʿi Çelebi’s text on the rightly guided caliphs, whereas Fuzuli’s text highlights Husayn’s sufferings above all. In his Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, Lamiʿi Çelebi shies away from cursing Yazid. Quoting Hızır b. Celal (d. 1459), the first judge of Istanbul, he advises the reader to be quiet and not curse, as Yazid is not worse than the devil (Çünki şeytāndan Yezīd artuḳ degül / Aduñı liʿāna daḳma sākit ol).73 However, Lamiʿi Çelebi also attests to the horror of the tragedy when he writes that the altercation has drained any efforts to cease cursing (terk-i laʿnet itmege ḳalmaz mecāl).74

71 72

73

74

Şuʿarā, 831; ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi, Meşāirüʾş Şuʿarā; Mustafa İsen, Künhüʾl Abharʾın Tezkire Kısmı (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayını, 1994), 266–67; Harun Arslan, “Kitab-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Giriş-Metin-İnceleme-SözlükAdlar Dizini” (PhD diss., Istanbul Üniversitesi, 2001). Hereafter, Kitāb-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl. Kitāb-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, 78. Günay Kut provides a list of manuscript copies of this work. Among the nine surviving copies, three of them (mentioned above) are illustrated. Recently, a dispersed folio from a Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, containing a painting, was sold at Sotheby’s in London (20 April 2016, Lot 42). Kitāb-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, 73. While Lāmīʿī Çelebi does not name the work but only the author, his source is the Ḳaṣīde-i Nūniyye of Ḥıżır Bey. Mustafa Sait Yazıcıoğlu, “Hızır Bey ve Kaside-i Nuniyyeʾsi,” Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 26 (1983): 549–88. Kitāb-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, 75.

Like Fuzuli, Lamiʿi Çelebi also wants to provoke the readers to lamentation (aġlasunlar işidüb bu mātemi / dem aḳıtsunlar añub ol bir demi).75 Not as popular as the Baghdadi author’s version of the Karbala tragedy, there were fewer illustrated copies of Lamiʿi Çelebi’s Maḳtel.76 Two copies, a manuscript in London (fig. 44) and a dispersed leaf in New York (fig. 45), portray the Prophet preaching inside a mosque. As in the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā examples, here ʿAli and his sons are depicted seated on the right among a crowd of people listening. As in the other compositions, the figures in the congregation are portrayed from different angles—some in profile, others in three-quarter view. More figures appear at the doorway and are also listening. However, in this instance, it is not the Prophet’s final sermon that is depicted, but Lamiʿi Çelebi’s laudatory remarks on the Prophet in the introduction to his work. The placement of the painting in the London copy further supports the Sunni bent of Lamiʿi Çelebi’s text. Here, the author writes: “In order to make the palace of religion solid / [You] made the rightly guided caliphs the pillars [of its throne].”77 While Lamiʿi Çelebi’s text differs from Fuzuli’s, the paintings, including sermon scenes and battle scenes are quite similar and include paintings of the Swearing of Allegiance of ʿAli (fig. 46), and several combat scenes from the Battle of Karbala. The two texts, while different in approach tell the story of the same event and repeat compositions for ease of preparation of the illustrated copies.

75 Ibid. 76 For a study of these illustrated manuscripts, see the thesis by Oben Lale Kalgay, “Lāmīʿī Çelebiʾnin Makteli Āl-i Resūl Adlı Eserinin Tasvirli Bir Nüshası: Istanbul Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesi T. 1958” (MA thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 2015). 77 Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, BL Or. 7238, fol. 3a.

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 44 The Prophet preaching. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl

British Library, London, Or. 7328, fol. 3a

127

128

Chapter 4

Figure 45 The Prophet preaching. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, dispersed leaf, 55.121.40

129

The Garden of the Blessed

Returning to the Brooklyn Museum of Art manuscript, the painting that follows the Prophet Muhammad’s final sermon illustrates a scene from the life of ʿAli b. Abi Talib. The painting (fig. 47) portrays ʿAli enthroned before a tent. He is dressed in a green and brown garment and dark green turban. A flaming halo surrounds his shoulders and head. His attendant stands holding his doubleedged sword while his army and his donkey can be seen on either side of the tent. This particular scene takes place after the Battle of Nahrawan when ʿAli asked who would send news of the victory to Kufa. ʿAbd al-Rahman b. Muljam-i Muradi stepped up to the task. Here, Ibn Muljam, portrayed as a dark-skinned man, foreshadows the murder of ʿAli b. Abi Talib at his hands. The way Ibn Muljam has been portrayed here, stocky, in profile with a large nose and a jutting chin, is almost like the representations of Iblis in several of the Ḥadiḳatü’s Süʿedā manuscripts. Fuzuli’s account, which does not follow a chronological sequence but a thematic one within each chapter, connects this event after the Battle of Nahrawan with the story of Ibn Muljam (who hailed from Egypt along with the tribe that came to murder ʿOsman and remained in Kufa). Fuzuli mentions Ibn Muljam’s gifting a sword to ʿAli at another point in time, and the latter’s refusal of it, as well as ʿAli’s prescience of his death at the hands of Ibn Muljam.78 The majority of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā manuscripts portray the climactic moment of ʿAli b. Abi Talib’s death and the capture of Ibn Muljam. However, like the Brooklyn Museum of Art manuscript, the Paris copy also chooses a different moment in the story of ʿAli b. Abi Talib. Here (fig. 48), as in the Brooklyn copy, a moment of victory is chosen for representation—ʿAli and his army victorious over the kharijites at the Battle of Nahrawan. ʿAli, astride his donkey, is placed centrally, while a pile of bodies pierced with arrows

lay at their feet. This painting is placed right after the victorious end of the battle, where it was reported that all but nine of the four thousand enemies had been killed. In addition to illustrating the story and particularly the death of ʿAli b. Abi Talib, Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā manuscripts often illustrate battle scenes between ʿAlid forces and the Umayyad forces, such as a battle between Muslim b. ʿAqil and the Umayyad forces of ʿUbaydallah b. Ziyad, or between Ezrak and his sons and Qasim, son of Hasan. Members of the Umayyad army are portrayed frequently with slightly darker skin and grotesque features, visually enhancing the opposition between the forces. Among the episodes that are often highlighted with the inclusion of a painting are the Death of Hasan (fig. 49) and Zayn al-ʿAbidin Preaching. Most of the paintings depicting the Death of Hasan are compositionally similar: Hasan, surrounded by a flaming halo, lies down, accompanied by Husayn, also surrounded by a flaming halo. The London manuscript (fig. 50) portrays him in the attendance of Husayn and several women. Women also appear in other paintings depicting the Death of Hasan, though not so prominently, as observers. In one case, in the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, two women can be discerned.79 This time, they are clearly not observers, however (fig. 51). The painting juxtaposes several moments in the story of the death of Imam Hasan. On the right, we see Jaʿda bint al-Ashʿath, also known as Asma, wife of Imam Hasan, taking the poison—diamond powder— from a woman. Here, the marginal composition depicts the placing of the poison in the jug, while the main composition shows Hasan dying. Among the attendants are his brother Husayn, and his son Qasim, as noted by an inscription on his turban.80

79

78

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 200–01.

80

Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, MS Diez A Fol.5, fol. 109a. As the second chapter pointed out, women also appear in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, in which they are represented

130

Chapter 4

Figure 46 ʿAli receiving the Bayʿa. Maḳtel-i āl-i Resūl

Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, MA, 1985.229, © President and Fellows of Harvard College. dispersed leaf

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 47 ʿAli b. Abi Talib after the Battle of Nahrawan. Ḥadiḳatü’s-Süʿedā Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, 70.143, fol. 218a

131

132

Chapter 4

Figure 48 ʿAli b. Abi Talib at the Battle of Nahrawan. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʾedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 104a

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 49 Death of Hasan. Ḥadiḳatü’s-Süʾedā

Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, 70.143, fol. 260a

133

134

Chapter 4

Figure 50 Death of Hasan. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 24b

135

The Garden of the Blessed

The Death of Hasan is also included in Lamiʿi Çelebi’s Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, in a composition similar to the above-mentioned examples. Citing Muhammad Parsa’s (d. 1420) Faṣl al-Khiṭāb li-Waṣl al-Albāb (The Conclusive Judgment in Uniting the Hearts) Lamiʿi Çelebi writes: “Six times they gave him pure poison / [But] as his body was from top to bottom a panacea / His heart was resistant to any poison.”81 The painting in the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art (T. 1958, fol. 10b) appears at this climactic moment when, upon the sixth dose, the poison finally does its job. Almost all of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā manuscripts and the single illustrated copy of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ include a painting depicting Zayn al-ʿAbidin, the son of Husayn, preaching in the mosque. The painting in the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ (MS Diez A fol. 5, fol. 232b) identifies the location specifically as Damascus, whereas several of the compositions depict the scene in an otherwise generic mosque interior. Several additional scenes also include the exterior of the mosque, the dome on a high drum and tapering minarets on the upper margin, elements that frequently appear in Baghdad paintings (fig. 52–55). Most of the paintings appear at the moment when Imam Zayn al-ʿAbidin had obtained permission from Yazid to voice the sermon. Wary of the crowd’s reaction to the sermon, however, Yazid called on the muezzin to drown out the address. The Brooklyn painting portrays this moment when the muezzin, instead of interjecting,

81



among the audience in a painting depicting Baha alDin Walad, preaching in Balkh (fig. 9). Muḥammad Parsā, an eminent member of the Naqshbandiyya order, is among Lamīʿī Çelebi’s references in his work, which emphasizes the veracity of historic facts as evidenced by his examples of such authors, and as through his reiterations, that “this is how historians have noted the events” (Böyledir tārīh ehlinden haber). Fużūlī also references Muḥammad Parsā in his Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā. Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, tiem T. 1958, fol. 10b.

voices the pronouncement of faith (takbir).82 This is highlighted in the Istanbul manuscript (fig. 55), where a man dressed in red, possibly the muezzin, stands up and voices the takbir, as noted by Fuzuli. Both moments highlight Zayn al-ʿAbidin’s open challenge to Yazid, who, in Fuzuli’s account, proclaims he had not consented to Husayn’s m ­ urder.83 Fuzuli’s narrative ends with Yazid’s curse upon ʿUbaydallah b. Ziyad, the governor of Kufa. Fuzuli ends his work with various reported and written accounts of the remaining female companions, their lamentation, a short story and poem comparing the pains and sufferings of prophets to that of the martyrs of Karbala (hence linking the end of his account with the beginning), as well as with an account of the worldly pains and sufferings of those who perpetrated the murders, before facing their eternal judgment (el-ḳıṣṣa ḳutelā-yı Ḥüseyn ʿuḳūbāt-ı ʿuhrevīden muḳaddem ʿuḳūbāt-ı dünyāya giriftār olmadan dünyādan gitmediler).84 To this, he appends an elegy for Imam Husayn (missing in Kashifi’s version), as well as a brief overview of the twelve Shiʿi imams, as per Husayn Vaʾiz Kashifi’s Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ.85 While Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā follows a mainly linear chronology in its organization—beginning with Adam and the Old Testament prophets and ending with an elegy for Husayn—within each chapter there are chronological warps through reported stories about the lives of Prophet Muhammad and his 82

83 84 85



A dispersed leaf from a manuscript of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā, presently in the Museum of Ethnology in Rotterdam also depicts this moment. For a reproduction of this painting, see Mahnaz Shayeste Far, “The Impact of Religion on the Painting and Inscriptions,” Central Asiatic Journal 47 (2003): 250–93, 281. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, 468. Ibid., 479. Fużūlī writes that while a genealogy of the sayyids is not part of the account of what befell the martyrs in Karbala and the story of the sufferings of prophets, he includes a summary version of this information in line with his shadowing or imitation (tatabbuʿ) of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ. Ibid., 483.

136

Chapter 4

Figure 51 Death of Hasan. Rawḍat al-Shuhadā

Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin-Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Orientabteilung, MS Diez A fol. 5, fol. 109a

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 52 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Brooklyn Museum of Art, Brooklyn, fol. 560a

137

138

Chapter 4

Figure 53 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 269b

The Garden of the Blessed

Figure 54 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, Supp. turc 1088, fol. 263a

139

140

Chapter 4

Figure 55 Zayn al-ʿAbidin preaching. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, Istanbul, T. 1967, fol. 271b

141

The Garden of the Blessed

family that highlight themes of suffering, lamentation, predestination, and patience. Paintings in many of the illustrated copies include episodes on the stories of the prophets, scenes of preaching, and of battles or individuals in combat. In this regard, they are not unlike the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ or the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl copies. While there are stylistic variations among all, compositionally the multiple copies of these works on the Karbala tragedy bear striking similarities to one other, as well as showing innovations that appear to be unique to Baghdad. That there are multiple copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā—all with more or less the same episodes illustrated— and less so of the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl or the single illustrated copy of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ raises questions about ownership, audience, and readership. The similar compositions and subject matter in the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, and the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ also raise questions on the use of models in the preparation of illustrated manuscripts and the conditions under which manuscripts were prepared outside of the court. Given the multiple copies of illustrated genealogies, some of which contain notes of well wishes to the reader (discussed in the final chapter),86 the multiple copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā suggest that these may have been produced speculatively with the hope of selling them to interested patrons, or possibly for those wishing to have a visual reminder of the sites of the Karbala tragedy and the shrines and burial grounds of its martyrs. The inclusion of a painting depicting Prophet Muhammad praying for the souls of those interred at the cemetery of Baqiʿ before his death (a scene depicted in only one manuscript copy) (fig. 56), and the importance of this site for Shiʿis make a further connection between the illustrated copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, at least for one copy, and

86

Serpil Bağcı, “From Adam to Mehmed ııı: Silsilanama,” in The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000), 188–202, 198.

the Shiʿi population of Baghdad.87 The ­addition in gold of the vocative “Yā ʿAli” on the facial veil of ʿAli, as well as a faint vocative on that of the Prophet Muhammad as compared to the names of

87

The cemetery of Baqiʿ in Medina contains the graves of many of the Prophet’s companions and relatives, including his infant son Ibrāhim, his uncle ʿAbbās, Imams Ḥasan b. ʿAlī, Zayn al-ʿAbidin, Muḥammad alBaqir, Jaʿfar al-Sādīq. Ulrich Marzolph has published on an illustrated nineteenth-century Shiʿi pilgrimage scroll in a private collection in Hawaii. This scroll, commissioned by a Muḥammad Jaʿfar Kasāʾī, a cloth-merchant from Karbala, includes the main sites in Mecca and Medina, as well as the cemetery of Baqiʿ and Fadak (which according to Marzolph is rarely, if ever, found in Sunni pilgrimage certificates), and sites in Kufa, Najaf, Karbala and Mashhad. An earlier example of the depiction of the cemetery of Baqiʿ can be found in the example written by Seyyid ʿAlī, mentioned below. Interestingly, the cemetery of Baqiʿ is also included in the pilgrimage certificate drawn for prince Meḥmed (d. 1543), son of Süleymān I. It is worth noting that the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (described in Chapter 2) was meant to include a painting to accompany a very brief account of Fadak. It appears in the story of what happened during the time of the Umayyad caliph ʿOmar b. ʿAbd al-ʿAziz (r. 717–20). The author writes: “And also in this year the village named Fadak, which the Prophet had […] it had been given to the possession of the treasury, it was given back to Faṭıma’s family so that it would be divided among the descendants of the Prophet.” Here, the author does not refer to any of the former dispute between the daughter of Muḥammad and caliph Abū Bakr regarding the rights to the possession of Fadak. Instead, the brief statement shows that Fadak was returned to the descendants of Faṭıma. Ulrich Marzolph, “From Mecca to Mashhad: The Narrative of an Illustrated Shiite Pilgrimage Scroll from the Qajar Period,” slwpia 5 (2013): 1–33; Muḥammed Tāhir, Cāmīʿü’s-Siyer, tpml H. 1369, fol. 525b. On the pilgrimage certificate drawn for prince Meḥmed see Zeren Tanındı, “Resimli Bir Hac Vekaletnamesi,” Sanat Dünyamız 9 (1983): 2–6. Rachel Milstein, “Kitāb Shawq-nāma—An Illustrated Tour of Holy Arabia,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 25 (2001): 275– 342. Hereafter, Rachel Milstein, Kitāb Shawq-nāma.

142

Chapter 4

Figure 56 The Prophet Muhammad praying at the cemetery of Baqiʿ. Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā British Library, London, Or. 12009, fol. 66b

The Garden of the Blessed

ʿOsman and ʿOmar added on their turbans in black ink in this manuscript, further imply a Shiʿi bent.88 The London manuscript, which includes this painting, is, however, the only example among the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā manuscripts to include a depiction of the cemetery of Baqiʿ. In addition, the use of similar compositions, the possible use of models in the preparation of the illustrated manuscripts, and the fact that three different texts on the Karbala tragedy—the Persian Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, and the Turkish Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā and Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl—were illustrated opens up the question of who these manuscripts were, in fact, produced for. I speculate that these were geared for a local audience. Bektashi circles in Baghdad appear to be a likely audience, especially for the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā. A more Sunni-oriented group—much smaller based on the surviving manuscripts—may have been the audience for the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl. Whoever the particular audience or owner was, these illustrated works likely fed from the sacred topography of Baghdad and possibly functioned as visual mementos of the land upon which the family of the Prophet was martyred. Sayyid ʿAli al-Husayni, a sixteenth-century author who made the pilgrimage in 1559, noted down his journey and illustrated the account, “so that [his] dear friend [presumably, the reader], when he looks upon these images, will be filled with a longing to see them, and will make every effort to set out on the road.”89 Pilgrimage scrolls 88

89

Christiane Gruber, “Between Logos (Kalima) and Light (Nur): Representations of the Prophet Muhammad in Islamic Painting,” Muqarnas 26 (2009): 229–62. With regards to this British Library manuscript, Gruber points out that the paintings have the date 1188 (1706) written on them, despite the attribution of G.M. MeredithOwens of these paintings to Shiraz circa 1550–60. She suggests that the paintings could have been retouced in the early eighteenth century. While the paintings do have this number on them, they do not appear to be retouched and can be more closely attributed to turn of the seventeenth century Baghdad. Quoted in Rachel Milstein, Kitāb Shawq-nāma, 275. She notes that the otherwise unidentified author of the

143 and guides to the holy sites of Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem act as visual reminders and certificates of piety; additionally, texts on the essentials of the pilgrimage, such as the Futūḥ al-Haramayn (Description of the Two Holy Sanctuaries) of Muhyi al-Din Lari (d. 1526–27) or the Dalāʾil al-Khayrāt (Ways of Edification) of Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Jazuli (d. 1465) act as guides to the rituals of the pilgrimage.90 Ibn Tawus (d. 1266), a jurist and theologian from Hilla—as well as the composer of a work on the Karbala tragedy—writes that he created his account as a companion to those visiting the shrines.91 Is it possible to also consider the illustrated copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā as visual mementos of a pilgrimage to the burial sites and shrines of the martyrs of Karbala, or as reminders of the lamentation that is emphasized throughout the text? Metin And and Haluk İpekten point to the popularity and readership of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā of Fuzuli among Bektashi circles.92 M. Enver Beşe Shawqnāma (The Book of Longing) (National Maritime Museum in Haifa, inv. no. 4576) was the scribe of another illustrated manuscript copied in Mecca in 1550–51. The preparation of the illustrated account of the hajj pilgrimage can also be seen in the context of bringing back souvenirs from Mecca. See for example, Suraiya Faroqhi’s chapter, “Keepsakes and Trade Goods from Mecca,” in Travel and Artisans in the Ottoman Empire: Employment and Mobility in the Early Modern Era (London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2014), 89–98. 90 Composed in the mid-fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, illustrated versions of these texts appeared throughout the sixteenth century and became more popular in the succeeding centuries. Rachel Milstein identifies fourteen dated illustrated manuscripts of the Futūḥ al-Ḥaramayn, dating to the sixteenth century. There are also undated copies, which are datable to the sixteenth century based on style. For a list of these manuscripts see Rachel Milstein, “Illustrations of the Hajj Route,” in Mamluks and Ottomans, Studies in Honour of Michael Winter, ed. David J. Wasserstein and Ami Ayalon (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 166–94. 91 Güngör, Maktel-i Hüseyin, 456. 92 İpekten, Fuzuli, 55; Metin And, Ritüelden Drama, 94.

144

Chapter 4

also notes its popularity among Bektashis and its use in Muharram ceremonies.93 Unfortunately this is based on observation of such practices in Anatolian villages and I have not come across evidence from late sixteenth-century Baghdad that supports this. While literary references to the presence of Bektashis in Iraq date to the early seventeenth century, the popularity of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā in Baghdad may be seen in a wider context of verification of identity and genealogy (through the visitation of Alevi dedes seeking to have their genealogies renewed), popular piety, and shrine visitation that was geographically immediately central to Baghdad.94 The connection of place and sacred history through the interplay of visitation, ritual acts, and texts in the ʿAlid shrines in medieval Syria, can also be suggested in the sacred topography of Baghdad.95 The Karbala tragedy of the seventh century, shrine visitation and the associated rituals through time, the reading and performance of the Karbala tragedy on the very land on which it occurred, and the production of illustrated accounts of the tragedy by the local author Fuzuli can be seen in the popularization of the Ḥadīḳatü’sSüʿedā in Baghdad. The cultural spring from which the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā arises is inseparable from the geographical site of the martyrdom of Husayn and his followers. The dynamics of certification of lineage, acts of piety and pilgrimage inform the context in which one can view the proliferation of the illustrated copies of the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā,

93 94



95

M. Enver Beşe, “Anadolu Bektaşi Köylerinde Muharrem Ayini,” Halk Bilgisi Haberleri 10 (1941): 158–60. Karakaya-Stump’s research on Bektashi convents in Iraq suggests that the convent in Karbala was visited by Alevi dedes, who had their genealogies renewed. Ayfer Karakaya-Stump, “The Forgotten Dervishes: The Bektashi Convents in Iraq and their Kizilbash Clients,” International Journal of Turkish Studies 16 (2010): 1–24. Stephennie Mulder, The Shrines of the ʿAlids in Medieval Syria: Sunnis, Shiʿis and the Architecture of Coexistence (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), especially Chapter 5.

particularly in a province that was, after all, known as the burc-u evliyā. The expressive figures in the compositions and scenes of preaching included in the illustrated copies of this text mimic the performative aspect of the text. In addition, the Baghdadi origins of Fuzuli may have enhanced the work’s popularity in the province. İpekten notes that the sixteenthcentury translation of the Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, prepared by a poet named Ahmed, known by the penname Cami, was soon forgotten after Fuzuli’s Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā was composed.96 Among other contemporary works on the Karbala tragedy, Fuzuli’s version was the most widely read (at least as evidenced by the surviving manuscript copies). This aspect of Baghdad as a site of holy shrines of importance to both the Ottomans and the Safavids, also informs another group of illustrated manuscripts, which have been more closely studied elsewhere.97 While discussion of these works on the lives and miracles of Sufi mystics is beyond the scope of this chapter, they also take part in a wider interest in popular religious stories, such as the interest in illustrated copies of the Majālis alʿUshshāq (Assemblies of Lovers) produced in Shiraz.98 In the early seventeenth century Ottoman patrons became interested in owning illuminated copies of the Mathnawī. Cevri Ibrahim, a calligrapher and Mawlawi poet, copied twenty-two versions of the Mathnawī during his retirement from the office of secretary to the Imperial Chancery.99 Moreover, other illustrated manuscripts, such as 96

Haluk İpekten, Fuzuli, 56; Mustafa İsen, ed. Künhüʾl Ahbārʾın Tezkire Kısmı (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayını, 1994), 202. 97 Haral, Osmanlı Minyatüründe Mevlanaʾnın Yaşam Öyküsü. 98 On these manuscripts, see Lale Uluç, “The Majālis alʿUshshāq: Written in Herat, Copied in Shiraz, Read in Istanbul,” in M. Uğur Derman Festschrift: Papers Presented on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, ed. Irvin Cemil Schick (Istanbul: Sabancı University, 2000), 569–602. 99 Filiz Çağman and Zeren Tanındı, The Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire, 509–11.

The Garden of the Blessed

the Turkish translation of the Shāhnāma (Book of Kings) copied in the early seventeenth century by calligraphers associated with the Mawlawi order, and one of which was likely to have been produced for Hafız Ahmed Paşa (d. 1632), who was close to Mawlawi circles, show the increasing interest in illuminated and illustrated works among Ottomans, who were in (or close to) the Mawlawi order.100 While various shrine centers (such as those of Imam ʿAli al-Rida in Mashhad, or Shaykh Safi in Ardabil) accommodated artists and precious books, the Ottomans did not treat shrines in the same manner as the Safavids—namely, as places where books could be produced or sold. However, as mentioned in the previous chapter, calligraphers were active in the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala. In addition, the Ottomans did not show the same interest as the Safavids in the production of illustra­ted and illuminated copies of the works of mystics such as ʿAbdullah Ansari, ʿAttar, Rumi, or Jami101—the verses chosen for calligraphic copying by Hasan ʿAli Mashhadi (mentioned in Chapter 3) in Karbala may further highlight this difference 100 Ibid., 511–13. 101 Ibid., 516–17.

145 in literary inclination. In contrast, in the Ottoman court atelier of the late sixteenth century, illustrated book production focused mostly on works of history. In this respect, illustrated works on the lives of Sufi mystics prepared in Baghdad (as well as the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā) present a divergence from courtly interests in Istanbul. Illustrated works on the lives of Sufi mystics and on the Karbala tragedy prepared in Baghdad are remarkable for their compositional innovation. While in the capital the story of the life of Prophet Muhammad was also illustrated and there was an interest in the stories of prophets, Baghdad is unique with respect to the coexistence of multiple illustrated copies of texts on the Karbala tragedy (possibly geared toward a Bektashi audience) as well as texts on lives of Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi and the Sufi mystics.102

102 See Zeren Tanındı, Siyer-i Nebī: İslam Tasvir Sanatında Hz. Muhammedʾin Hayatı (Istanbul: Hürriyet Vakfı Yayınları, 1984); Carol G. Fisher, “The Pictorial Cycle of the Siyer-i Nebi: A Late Sixteenth Century Manuscript of the Life of Muhammad” (PhD diss., Michigan State University, 1981).

Chapter 5

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids: The Ankara Genealogy A painting in an illustrated mecmuʿa (­compilation or miscellany) from the seventeenth century shows a youth dressed as a Bektashi dervish holding a book in one hand.1 The painting is accompanied by his tale. This youth was from the lands of Rum (diyār-ı Rūm) and was the son of a merchant who was trading in Baghdad and Basra. Offended by, and estranged from his father, the youth traveled to the Safavid lands with his affluent lover. They disguised themselves as Bektashi dervishes and headed to the lands of ʿAjam (diyār-ı ʿAcem), traveled many lands and finally died together.2 The painting and the story portray the malleability of one person’s identity—from merchant’s son, to lover, and later dervish. They also highlight spatial fluidity—in trade and travel from the lands of Rum to the lands of ʿAjam. This painting thus encapsulates the full range of fluidity on the frontier. By this I mean several things: movement of people and objects between the Ottoman lands (Rum) and the lands of Iran–Iraq (ʿAjam) through trade or war; mobility in terms of wealth and rank, albeit in not necessarily legitimate ways; and a coexistence, interaction, and negotiation of identities (between Ottoman and Safavid, or Sunni and Shiʿi). Religious identity is not necessarily always mutable but, in Baghdad—with its major Shiʿi population under Sunni Ottoman rule—the two could coexist and interact, which is where the “flexibility” comes in. Religious affiliation could either be camouflaged through fear or caution (taqiyya) or negotiated. Shahverdi b. 1 Mecmuʿa, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 140. For an illustration of this painting and a study of the mecmua see Tülün Değirmenci, “An Illustrated Mecmua: The Commoners Voice and the Iconography of the Court in Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Painting,” Ars Orientalis 41 (2011): 186–218. 2 BnF, Turc 140, fol. 13a.

Muhammadi, a descendant of the nominal governors of Luristan, had escaped to Baghdad fearing the Safavid shah’s wrath, and “would wear the Qizilbash tāj or the large Ottoman turban… as the occasion demanded,” thus providing an example of taqiyya and showing the art of negotiation of identities  and allegiances.3 Coexistence of the Sunnis and Shiʿis in Baghdad also had implications for  its architecture—­ including the coexistence of Bektashi convents, Shiʿi shrines and shrines of Sunni figures—and on its artistic production. As the previous chapter suggested, the breadth of illustrated works of popular religious literature also reflected the coexistence of different religious inclinations. One historical lens is insufficient to grasp the artistic production in Baghdad. Instead, multiple perspectives are needed to reach a better understanding of this phenomenon. This chapter focuses on an early seventeenthcentury illustrated genealogy at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara (MS 8457), which is stylistically Baghdadi, but iconographically and textually pro-Safavid, at a time when Baghdad was under Ottoman rule. The Ankara genealogy hints at recurrent tensions, be they pronounced sectarian differences or political rivalries. However, it also indicates ease and flexibility in what seems at first glance to be an insurmountable difference. As an illustrated genealogy—a form which first appeared in the post-Mongol Persianate world and became widespread in the Ottoman realm in the mid-sixteenth century—the Ankara manuscript adapts the genealogical tree tradition with a particularly Safavid tenor. With its immediate visual accessibility and claim to legitimacy through genealogy as a methodological tool, the Ankara 3 Iskandar Munshī, History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great (Tārīkh-i ʿAlam-ārā-yi ʿAbbāsī), tr. Roger Savory (Boulder: Westview Press, 1978–1986), Book 2, 642–46.

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

manuscript represents contested identities in the liminal region of Baghdad. 1

The Composition of Genealogies at the Ottoman Court

Literally meaning “chain” in Arabic, the term silsila denotes a line of descent or lineage. Be it a certification of training, an affiliation to a particular master and Sufi order, or a confirmation of consanguinity, the genealogy (silsilanāma), in the form of a tabulated list, diagrammatic tree, or narrative text, serves the purpose of constructing an identity and tradition as well as providing a synopsis of history. The compilation of genealogies further relates to certification or isnād, the practice of authentication through a chain of transmission commonly used in the study of hadith. The legitimating function of such chains of transmission underlies their use in genealogical registers, whether of Sufi orders, dynasties or in biographical dictionaries. Like isnād, the genealogical register is employed for a variety of purposes, from linking disciple and master to showing dynastic or universal histories. Succinctly and palpably, genealogical registers legitimate and distinguish individuals by virtue of linking them.4 Universal and dynastic histories that run from Adam, the first human, through a succession of biblical prophets and ­pre-Islamic 4 İlker Evrim Binbaş, “Structure and Function of the Genealogical Tree,” in Horizons of the World: Festschrift for İsenbike Togan (Hududuʾl Alem: İsenbike Toganʾa Armağan), ed. İlker Evrim Binbaş et al. (Istanbul: İthaki, 2011), 482. See also Hugh Kennedy, “From Oral Tradition to Written Record in Arabic Genealogy,” Arabica T. 44, Fasc. 4 (1997): 531–44. For early examples of the genre of genealogy, see also Zoltán Szombathy, The Roots of Arabic Genealogy: A Study in Historical Anthropology (Piliscsaba: The Avicenna Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, 2003). For multiple interpretations of chronology, see Shahzad Bashir, “On Islamic Time: Rethinking Chronology in the Historiography of Muslim Societies,” History and Theory 53 (2014): 519–44.

147 and Islamic rulers create a chain of transmission that accords authenticity. The fact that universal histories and genealogies are sometimes combined in a single text demonstrates the malleability of the genre. Indeed, universal histories in prose share much in terms of content with schematic genealogies. The genealogical register has a long history in the Islamic context, with examples dating from the early fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The earliest Ottoman dynastic silsilanāmas—which include an unillustrated Persian genealogy and two illustrated Latin genealogies—date from the reign of Bayezid ii (r. 1481–1512). This early Ottoman genealogy in Persian (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1590) most likely draws upon Ilkhanid or Timurid precedents as reflected in the works of Rashid al-Din (d. 1318) or Hafiz-i Abru (d. 1430) among others. The composition of this unillustrated Persian genealogy also coincides with the re-institution of the office of the naqīb alashrāf (marshal of the nobility) during the reign of Bayezid ii after a brief interim rescission during the reign of Mehmed ii (r. 1451–81). Interestingly, it is also during the reign of Bayezid ii that an illustrated genealogy of the Ottoman dynasty was prepared in Latin. This genealogical scroll, Genealogia Turcorum Imperatorum, Lex Imperii Domi militaeque habita, dedicate Principi Voladislauo Hungarie Bohemie & C. Regi (The Genealogy of Turkish Emperors, The Laws of the Empire and the Military, Dedicated to Prince Vladislaus of Hungary, and King of Bohemia and Croatia), was prepared by the advisor of Matthias Corvinus (r. 1458–90) and his successor Vladislaus ii, Felix Petancius, who undertook diplomatic missions to the Ottoman Empire and dedicated the illustrated scroll to King Vladislaus ii of Hungary (r. 1490–1516).5 5 Julian Raby, “Opening Gambits,” in The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, ed. Selmin Kangal (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000), 64–96, 92. On the post of the nāqīb al-ashrāf, see EI2, s.v. “Naḳīb al-Ashrāf,” by A. Havemann. See also Rüya Kılıç, “The Reflection of Islamic Tradition on Ottoman Social Structure: The Sayyids and

148 Following these Persian and Latin examples, it is only in the mid-sixteenth century that an Ottoman Turkish genealogy was composed or translated. In the late sixteenth century, particularly in the context of imperial projects that sought to portray the Ottomans as the culmination of universal history, the dynastic genealogy tradition in the Ottoman realm was revived. It is also in the late sixteenth century that illustrated versions of Ottoman dynastic genealogies began to be produced. In addition to the composition of universal histories at the Ottoman court, the last two decades of the sixteenth century saw a strong interest in royal portraiture. These two factors undoubtedly contributed to the appearance of new genealogies in the form of illustrated portrait medallions in Baghdad. There are close to a dozen surviving illustrated copies of such genealogies that were produced in Baghdad in the late sixteenth and the early seventeenth centuries. Much smaller— and with less grandeur than the official illustrated histories produced in Istanbul—these Baghdadi silsilanāma manuscripts provide a summary of universal history with short stories about the lives and reigns of important figures. Between eighteen and thirty folios in length and with simple brown leather bindings, these smaller manuscripts are inexpensive productions that, I suggest, were produced for the open market in Baghdad. Of the dozen late sixteenth and early seventeenthcentury silsilanāma manuscripts attributed to the province, three bear colophons with the date 1006 (1597–98) and the names of scribes who were all residents of Baghdad.6 Sharifs,” in Sayyids and Sharifs in Muslim Societies, ed. Morimoto Kazuo (London: Routledge, 2012), 123–39. 6 These are tpml H. 1591, tpml H. 1324, and cbl T. 423. In addition to these, which Bağcı mentions, the BnF Silsilanāma was also copied in Baghdad. This work is slightly different from the others. Instead of paintings within roundels, it features drawings that it is likely were added later. See Serpil Bağcı, “From Adam to Mehmed ııı: Silsilanāma,” in The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000), 188–202, 188. Hereafter, Bağcı, From Adam to Mehmed ııı.

Chapter 5

That several of these illustrated genealogies were produced in the span of a few years (or even months) and that some of them end wishing the reader well suggests that there was a market in Baghdad for brief, affordable, illustrated universal histories told through genealogical succession.7 Ottoman archival book registers also point to the popularity of genealogies.8 Most likely speculatively produced, the illustrated genealogies can be likened to a similar popularization of the illustrated Majālis al-ʿUshshāq (The Assemblies of the Lovers) that had occurred earlier in the century in Shiraz.9 While questions of readership and the popularity of certain genres at a particular time or place require further study, the high number of illustrated genealogy manuscripts indicates that these became popular in Baghdad at the turn of the seventeenth century. 2

The Texts and Their Translations

Scholars commonly attribute several authors to the Persian, Turkish, and Arabic versions of the dynastic genealogy variously known by the titles Subḥāt al-Akhbār (The Rosary of World History), Subḥāt al-Akhyār (The Rosary of the Good), Subḥāt al-Akhbār ve Ṭuhfat al-Akhyār (The Rosary of World History and the Gift of the Good), and Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh (The Quintessence of Histories). It is assumed that the “original” was a Persian text composed by either Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan or by Shafiʿi al-Sharif, who worked during the reign of the Ottoman ruler Süleyman i (r. 1520– 66), and that a Turkish translation was prepared by Yusuf bin ʿAbdüllatif.10 This assumption stems 7 8

9

10

Ibid., 198. Lale Uluç, Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans, and Ottoman Collectors (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2006), 471–78. Hereafter, Uluç, Turkman Governors. For a detailed study on the production of illustrated manuscripts and, in particular, the Majālis al-ʿUshshāq, see Uluç, Turkman Governors. Bernhard Dorn et al., Catalogue des Manuscrits et Xylographes Orientaux de la Bibliothèque Impériale

149

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

from the information given by the seventeenthcentury Ottoman scholar Katip Çelebi (d. 1657) in his bibliographical dictionary Keşfüʾz-Ẓunūn (The Uncovering of Ideas), in which he mentions a genealogical scroll composed by Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan.11 The same information is repeated by Franz Babinger (d. 1967), who writes that Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan’s universal history was translated into Ottoman Turkish by Yusuf bin ʿAbdüllatif in 1545.12 The name of the latter as translator is also provided in a mid-­ eighteenth-century unillustrated genealogy.13 A close reading of illustrated and unillustrated genealogical manuscripts and scrolls shows that there are two earlier Persian versions of this work from which stem two Turkish versions (see table 1). What is left out or added, both in text and in painting, demonstrates how the format of the genealogical tree can be manipulated to highlight a particular dynasty or lineage. In essence, the g­ enealogy is Publique de St. Pétersbourg (St. Petersburg: Impr. de lʾAcadémie Impériale des Sciences, 1852); Gustav Flügel, Die Arabischen, Persischen, Türkischen Handschriften der Kaiserlichen und Königlichen Hofbibliothek zu Wien (Hildesheim, NY: Olms, 1977). Interestingly, a later Persian translation has been made from the Turkish text attributed to Yusuf b. ʿAbdü’llaṭif. See Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Persian Manuscripts in the British Museum, Vol.1 (London: British Museum, 1879), 138; BL Add. 19,531, fol. 1b. 11 G.M. Meredith-Owens also notes, without providing the source, that a continuation of the Turkish genealogy was made by Derviş Meḥemmed ibn Shaykh Ramażan under the title Subḥāt al-Akhbār va Tuḥfat al-Abrār. G.M. Meredith-Owens, “A Genealogical Roll in the Metropolitan Museum,” in Islamic Art in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, ed. Richard Ettinghausen (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1972), 87–90. Hereafter, G. M. Meredith-Owens, Genealogical Roll. 12 Franz Babinger, Osmanlı Tarih Yazarları ve Eserleri (Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı, 1992), 79. 13 Serpil Bağcı writes that the name of Yūsuf bin ʿAbdüllaṭīf is given in a mid-eighteenth-century silsilanāma preserved at the Topkapı Palace Museum Library (B.193), where the introduction names Yūsuf bin ʿAbdüllaṭīf as the translator of the Persian work. Bağcı, From Adam to Mehmed iii, 188.

a shared genre. Thus, the manipulation of format and content results in a particular image. The potency of these registers is underscored by the fact that they were occasionally fabricated to suit the political purpose of one individual or another. The case of the late sixteenth-century Celali rebel ʿAbdülhalim Karayazıcı (d. 1602), who reportedly asserted a genealogy that went back to unidentified ancient rulers, is one example in which claiming a certain lineage becomes a means to establish legitimacy.14 That the rebel also issued orders with an imperial seal after capturing the town of Ruha (present-day Urfa) and appointed the Ottoman governor-turned-rebel Hüseyin Paşa as his grand vizier shows the importance of genealogies, fabricated or not, along with other visible markers of power and legitimacy. Similarly, Afrasiyab, the ruler of Basra, crafted a genealogy for himself that went back to the Seljuks, emphasizing his Sunni identity.15 An unillustrated scroll composed in Persian, with annotations around medallions in Turkish, most likely added at a later date, names its author as Shafiʿi al-Sharif.16 A comparison of this scroll’s text to that of another unillustrated scroll at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna (Cod. Mixt. 487), and to that of the illustrated manuscript preserved at the Museum of ­Ethnography

14

15 16

Günhan Börekçi, “Factions and Favorites at the Courts of Sultan Ahmed i (r. 1603–1617) and His Immediate Predecessors” (PhD diss., Ohio State University, 2010), 34; Baki Tezcan, “Searching for Osman: A Reassessment of the Deposition of the Ottoman Sultan Osman ii (1618–1622)” (PhD diss., Princeton University, 2001), 210. See also the more recent work by Baki Tezcan, The Second Ottoman Empire: Political and Social Transformation in the Early Modern World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Jane Hathaway, The Arab Lands Under Ottoman Rule, 1516–1800 (New York: Pearson Longman, 2008), 68. This scroll at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (67.272) has escaped the attention of most scholars with the exception of G.M. Meredith-Owens, who provides a brief introduction to this work in his Genealogical Roll, 89, and Serpil Bağcı, From Adam to Mehmed iii, 188.

150

Chapter 5

Silsilename Versions Persian A ·

Persian B

Museum of Ethnigraphy (Nr.8457)

·

Turkish A

·

· Badische Landesbibliotheck Rastatt 201 · Bibliotheque nationale de France, Supp. Ture 126 (dated 1013 AH/ copied in Baghdad)

Metropolitan Museum of Art 67.272 Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Mixt. 487 Turkish B

· Topkapi Palace Museum Library H.1324 (dated 1006 AH/ copied by Yusuf b. Mihammed Dizfuli/ includes Arabic introduction) · Topkapi Palace Museum Library H.1591 (dated 1006 AH/ copied by Yusuf b. Mihammed Dizfuli/ includes Arabic introduction) · Chester Beatty Library T.423 (dated 1006 AH/ copied by Abu Talib Isfahani, resident of Bagdad/includes Arabic introduction) · Topkapi Palace Museum Library A.3110

· Sakib Sabanci Museum 190-0592 (author noted as Shafi’i al-Sharif) (not illustrated) · Topkapi Palace Museum Library B. 193 (translator noted as Yusuf b. ‘Abdüllatif) (not illustrated)

· Topkapi Palace Museum Library H.1624 · Österreichische Nationalbibliothek A.F.50 · Los Angels County Museum M.85.237.38 · Dar al-Kutub, 30 Tarikh Turki Khalil Agha, Cairo · Vakiflar Genel Müdürlügü Nr.1872 · Istanbul University Rare Books Library, T. 6092

Table 1

Silsilenāme versions

in Ankara shows that the Ankara manuscript differs slightly from these. The preface to the Metropolitan Museum of Art scroll begins offering a praise to God, who “with the hand of providence and compass of design … created Adam from clay over forty mornings.”17 It continues by noting the select nature of humanity and the Prophet Muhammad. The author writes that he wished to compose a work of history, but since many others had composed histories before him, he wanted instead to create a genealogical 17

While many of the same hadiths (such as the one mentioned above) and Qurʾanic quotations are included in all of the silsilanāma manuscripts, the Metropolitan scroll is slightly different in that the beginning of the preface is a summary of the other silsilanāma texts, and the rest of the preface diverges from the other manuscripts.

scroll. After a note on the difficulties of such an endeavor and a criticism of his enemies, a paean to Sultan Süleyman follows. The sultan is eulogized as the “padishah with the true essence of a caliph, the most munificent king of all kings, [a contemporary] Iskandar with a mind like Aristotle, sun of the heavens, guardian of the world, the purest element of the house of Osman.”18 This is followed by an overview of the organization of the scroll and the diagrammatic genealogy. It features two red circles for prophets and one circle for others, connected by lines, prophets in the middle of the page, and the sons of Gayumars, the Kayanians, and others at the top, all the way to the Ottomans at the bottom. Next, the time span from Adam to those prophets who came before and after the Deluge is noted. The scroll then lists dynasties before 18

Metropolitan Museum of Art, 67.272.

151

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

and after the rise of Islam and provides a table of the twelve dynasties after the advent of Islam, ending with the Ottomans. A comparison of the Metropolitan Museum of Art scroll with the Vienna copy shows that, while the latter starts directly with the praise of Sultan Süleyman as “the purest substance of the house of Osman,” the rest of the preface is the same as that of the Metropolitan Museum of Art scroll; it provides information on the organization of the layout of the scroll, the length of rule of prophets and kings, and a table of dynasties after the advent of Islam.19 In both scrolls, the text written next to and around the medallions is in Turkish and in a different hand. It is possible that these texts were added later. Two other unillustrated works are Ottoman Turkish translations of the Metropolitan and Vienna version of the Persian text. One is currently at the Sakıp Sabancı Museum (190-0592). The preface of this work, in Turkish, gives the name of the author as Sharif al-Shafiʿi. The Sabancı Museum scroll highlights Sultan Süleyman, whose name is written within a large medallion, half of which contains text regarding his reign and the other half of which is subdivided into the seven climes and the lands he possesses. The scroll presently ends with an empty medallion reserved for the Ottoman ruler Mehmed iii (r. 1595–1603). The other Ottoman Turkish translation is an unillustrated genealogy dating to the mid-eighteenth century, which was originally organized as a scroll but is presently in the form of a codex (Topkapı Palace Museum Library, B. 193). It provides us with yet ­another 19

Note also that in both the Metropolitan and Vienna scroll, the Genghisids are not presented with the same information (number of rulers, length of rule), but instead their dynasty is left blank. The likelihood that the Vienna scroll is missing a portion at the beginning should be noted. Presently, the scroll is capped with an ogival-shaped paper, whose somewhat rudimentary illumination follows its shape. On the right and left margins, the ruling lining the scroll on both sides continues toward the top of the scroll (Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Mixt. 487).

name, the person who translated this work into Turkish: Yusuf bin ʿAbdüllatif.20 Both the Metropolitan scroll and the Topkapı manuscript refer to the title of the work as Subḥāt al-Akhbār. The Persian language preface found in the Ankara manuscript is quite different from the one in the Metropolitan and Vienna examples. Although the two versions of the preface share similar ­content and Qurʾanic quotations, their wording is quite different, which suggests that the preface of the Ankara manuscript is likely the work of another author. Whether the author is the Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan mentioned by Katip Çelebi is not substantiated. However, it is this Ankara version of the Persian text, rather than the prefaces of the Metropolitan Museum and Vienna manuscripts, that forms the basis of the majority of late sixteenth-century illustrated Ottoman Turkish translations. The illustrated Ottoman Turkish versions from Baghdad reflect an almost verbatim translation of the Ankara text, with only the verbs changed from Persian to Turkish. This shared text renders the alterations in the Ankara genealogy even more potent. In these illustrated Ottoman Turkish copies from Baghdad, a diagrammatic genealogical tree beginning with Adam follows the preface. The figures in medallions are often depicted seated, either kneeling or cross-legged. Prophets have flaming haloes around their heads. Some hold books or prayer beads in their hands. Like the prophets, rulers are depicted seated, sometimes holding a cup. With a few exceptions, such as the prophet Saleh (Salih) with his camel, or Moses (Musa) with his rod turned into a dragon, most of the paintings portray the prophets and kings in an iconic manner. Figures are placed on a pricked gold

20

Serpil Bağcı also notes that the name of the genealogy’s translator can be found in this manuscript, but she has not made the connection between this manuscript and the Metropolitan scroll that forms the basis of the Turkish translation by Yūsuf bin ʿAbdüllaṭīf. Bağcı, From Adam to Mehmed iii, 188.

152

Chapter 5

background. These illustrated genealogies can be attributed to Baghdad on the basis of style. Furthermore, three illustrated genealogies have colophons giving the name of the scribe, who was a “resident of Baghdad.” In addition, one illustrated manuscript (Bibliothèque nationale de France, Supp. turc 126)—whose drawn illustrations may have been added later—is dated 1604–5 and lists Baghdad as the place of execution in its colophon. Another illustrated Ottoman Turkish copy of the work lacks a colophon but contains further evidence of a connection to Baghdad. In addition to the stylistic affinity of the painted medallions to Baghdad paintings, appended to this genealogy is a painting depicting Mehmed iii on a throne (fig. 19), discussed in Chapter 2. The repetitive and iconic nature of the paintings in the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies, as well as the structure and format of manuscripts produced within several years of each other, suggest the use of models in these short, popular universal histories. These paintings also highlight how the Ankara manuscript, while stylistically similar to the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies, is iconographically more elaborate and pro-Safavid in text and image. 3

The Ankara Genealogy

The Ankara genealogy is a relatively small manuscript, measuring 250 x 145 mm. It has eighteen folios. The original binding of the manuscript failed or was removed and it presently has a black checkered board binding. In the rebinding process, some folios were misplaced.21 The folios have been damaged and trimmed at the edges of the ruling and have not been re-margined. In addition to the alterations resulting from the rebinding process, 21

Günsel Renda provides a reconstruction of the manuscript in her article, “Ankara Etnografya Müzesiʾndeki 8457 No.lu Silsilanāma Üzerine Bazı Düşünceler,” in Kemal Çığʾa Armağan (Istanbul: Bozok Matbaası, 1984), 175–202, at 181. Hereafter, Renda, Ankara Etnografya.

some early modifications to the text are evident, which will be discussed below. The manuscript opens with an illuminated ʿunwan (headpiece), which is predominantly gold and blue with stylized maroon lotus flowers on the upper section. The central lobed gold cartouche, which lacks the title of the work, is outlined in orange, a color often found in ʿunwans of illuminated manuscripts from Baghdad. The text is composed in Persian and written in nastaʿliq. Qurʾanic quotations and Arabic phrases are written in thuluth in blue ink. The opening two folios of text have interlineal illumination in gold. The double-page of the illustrated genealogical tree beginning with Adam and Eve is decorated above with a floral design in gold and below with an animal design. The rest of the folios are decorated with small floral designs in gold, except for several sheets decorated with animal or tree designs. There are 146 painted medallions depicting prophets from the Old Testament, the Prophet Muhammad, ʿAli ibn Abi Talib and the Twelve Imams, and the Abbasid caliphs and various rulers throughout time, ending with a larger painted medallion of the Safavid prince Hamza Mirza (d. 1586), the son of the Safavid Shah Muhammad Khudabanda (r. 1578–87) and the elder brother of the future Safavid Shah ʿAbbas i (r. 1588–1629). The text of the Ankara genealogy consists of two parts: a short introduction in prose and the illustrated genealogical tree, which includes short biographical information written around the medallions. The prose introduction begins by praising God as the creator of the universe and attributes all worldly existence to God. Above all, Adam is distinguished as God’s chosen one because of his purity. After voicing gratitude to the creator, the author writes that the universe and all existence are but one drop in the sea of God’s generosity.22 Interspersed with quotations from the Qurʾan that emphasize the Creation and mankind’s status as God’s chosen, the introduction likens the Creation to the act of writing. After noting Adam’s pristine 22

aem No. 8457, fol. 1b.

153

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

nature, the author moves on to praise the prophets and saints, who are honorable and special on ­account of their divine blessing (karāmat). Here, appropriate Qurʾanic verses and hadiths are chosen to highlight the nature of prophets. Muhammad is distinguished as the lord of the prophets. The author quotes a Qurʾanic verse which points out the role of Prophet Muhammad as a messenger among other messengers (3:144). This florid encomium ends with blessings on the Prophet and on ʿAli ibn Abi Talib, his deputy. The next section of the introduction following this “divine encomium, and [having established] the fundamentals of the guidance of prophecy”23 shows evidence of textual modification. Two lines in the middle of folio 2a have been replaced. Upon examining the manuscript, a different calligraphic hand, as well as different paper, can be observed.24 The revised line praises the Ottoman ruler Ahmed i (r. 1603–17): “Shah Ahmed, the ruler of the auspicious conjunction of the time, the outcome of the world, possessor of good fortune, undaunted against the enemy with the sword of the prophet, friend of the four caliphs.”25 The altered text continues with a call for victory against the Safavid Qizilbash: May the heavenly tent of that magnanimous sultan—­including its ropes, bound with blessings and happiness, and its curtains flowing from the firmament—stand strong forever. And may his sword never be drawn from the necks of the redheads (sorkhsarān) so that he be forever victorious against that enemy. May the pillars of his reign and the days of his fortune be ever-present on his realms and the sun of his benevolence forever shine on his subjects, from the fish below to the moon above, until the Day of Judgment.26

23 Ibid., fol. 2a. 24 Renda, Ankara Etnografya, 176. 25 aem No. 8457, fol. 2a. 26 Ibid.

The rest of the encomiastic section of the introduction is original; it ends with the author naming the work as Jamʿ-i Tārīkh (Collection of History). A timeline from Adam to the Prophet Muhammad follows, along with a discussion of variances in dating and the number of years from each major prophet to Muhammad. Historical events and rulers are categorized into two groups: those that came before the advent of Islam (jāhilīyya), and those that came after (Islāmīyya). These are further classified according to their respective dynasties with information provided on the number of rulers and the number of years each dynasty was in power. Emphasis is placed on the Safavids in this text. After naming the post-Mongol dynasties (the inclusive breadth of which also sets this manuscript apart from other genealogies), the text briefly mentions “and the other: the Ottomans—they are fourteen [rulers]—who ruled to this day, the year 1015 [1606–7], for 315 years.”27 This date corresponds to the reign of Ahmed i, the fourteenth Ottoman sultan, the ruler whose name has been added to the aforementioned introduction. The prose preface ends on folio 3a with blessings on the Safavid dynasty: “By mentioning the kings of the Safavid dynasty, the emblem of the guardianship of the imamate and of supreme guidance— may God protect them with sublime holy lights and eternal rule—the purpose of this description is also [to provide] a sample of their divine characteristics and their glorious feats.”28 The diagrammatic genealogical tree begins on folio 3b with Adam and his offspring. The portraits or names of prophets and rulers are represented in variously sized medallions, with cursory stories related to these figures added around the painted medallions. Individuals are divided according to their respective dynasties by vertical lines. Contemporary rulers or prophets appear next to each other on the same page. This format permits a synchronic and a diachronic synopsis of universal history. 27 Ibid., fol. 3a. 28 Ibid.

154 A large painted medallion portrays the Archangel Gabriel presenting Adam with a tablet. On the right, Eve holds two children—presumably Cain and Abel. Abel’s name is written in a medallion that branches off to the right, and his murder by Cain is depicted in a larger medallion below. From the succession of the other sons of Adam—Seth (Shith), Enosh (Anush), Qinan (Kanʿan), Mahalaleel (Mahlaʿil), and Jared (Bared)—a line branches off to the left where the line of the ancient Persian kings begins. At this point, the sons of Noah (Nuh) appear, with Japheth (Yafes) on the left-hand side, Shem (Sam) in the middle, and Ham on the right. The descendants of Japheth and Shem are represented in red ink within a blue medallion, and those of Ham, who was unfavored, in blue ink within a red medallion. The color-coding of blue ink for the names and red ink for the medallions is followed for some of the pre-Islamic Iranian kings as well. The names of many of the Old Testament prophets are written in red ink in blue medallions. For example, Abraham (Ibrahim) and Aaron (Harun) are identified in this manner, whereas Nimrod (Nimrud)—who, according to this text, had cast Abraham into fire—is identified with a red medallion, linked by a red line to Ham. Among rulers, and particularly the post-Timurid dynasts, the Safavids are distinguished by their central placement and a continuous line representing their dynasty; contemporary neighboring rulers, by contrast, are placed on either side, almost floating on the page. Thus, the color-coding, the size of each medallion and its placement on the folio, and the inclusion of a painting serve as markers of relative ­importance and provide both a legible summary of universal and dynastic history as well as a quickly graspable display of legitimacy. The manuscript currently ends with a large portrait medallion of the Safavid prince Hamza Mirza on folio 18a (fig. 57). The text begins by relating how valiantly Hamza Mirza fought the ranks of the Ottomans, and that among the Ottomans he was known as “Koç

Chapter 5

Kapan” (Ram Seizer). Hamza Mirza is often mentioned in sixteenth-century Ottoman chronicles because of his role in the Ottoman-Safavid war of 1578–90 during Murad iii’s reign. Hamza Mirza is further highlighted in Ottoman sources, especially the Şecāʿatnāme (Book of Courage) of Asafi Dal Mehmed Çelebi (d. 1597–98), who includes several portraits of the young prince in his illustrated account of the war.29 Interestingly, Hamza Mirza and Muhammad Khudabanda do not appear in Safavid illustrated manuscripts. While Shah Muhammad Khudabanda managed to remain in control of the affairs of state until 1587, several Ottoman authors report challenges to his reign during the Ottoman-Safavid war; some advocated for Hamza Mirza, others for Tahmasp Mirza, and others still for Ebu Talib Mirza.30 That news of such affairs reached Ottoman ears at the peak of war highlights the volatility of rule in the Safavid lands. Hamza Mirza had been declared crown prince by a Takkalu-Mawsillu-Turkmen ­alliance.31 However, a Shamlu-Ustajlu alliance declared Muhammad Khudabanda’s younger son, ʿAbbas Mirza, as the heir apparent although he was only eight years old at the time. In the end, it was ʿAbbas Mirza who would replace Muhammad Khudabanda as Shah ʿAbbas in 1587 after Hamza Mirza mysteriously died in 1586.32 29 Abdülkadir Özcan, ed., Āsafī Dal Mehmed Çelebi, Şecāʿatnāme: Özdemiroğlu Osman Paşaʾnın Şark Seferleri (1578–1585) (Ankara: Çamlıca, 2006). For an introduction to this work and a transcription of the text, see Mustava Eravcı, ed., Āsafī Dal Mehmed Çelebi ve Şecāʿatnāme (Istanbul: mvt Yayıncılık, 2009). 30 Şeyh Muḥammed Vefāʾī, Tevārīh-i Ġazavāt-ı Sulṭān Murād-ı sālis, önb Hist. Ott. 66, fols. 66a–67b. 31 Andrew J. Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire (London: I. B. Tauris, 2006), 42–3. 32 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī writes that Ḥamza Mirzā was murdered by a boon companion named Hūrī. The author notes that Hūrī had been fostered by an amir known as Ismikhan. After killing Ḥamza Mirzā with a dagger, Hūrī went to his patron, who brought Hūrī to Shāh Muḥammad Khudābanda. Hūrī was immediately executed. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan

155

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 57 Hamza Mirza hunting, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh

Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 18a

The text in the Ankara manuscript regarding Hamza Mirza ends with the verse: “Undaunted against the enemy, with a sword like a diamond / Slave of ʿAli-yi Vali, Shah ʿAbbas.”33 The remark about Shah ʿAbbas, right where the manuscript presently ends, suggests that the genealogy may

33

el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 48b. aem No. 8457, fol. 18a.

have continued with an account of Shah ʿAbbas i (r. 1588–1629). This would correspond with the date 1606–7 given in the preface, as also mentioned by Renda.34 It is possible that the manuscript was unfinished or, more likely, that it is missing several folios at the end. In all likelihood, the manuscript did not make it to its intended owner, thus going back on the market. 34 Renda, Ankara Etnografya, 188.

156

Chapter 5

In addition to the prominence of Safavid rulers in both the preface and paintings, the texts surrounding the portrait medallions also present a pro-Safavid stance. The brief accounts of the reigns of Shah Tahmasp and Shah Muhammad Khudabanda voice praise of the former’s support of Twelver Shiʿism and his destruction of the works of the ahl al-sunna (people of the prophetic practice) in that land,35 and express a desire for Shah Muhammad Khudabanda’s success against the Ottomans: “God willing, with the help of God, the rest [of the Ottomans] will be captured.”36 The texts concerning Shah Ismaʿil i and Shah Tahmasp i are taken from the Mirʾāt al-Adwār wa Mirqāt al-Akhbār (Mirror of Periods and Staircase of Accounts) of Muslih al-Din Lari (d. 1572), who composed a universal history in Persian, among other works. It appears that whoever altered the preface either failed to thoroughly review the entire text or intentionally left conflicting accounts. On the one hand, the introduction expresses a hope for success against the Safavids. On the other, the brief narratives surrounding the portrait medallion of Shah Muhammad Khudabanda voice hope for success against the Ottomans. The sudden change in the introduction was perhaps aimed to suit a possible Ottoman audience. When juxtaposed with the unaltered texts in the rest of the manuscript, the altered introduction may further emphasize  the attempted domination of the Ottomans over the Safavids. With its curious provenance and confused text, the Ankara manuscript exemplifies the liminality and tensions of artistic output in Baghdad between the Ottomans and Safavids. A comparison of the text of the Ankara manuscript with the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies shows that the latter are close translations of the Persian text found in the former. As mentioned above, the introductory prose section and the biographies of biblical prophets surrounding 35 36

aem No. 8457, fol. 17b. Ibid., fol. 18a.

the portrait medallions in the Ottoman Turkish genealogies are taken almost verbatim from the version attested in the Ankara manuscript, with only the verbs changed from Persian to Turkish. The introduction in the Ottoman Turkish texts, however, lacks any mention of Imam ʿAli as the deputy of the prophet. This is not surprising, as the genealogies in Ottoman Turkish highlight the Sunni Ottoman dynasty. In the Ankara manuscript, ʿAli is given further distinction by his placement alongside the Prophet Muhammad and Archangel Gabriel (fig. 58). Furthermore, the portraits of the four orthodox caliphs are missing in the Ankara manuscript, whereas in most of the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies the Prophet Muhammad is portrayed together with the four caliphs (fig. 59a–59e). Remarkably, however, none of the Ottoman Turkish genealogies include the invocation of success against the Safavids that is present in the Ankara manuscript. In the Ottoman Turkish copies, the encomiastic title “the ruler of the auspicious conjunction of the time, the product of the world, undaunted against the enemy of the sword of the prophet” is reserved for Süleyman i, the “glory of the house of Osman,” during whose reign the Ottoman Turkish translation was made. The appeal that the ruler be victorious over the Qizilbash (sorkhsarān) is missing in all of the Turkish translations, and the text simply continues to wish that the “basis of the ruler’s reign and the days of his rule remain forever over the scope of his realm and that the light of his generosity shine all the way from the moon above to the fish below.”37 The 37

The formulation “the ruler of the auspicious conjunction of the time, the outcome of the world, the pride of the line of the Ottomans, the sultan son of a sultan son of a sultan, Sultan Süleyman Han, son of Sultan Selim Han, that ruler of the universe, may the ropes of the tent of felicity and excellence and his celestial tent be forever strong. May the foundations of his reign and the days of his rule be forever on his domains, and may the rays of his grace ceaselessly shine on the lords, [all the way] from the fish to the moon till the Day of

157

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Ode) of Caʿfer Efendi (d. after 1623), the biographer of the architect Mehmed Ağa. The qasida praising the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed is embedded in the text of Caʿfer Efendi’s Risāle-i Miʿmāriyye (Treatise on Architecture), an early seventeenth-century treatise on architecture. The treatise was written in 1614–15, just as the dome of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed was being completed. The qasida provides an ekphrastic description of the mosque, ­likening parts of it to spring flowers and vegetation. Finally, the qasida praises “the victorious shah and sovereign sultan, Ahmed Khan,”38 and ends with an invocation of success against the “Shah of the Heretics,” saying:

Figure 58 The Prophet and his deputy and son-in-law ʿAli together with the Archangel Gabriel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh

Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 7b

interpolation of the name of Shah Ahmed, the description of the sultan as the “friend of the four caliphs” (muḥibb-i çahār yār), and the invocation of victory against the Qizilbash are potent modifications in an otherwise pro-Safavid manuscript. It is most likely that this alteration was made early in the life of the manuscript during the reign of the Ottoman ruler Ahmed i. A similar appeal for success against the Qizilbash appears in contemporary Ottoman texts, reflecting recurrent tensions between the two rival neighbors in the early seventeenth century. One example can be found in the Bahāriyye (Spring Judgment” can be found in the following manuscripts: tpml H. 1591, fol. 16b; tpml H. 1624, fol. 2b; tpml A. 3110, fol. 2a; cbl T. 423, fol. 15b; lacma M85.237.38, fol. 2a, BnF Supp. turc 126, fol. 2a, önb A. F. 50, fol. 2a.

O God, bless him with long life like the Prophet Hızr! Make the all-knowing saint the companion of that Sultan! Overwhelm his enemies with torment and subjucation! O Irresistible One, give not importance to his enemies! Let the Shah of the Heretics be perpetually powerless before him! Let the infidels groan under the blows of his [Ahmed Khan’s] sword! Let him be triumphant and victorious, and a vanquisher and a taker of spoils.39 Similar wording is used in Mustafa Saʿi’s rendering of the autobiography of the chief architect Sinan (d. 1588). Praising the reigning Sultan Murad iii (r. 1574–95), Mustafa Saʿi concentrates on the sultan’s eastern conquests and his victories against the Safavids, writing:

38

39

Caʿfer Efendi, Risāle-i Miʿmāriyye: An Early-­SeventeenthCentury Ottoman Treatise on Architecture: Facsimile with Translation and Notes, trans. Howard Crane (Leiden: Brill, 1987), 74. Translation by Crane. Ibid., 75–6.

158

Chapter 5

Figure 59a

The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme lacma M85.237.38, fol. 6b

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 59b

The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme

cbl T. MS 423, fol. 21b. ©The Trustees of the Chester Beatty Library

159

160

Figure 59c

Chapter 5

The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1591, fol. 23b

[He] imprisoned him in his square and checkmated him. One of his army columns conquered the domains of Shirvan. The lion cut Van off from the enemy. [The shah] suffered the blow of the Rumi. He deemed it the claw of an iron dog. Think not that he lost [but] Kars and Yerevan! He lost his goods. He lost his life. While [the shah] was sovereign of the world, alas, They [the Ottomans] made his crown too tight for his head. Those who blaspheme the Friends are hypocrites. [They] deserve whatever suffering is inflicted on them.

Long live the sultan, refuge of the world! May the celestial sphere be to him an imperial tent!40 These wishes for success against the Safavid shah hint at the prevalent mood in Baghdad. Slightly over a decade after the peace of 1590, hostilities between the Ottomans and Safavids broke out anew, especially between 1603 and 1607 and then again after 1612. The date of 1606–7 corresponds to the precarious aftermath of these conflicts as

40

Quoted in Howard Crane and Esra Akın, Sinan’s Autobiographies: Five Sixteenth-Century Texts, ed. Gülru.

161

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 59d The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1324, fol. 23b

well as the years when the Celali rebels occupied Baghdad. 4

The Ankara Manuscript and Its Paintings

In addition to its curious provenance, the Ankara manuscript is remarkable in terms of its organization and iconography. Whereas most genealogies provide icon-like portraits of the prophet or ruler in question, the compositions in the Ankara genealogy interact with the text more closely. They also relate to other illustrated works, such as the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbīyā (Stories of the Prophets) or the

Shāhnāma (The Book of Kings).41 The Ankara genealogy begins with Adam, who is normally depicted with the Archangel Gabriel in other manuscripts. In the Ankara manuscript, Adam is depicted not only with Gabriel but also with Eve, who has two infants on her lap (fig. 60). On the lower right, Cain, dressed in an animal-skin garment, lifts a rock to strike Abel, who has already fallen (fig. 61). In the distance, two goats watch the scene behind green hills. The reason for Abel’s murder is jealousy, as implied in the laconic account given in the text: “Abel’s sacrifice was accepted by fire after 41 Renda, Ankara Etnografya, 185, 187.

162

Figure 59e

Chapter 5

The Prophet with the four orthodox caliphs. Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, A. 3110, fol. 8b

which Cain struck Abel in the head with a rock.”42 The text continues: “Eve parted ways with Cain. Abel had produced many sons. They settled in Yemen and Aden and built fire temples. And Idris (Enoch) clashed with them. The offspring of Cain reached forty thousand.”43 The cursory text assumes the reader is familiar with the stories of the prophets in the Old ­ Testament. Similarly, the narrative nature of the images hints at visual links between this silsilanāma and other illustrated works such as the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbīyā, Ḥadīḳatüʾs Süʿedā, or the Shāhnāma. Sharing the same page as Adam and 42 aem No. 8457, fol. 3a. 43 Ibid.

his sons is a painting of Gayumars, the legendary first king of Iran, and the first earthly ruler. He is frequently portrayed in illustrated Shāhnāmas dressed in animal skin. Here, as well, Gayumars is dressed in animal skin, but unlike the iconic images of him found in other illustrated genealogies, the Ankara genealogy portrays him with a flock of animals and with other people who are likewise dressed in animal skin (fig. 62). The narrative nature of the images is also evident in the depiction of Iraj, one of the sons of the Iranian mythical king Faridun, who was murdered by his brothers, Salm and Tur (fig. 63). In the painted medallion, Tur can be seen grasping Iraj by the hair and slitting his throat, while Salm seems to be pinning him down. Also note the tri-lobed turban

163

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 60 Adam and Eve with Cain and Abel and the Archangel Gabriel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b

of Salm, a feature often encountered in Baghdad paintings. On the same page, there is a painting depicting the prophet Saleh and the camel that he caused to appear from the rocks (fig. 64). While several illustrated genealogies also show Saleh with his camel, here the camel is grazing while her calf is suckling. Further down on the same page, the story of the prophet Eber (Hud) is related. The painted medallion shows the prophet standing on the right, with hands clasped before him, while the tribe of ʿAd has been struck with a thunderous storm. Bahram Gur, the Sasanid king whose fame is immortalized in the Haft Paykar (Seven Beauties) of Nizami (d. 1209) and in the Shāhnāma of Firdawsi, is shown seated on a throne flanked by two lions. One of the stories in the Shāhnāma concerns how Bahram Gur slayed two lions to gain his crown. The Ankara manuscript does not depict this moment of battle but shows an awareness of the story in featuring the two lions on either side of the throne. In addition to visual references from the Shāhnāma or the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbīyā such as Cain killing Abel, Noah and his ark, the Sacrifice of ­Ishmael, or the prophet Saleh and the camel, some of the paintings show a closer relationship to the text itself. For example, while it is common to depict the Infant Christ on his mother’s lap, the Ankara silsilanāma includes a bearded man kneeling next to the Virgin Mary and the Infant Christ (fig 65). Renda suggests that this is the man who was crucified instead of Jesus.44 Around the painting, the following is written that: 44

Figure 61 Cain and Abel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b

Renda also points out that a depiction of a man who was crucified instead of Jesus Christ appeared in copies of the Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh (cbl T. 414, fol. 102b, Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts T. 1973, fol. 40a, Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1321, fol. 46a). She adds that such a composition does not appear in other illustrated genealogies. Renda, Ankara Etnografya, 185. On the ZübdetüʾtTevārīh, see Günsel Renda, “Topkapı Sarayı Müzesindeki H. 1321 No.lu Silsilanāmaʾnin Minyatürleri,” Sanat Tarihi Yıllığı 5 (1973): 443–95. See also Renda’s “New Light on the Painters of the Zubdat al-Tawarikh in the

164

Chapter 5

Some of the Jews rejected him and tried to kill him. God placed his likeness (ṣurat) on a Jew, and they crucified him. At the age of thirty-three, by the order of God, Jesus ascended to the fourth heaven. And at the end of time, he will return to earth, kill the Deccal, and pray with Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi.45 Given the close relationship between text and image, the kneeling man may indeed be the man who was crucified instead of Jesus, but ­iconographically the image is reminiscent of the paintings of the Holy Family. Thus, it is also likely that the bearded, kneeling man, with his European-style hat in his hands, is Joseph. Indeed, many of the paintings from late sixteenth-century Baghdad include images of contemporary Europeans, anachronisms that also point to possible Western visual sources and interaction with Europeans through diplomacy and trade. Another painting that shows the close relationship between text and image is that of Ishmael (Ismaʿil) praying in front of the Kaʿba. The grave of his father Abraham is also marked on the painting. The text notes that Ishmael went to Mecca

45

Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts in Istanbul,” in IVème Congrès International dʾArt Turc, Aix-en-Provence (Aix-en-Provence: Éditions de lʾUniversité de Provence, 1976), 183–200; idem “Istanbul Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesindeki Zübdetüʾt Tevarihʾin Minyatürleri,” Sanat 6 (1977): 58–67; and more recently Emine Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2013), 158–75. aem No. 8457, fol. 7a. The reference to Jesus Christ praying with the Imam Muḥammad al-Mahdi, the twelfth Imam, generally understood to be in Occultation (­hiding), hence the appellation “The Hidden Imam,” also suggests the Shiʿi nature of the text. However, as Subrahmanyam remarks, it is not only Shiʿis who believe in the Mahdi. He gives the example of mid-­sixteenthcentury Morocco, “where the ruler Muhammad alShaikh, second of the Saʿdi dynasty of ­Sayyids from the southern Atlas, took to titling himself ‘al-Mahdi.’” Sanjay Subrahmanyam, “Connected Histories: Notes toward a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia,” Modern Asian Studies 31 (1997): 735–62, at 751.

after the death of his father and visited his grave, and the painting shows this moment. It is added that Ishmael was given prophethood and invited people who were idolaters to Islam, some of whom converted. In addition to biblical prophets and visual links to other textual genres, the way some of the rulers are depicted is also worth noting. The Abbasid caliphs and the post-Mongol dynasties are first ­introduced by text, which is followed by portrait medallions; individual descriptions of the rulers surround the medallions. Rather than appearing in single portraits within medallions, however, some rulers are depicted in the company of their retinue or an audience. For example, the Muzaffarid ruler Shah Mansur (d. 1393) is represented on a dappled gray horse, looking back at a woman who is addressing him. His contemporary, Khwaja ʿAli al-Muayyad (d. 1386)—the last ruler of the Sarbadars who ruled in Khurasan in the mid-­fourteenth century—is shown seated outside while an attendant holds his horse. Qutluq Khan Abu Bakr ibn Saʿd ibn Zangi (r. 1226–60), the Salghurid atabeg (a notable acting as guardian and tutor to the infant Seljuk prince), is portrayed as a young ruler seated on a throne, while a bearded man identified as Saʿdi kneels before him, presenting a book to him (fig. 66). It is noted that Qutluq Khan was a just ruler and that his fairness was known all around the world; that he supported shaykhs and  men of knowledge of Shiraz, and greatly cultivated and built Shiraz; and that Saʿdi of Shiraz dedicated the Gulistān (Rose-garden) to him.46 As per the text, the atabeg is depicted together with Saʿdi. The ruler, identified as ʿOsmāniyānʾdan Sulṭān Meḥmed Fātīḥ (Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror from the Ottomans), is depicted together with a white-bearded man holding a book, most likely a member of the ulema.47 In addition to the biblical prophets and kings, this manuscript also includes ­representations of Plato, Pythagoras, and Nasir

46 47

aem No. 8457, fol. 10b. Ibid., fol. 9b.

165

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 62 Gayumars, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh

Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b

al-Din Tusi (d. 1274); their ­portraits are otherwise rarely included in illustrated genealogies. As noted above, among all the rulers depicted, the Safavids are given pride of place. The m ­ embers of the Safavid dynasty are all placed ­centrally on the page, whereas contemporary Ottoman, Uzbek, and Mughal rulers appear to float on the left and right sides rather than following a consistent line as would have been expected. Somewhat less ­disorganized than the contemporary Ottoman Turkish genealogies, the Ankara manuscript first introduces the Safavid dynasty with a ­section

taken from the Mirʾat al-Adwār wa Mirqat al­ Akhbār, detailing the battle that its founder, Shah Ismaʿil i (r. 1501–24), fought against the Aqqoyunlu ruler Alvand (r. 1497–1501). It also covers Ismaʿil i’s conquest of Tabriz, his defeat of Murad b. Yaʿqub Aqqoyunlu (d. 1514) and Muhammad Khan ­Shaybani (d. 1510), and his possession of ʿIraq, Fars, and Khorasan. It ends with Ismaʿil i’s defeat at Chaldiran (1514) by his Ottoman rival ­Selim i. The text emphasizes Shah Ismaʿil i’s victories in the first decade of his rule, quickly passing over the debacle at Chaldiran before outlining the date

166

Chapter 5

Figure 63 Murder of Iraj, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh

Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 4b

of his birth and length of his rule. The attention paid to Ismaʿil i’s victories against the Aqqoyunlu and the Shaybanids in Tabriz and Khurasan is  matched in the manuscript with the inclusion of Aqqoyunlu, ­Qaraqoyunlu, and Shaybanid rulers in both portrait ­medallions and the introductory text. These dynasties do not appear in any of the Ottoman Turkish silsilanāmas. Below the text in a rectangular frame, the founder of the Safavid dynasty is portrayed seated on a baldachine throne surrounded by attendants (fig. 67). He wears a plumed Safavid turban. His retinue can also be distinguished by their red ­turbans wrapped around a baton, as noted in

the text above. The founder of the dynasty is distinguished by the fact that he is afforded a large rectangular painting rather than a smaller portrait ­medallion. Above, on the upper left of the page, there is a portrait medallion depicting a seated ruler with a youth facing him. The youth is identified as ­Sultan ʿAli Safavi, brother of Shah Ismaʿil. A cryptic i­nscription below the medallion notes: “the brother of Shah Ismaʿil was Haydar-i ­Husayni; martyred in Shirvan.”48 It is possible that the ­figure on the left facing the youth portrays Shaykh Haydar, the father of Ismaʿil i, who was killed in Shirvan in 1488. Below this curious double por48

Ibid., fol. 17a.

167

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 64 Saleh and the camel, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh

Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 4b

trait is the portrait medallion of the Ottoman ruler Süleyman i dressed in Ottoman attire. The painting is reminiscent of Ottoman portrait traditions that depict the ruler seated cross-legged against a pillow and holding a handkerchief in one hand. An inscription in red refers to him as Sultan Süleyman-ı Rumi, indicating that the manuscript is not addressed to an Ottoman reader. The text regarding Süleyman i begins with a speedy overview of his conquest of Belgrade, Baghdad, and Esztergom. It  continues with a brief account of the rebel Safavid prince Alqas Mirza (d. 1550), with whom Süleyman marched against Tabriz, seizing Van. Mentioned next is Süleyman i’s peace treaty (in 1555) with Shah Tahmasp i, the shāh-i ʿālam (ruler of the world). Following this, the text turns to an account of the Ottoman prince Bayezid (d.

1561), who rebelled against his father Süleyman i and sought refuge at the Safavid court. Later, he was handed over to the Ottomans and executed along with five of his sons.49 The text ends with a brief account of Süleyman i’s death during the campaign at Szigetvár (1566). The next double-page spread presents the three Safavid rulers, Tahmasp i, Ismaʿil ii (on ­folio 17b), and Muhammad Khudabanda, as well as the prince Hamza Mirza (on folio 18a). They are all centrally placed on the page within large circular medallions and linked by a blue line (fig. 68). These pages are decorated with gold florals surrounding the medallions. Their Uzbek, Ottoman, and Mughal contemporaries are placed on the left 49 Ibid.

168

Chapter 5

Figure 65 Virgin Mary with the Infant Christ and Joseph, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 5b

and right, in smaller portrait medallions. The manuscript ends with a painting of Hamza Mirza hunting. His near contemporaries, Sultan M ­ ehmed iii and the Mughal ruler Akbar (r. 1556–1605), are portrayed on ­either side in smaller portrait medallions. It is noteworthy that Akbar is depicted seated on a throne saddled to a white elephant, possibly signifying him as a controller of the wild

beast or as a commander of war elephants. Additionally, Hamza Mirza is distinguished not as an enthroned ruler-figure but as a prince hunting with falcons. Rather than an iconic image, this sets Hamza Mirza in a narrative, portraying him as a hunter prince. The page with the painting of Shah Tahmasp and Shah Ismaʿil ii has been cut in the middle and the figure of Shah Tahmasp is rubbed

169

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

Figure 66 Atabeg Qutluq Khan and Shaykh Saʿdi, detail. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 10b

off. Interestingly, Murad iii’s face is also rubbed off. The page was later mended with tape. What remains of the portrait of Shah Tahmasp shows an enthroned ruler with an attendant on the right wearing a fur cap and holding his arrows. Three men stand on the left, wearing Safavid turbans and waiting in obeisance, while a fourth, dressed in orange, kneels before the ruler, presenting him

with a petition. The text surrounding this portrait medallion begins with Shah Tahmasp’s accession to the throne, the regard he paid to the infallible imams and Twelver Shiʿism, and his destruction of the monuments of the ahl-i sunna, as mentioned previously.50 The second part of the text is 50

Ibid., fol. 17b.

170

Chapter 5

Figure 67 Shaykh Haydar, Sultan ʿAli Safavi (brother of Ismaʿil i), Süleyman i, Ismaʿil i. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fols. 16b–17a

d­ evoted to his campaigns, first against the Uzbeks in Jam (in the summer of 1528), and then against the Ottomans in 1535. The text does not mention Shah Tahmasp’s defeat by the Ottomans; instead, it twists the historical account to claim that it was actually the Ottomans who “went back to Rum out of fear of the army in whose footsteps victory follows; peace was made afterwards.”51 Shah Tahmasp’s successor Shah Ismaʿil ii is portrayed enthroned in an outdoor setting; an attendant on the right holds his arrows, another holds a tray of fruits, and a similarly attired ­attendant

wearing a blue fur cap wrapped in its middle with a cloth offers him a cup. The text surrounding his portrait medallion reflects the somewhat turbulent years of the short reign of Shah Ismaʿil ii, noting that “many amirs were killed and sedition increased and all the princes perished in that tumult, except for the exalted padishah Sultan Muhammad and Sultan Hamza Mirza in Fars.”52 Ismaʿil ii’s short reign was marked by an increased influence of Qizilbash elements, many executions of the members of the ulema and the Ustajlu

51 Ibid.

52 Ibid.

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

clan, and discord raised by the shah’s pro-Sunni inclinations.53 Not viable for the throne on account of his near  blindness, Muhammad Khudabanda, (Shah Ismaʿil’s brother) was spared, as were Muhammad Khudabanda’s sons Hamza Mirza and ʿAbbas Mirza. The surviving members of the dynasty are represented on the facing page, on folio 18a. Above, Sultan Muhammad Khudabanda is shown seated on a rug outside, wearing a gold turban. Seated next to him is a young prince—also wearing a gold aigretted turban—looking at Muhammad Khudabanda, who is identified not by his given name but by the title ashraf-i ʿalī shāh (The Most ­Exalted Shah).54 Given that a larger portrait medallion is devoted to Hamza Mirza, the youth seated with Muhammad Khudabanda is most likely this prince. While Muhammad Khudabanda is given a lofty title, the text surrounding the medallion is somewhat critical of his reign, during which viziers and amirs plundered the treasury and over-taxed the populace, doing great damage. From the west, the Rūmiyān (Ottomans) sallied forth [i.e. Murad iii’s 1578–90 campaign]. The Qizilbash lost Tabriz and Shirvan; Turkmen and Takkalu [tribes] rebelled and were defeated.55 Afterwards, the army of the Ottomans was defeated three times; a hundred thousand Rūmiyān were killed; and hopefully, with the help of God, the rest

53

54

55

Iskandar Munshī, along with most Safavid historians, mentions Shāh Ismāʿīl’s “weak attachment to Shiʿism.” Iskandar Munshī, Tārīkh-i ʿAlam-ārā-yi ʿAbbāsī, Book 1, 318–19; Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-yi Baġdād, Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi Nuruosmaniye 3140, fol. 11b; Jalāl al-Din Muḥammad Munajjim Yazdī, Tārīkh-i ʿAbbāsī yā Ruznāmeh-i Mulla Jalāl, ed. Seyfullah Vahidinya (Tehran: Vahid, 1987), 41–2. It is probable that the inscriptions in red were not written by the calligrapher of the manuscript but by a non-Ottoman owner or reader. The text surrounding this painting clearly refers to Shāh Muḥammad Khudābanda. aem No. 8457, fol. 18a.

171 will be captured [presumably, under the current ruler, Shah ʿAbbas].56 The beginning of Shah Muhammad Khudabanda’s reign saw the resumption of war with the Ottomans, which would last until 1590. The spurious reference to the defeat of the Ottomans in the account regarding Muhammad Khudabanda was apt at a time when the two rivals were at war yet again. The expression of hope for success against the Ottomans in this text—together with the wishes for success against the Safavids that were added to the preface in 1606–7— exemplify the volatility of the status quo between the two rival empires as experienced on their frontier. Created slightly later than the corpus of illustrated genealogies produced in Baghdad, the Ankara manuscript follows the same format as these genealogies and maintains the same text (although here the text around the medallions is also in Persian, rather than Ottoman Turkish) and stylistic features. However, unlike the iconic portraits of prophets and kings in the illustrated Baghdad genealogies, who are depicted seated against bolsters in a timeless plain gold background, the figures in the Ankara manuscript are situated within a narrative that is closely related to the surrounding text and other popular stories about them. The only other genealogical manuscript attributable to Baghdad that distinguishes a particular figure within a narrative context is the fragmentary genealogy presently at the Linden Museum in Stuttgart,57 which ends with a large portrait of Ahmed i hunting, one of his favorite activities.58 In a centrally placed medallion at the bottom of the page, the young Sultan Ahmed i is 56 Ibid. 57 On this genealogy, see Hans Georg Majer, “Ein ungewöhnliches osmanisches Silsilanāma in Stuttgart,” Tribus 60 (2011): 125–59. 58 See Tülay Artan, “Ahmed i’s Hunting Parties: Feasting in Adversity, Enhancing the Ordinary,” Princeton Papers: Interdisciplinary Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 16 (2011): 93–138; idem, “A Book of Kings Produced and Presented as a Treatise on Hunting,” Muqarnas 25 (2008): 299–330.

172

Chapter 5

Figure 68 Shah Tahmasp i, Ismaʿil ii, Murad iii, ʿUbaydallah Khan on fol. 17b; Shah Muhammad Khudabanda, Emperor Akbar, Mehmed iii, Hamza Mirza, on fol. 18a. Cemʿ-i Tārīh Ankara, Museum of Ethnography MS 8457, fols. 17b–18a

depicted on horseback, with janissary guards on either side (fig. 69). While the portrayal of a sultan hunting is exceptional in this manuscript, it is also noteworthy that the figure is Ahmed i. It was during the reign of his father Mehmed iii that the first illustrated genealogies were produced and became popular.59 The Ankara and Stuttgart manuscripts show that the interest in shorter illustrated universal histories in the form of diagrammatic genealogies continued in the early seventeenth 59 Bağcı, From Adam to Mehmed iii, 188.

century during the reigns of Ahmed i and Shah ʿAbbas i, a period when conflicts between the Ottomans and the Safavids were rekindled. Given the parallel transformations in artistic and cultural realms—as well as the fact that Shah ʿAbbas i diminished the influence of the Qizilbash and instead empowered ghulāms (slaves), which can be likened to the Ottoman system of conscripted ḳuls (servant/slave)—the genealogy represents a familiar, yet subtly potent, medium for legitimacy and supremacy. For example, this sense of competition is heightened in the Ankara manuscript,

173

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

where the name of Ahmed i is inserted along with a wish for his victory against the Safavids, a sentiment similarly reflected in contemporary Ottoman texts. The Ottoman Turkish illustrated genealogies highlight the Sunni Abbasid heritage and emphasize links between the early Ottomans and the Seljuks, in effect legitimizing their Sunni ­Ottoman rule, a point made by Gülru Necipoğlu.60 In these genealogies the Ottoman dynasty is at the forefront, and other contemporary dynasties are totally absent. The portrait medallions follow the succession of Ottoman rulers in an unbroken line, while the texts surrounding them provide details on their accession, length of rule, and conquests. In this context, the Ankara manuscript stands out, not only with its emphasis on the Safavid dynasty but also with its inclusion of other post-Mongol and post-Timurid dynasties, such as the Injus, Muzaffarids, Aqqoyunlu, Qaraqoyunlu, and Uzbeks, which are not included in the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies. The Ankara manuscript and the corpus of Ottoman Turkish genealogies are visual portrayals of legitimacy and competition that utilize complex methods of certification and authentication. These short, but heavily illustrated, manuscripts attest to the popularity of summary universal histories that construct links between religious and historical personages; they also help us understand relations between the court and the provinces. It remains to be uncovered for precisely which audience the Ankara genealogy was intended. It is unlikely to be a royal Safavid commission, as the manuscript contains a medallion depicting Abu Muslim (d. 755), whose ritual cursing was sanctioned during the reign of Shah ʿAbbas i.61 It is clear, however, that the work was not an Ottoman commission, ­either. 60

Gülru Necipoğlu, “The Serial Portraits of Ottoman Sultans in Comparative Perspective,” in The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, ed. Selmin Kangal (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000), 45. 61 Ibid.

While the question remains open, the curious provenance of the manuscript does indicate that the Baghdad market extended beyond its Ottoman governors. This conclusion is further strengthened by the dedication of the above-mentioned 1603 illustrated Mathnawī to Imam Virdi Beg bin Alp Aslan Beg Dhu’l Qadr (New York Public Library Spencer Coll. Pers 12). In addition, that there are a dozen surviving illustrated genealogies that can be attributed to Baghdad based on style shows the popularity of these works. In terms of content, the illustrated genealogies surely exemplify the courtly interest in universal dynastic histories, especially the Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh, which also contains lines running through the pages.62 However, the illustrated genealogies also exhibit undeniable 62

That several of the genealogies also share the title Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh with Loḳmān’s work shows the congruence between these illustrated genealogies and the universal histories produced at court, a point also made by Gülru Necipoğlu. In addition, I have come across a manuscript sold at auction (Sotheby’s London, Lot 47, October 15, 1998, p. 36), which combines Loḳmān’s Zübdetüʾt-Tevārīh and an illustrated diagrammatical genealogical tree in a single volume. The manuscript was formerly in the collection of Selīm al-Awranuwsī, governor of Bosnia, 1239 (1823). According to the sales catalogue, this manuscript is a composite work containing the incomplete text of Loḳmān’s ZübdetüʾtTevārīh and the incomplete illustrated genealogical tree, which can be stylistically attributed to Baghdad. In addition, there is a single full-page painting showing Solomon and Belqis enthroned, surrounded by men and angels. This is possibly the right half of a doublefolio opening illustration. The inclusion of such illustrated frontispieces in many Shirazi manuscripts from the late sixteenth century, as well as many of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ manuscripts (whose place of production is still a matter of debate), points to the relevance and congruity of portrayals of prophethood, as well as the kinds of texts contained in a codex headed by such paintings. For opening illustrations depicting the enthroned Solomon with Belqis and his retinue, jinns, and animals, see Serpil Bağcı, “A New Theme of the Shirazi Frontispiece Miniatures: The Divan of Solomon,” Muqarnas 12 (1994): 101–11.

174

Chapter 5

Figure 69 Selim ii, Murad iii, Mehmed iii, Ahmed i. Silsilenāme

Linden-Museums, Stuttgart, vla 1155, fol. 4b. ©Linden-Museum Stuttgart; Photo: A. Drey

Between the Ottomans and the Safavids

originality in terms of their organization of painted medallions. At a certain point, the illustrated genealogies from Baghdad found their way to the Topkapı Palace Library, and it is possible that these works influenced later illustrated genealogies that were produced at the court in Istanbul in the 1680s. In the liminal geography of Baghdad where identity was murky at best, the outburst of illustrated genealogies (perhaps not unlike the appearance of diagrammatic genealogies after the Mongol conquest—a conquest that restructured society) makes a claim to Sunni Ottoman identity. Perhaps the popularity of the illustrated genealogies in Baghdad can be seen as a need for self-(re) definition after the whirlwind of change. In this context, the Ankara manuscript clearly stands apart and turns the genre on its head by placing the Safavids at the culmination of universal

175 ­ istory. By means of slight alterations to its text, h the genealogy could find a new home with an Ottoman owner. Indeed, the flexibility of the text is signaled by its viability on the market in Baghdad with a major Shiʿi population under Sunni Ottoman rule, where various groups could coexist and interact, their differences at times camouflaged through fear or caution or otherwise negotiated. This translatability is embodied in the corpus of illustrated manuscripts from turn-of-the-century Baghdad. It is through style, often described as “eclectic,” that the in-betweenness of Baghdad is reflected. The characterization of Baghdad as a person caught in a whirlwind underlines this eclecticism or hybridity, which further stands out in contradicting the courtly style, and in its originality.

Concluding Remarks The Ankara genealogy perhaps best highlights the comments of the seventeenth-century authors, Şeyhoğlu and Evliya Çelebi, that Baghdad was caught between two tribes.1 This in-betweenness, the reciprocal denigration even amidst sustained coexistence (peaceful or otherwise), hints at the complexity of interaction between the Rum and the ʿAjam inhabitants of the city. The Ankara genealogy also hints at recurrent tensions, be they of pronounced sectarian differences or of political ­rivalries. However, it also indicates an ease and flexibility in what seems to be an insurmountable difference. By means of slight alterations to its text, the genealogy could (hope to) find a new home with an Ottoman owner, because it was an adaptation in the first place. This translatability finds body in a different way for the rest of the corpus of illustrated manuscripts from turn-of-the-century Baghdad. The in-betweenness of Baghdad as a frontier province or “edge” is reflected in the hybridity of its paintings. The characterization of Baghdad as a person caught in a whirlwind between the Ottomans and the Safavids underlines this hybridity. At the moment when the Ottomans and the Safavids were actively and dialogically creating a distinct visual, ceremonial, and architectural idiom, the illustrated manuscripts from Baghdad appeared to be a mix between the two styles. This stylistic eclecticism—­which sprung forth from a conglomeration of different sartorial and architectural elements—­contrasts with the creation of a marked difference in imperial identity in the capitals. Where the province does not fit the 1 Şeyhoġlu, Kitāb-ı Tārīh-i Dārü’s selām-ı Baġdād’ıñ Başına Gelen Aḥvālleri Beyān İder fī Sene 1028, Codex Schultens 1278, Leiden University Library, fols. 20b–21a; Yücel Dağlı and S. Kahraman, eds. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi ıv. Kitap Topkapı Sarayı Bağdat 305 Numaralı Yazmanın Transkripsiyonu–Dizini (Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2000), 243.

model of “distinction” in the second half of the sixteenth century, this in-betweenness and hybridity of style, matched to a certain extent by the textual sources, points to a fluidity of identity owing to the liminal position of Baghdad as a frontier zone. The hybridity of the frontier thus stands out particularly in contradiction to the imperial image of the capitals, urging us to question our definitions of what is “Ottoman” or “Safavid.” Thus, the Turkmen Sadiqi Beg (d. 1610), painter and librarian to Shah ʿAbbas I (r. 1588–1629), traveled to the Ottoman lands dressed as a dervish, somewhat like the story of the youth dressed as a Bektashi dervish described in the previous chapter. There, Sadiqi Beg met the Ottoman poet Baki (d. 1600) in Aleppo.2 The Khorasani calligrapher Hasan ʿAli (d. 1592–3) found continued patronage in Karbala following the death of his former patron; and Fuzuli, who did not move out of Arab Iraq, composed poems for its Aq Qoyunlu, Safavid, and Ottoman overlords. This indicates the permeability of boundaries between what we take to be monolithic and hermeneutically sealed entities— the Ottoman and Safavid empires. Through a close reading of sources, we can reconstruct the networks of poets (such as Mustafa ʿĀli, ʿAhdi, Kelami and Tarzi in Baghdad), governors and their sons and relatives in various neighboring districts and provinces, and upstarts seeking to be—or already on the way to being—integrated into the state system. Moreover, artists and poets traveled for patronage, for shrine visitation, and for trade, among other reasons; likewise, merchants and pilgrims traveled and brought with them goods or took souvenirs. In the case of upstarts, the very liminality of Baghdad offered advantages and avenues for leverage. For example, in the case of Bekir Subaşı, using the liminal position of Baghdad against the Ottomans in order to become the governor of the 2 Sādiqī Beg, Majmaʿ al-Khawāṣṣ, ed. ʿAbd al-Rasūl Khayyampour (Tabriz: Akhtar-i Shumāl, 1948), 115.

Concluding Remarks

province did not initially seem to be a major concern. It is claimed that Bekir Subaşı only regretted his actions after the realization of failure, “for he was a Sunni Muslim of the Hanafi sect,” as construed in one contemporary chronicle.3 Forging direct connections among different individuals is not necessarily the aim in this book. However, these networks of relations between various individuals in districts in and around Iraq, as well as the Arab lands, eastern Anatolia, and the metropolitan centers, paint a more closely connected, albeit complicated, image. Certainly, networks and broad connections both within the Ottoman Empire and with its neighbors always existed in various ways. However, Baghdad is distinguished as a frontier zone in the late sixteenth century by the sheer quantity of illustrated manuscripts produced that share a distinct style. On the imperial level, distinction expressed dialogically—­ through monumental architecture, ornament, ceremony, official histories, and painting—presents claims of difference. In contrast, Baghdad reveals a more variegated picture. The foregoing has been an attempt to contextualize the appearance of a short-lived, yet lively art market in the frontier province of Baghdad. This flourishing of the interest in art appears at a moment of empire-wide social, cultural, political, and urban transformation, including the appearance of new modes of sociability and new places of socialization such as the coffeehouse, the emergence of a class of nouveau-riche interested in buying art, and the Celali uprisings. It coincides with the broadening of the base of patronage in the Ottoman and Safavid capitals, where there was an increasing interest in collecting and owning illustrated manuscripts, paintings, and calligraphies. As such, this book hopes to also complement recent scholarship on the transformations of art patronage in the Ottoman capital in this period. The corpus of illustrated manuscripts produced in and around Baghdad appears at the auspicious 3 Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-i Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fol. 125b.

177 conjunction of a period of peace, with the Ottoman and Safavid wars having recently ended in 1590 (with more favorable conditions obtained by the former), a possible exodus of artists from Shiraz, and a wider group of sufficiently wealthy buyers to sustain a market, including, but not restricted to, governors. To works produced in the metropolitan centers of Istanbul and Isfahan in the late sixteenth century, we can also add the prolific production of Shiraz painting as well as the still elusive group of Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ (Stories of the Prophets) and truncated Shāhnāmas (Book of Kings) manuscripts. These further point to an increasing desire to own illustrated works as well as the production of such works outside metropolitan centers. While the illustrated manuscripts produced in Baghdad can be loosely connected to current trends in the Ottoman and Safavid metropolitan centers, the types of works that were chosen for illustration in Baghdad, as well as their compositions, differ considerably. The more or less coherent group of manuscripts produced in Baghdad in this period appears within a predominantly Ottoman, yet cosmopolitan, social context, though this should not be taken to mean that it was only an Ottoman audience that consumed these works. The very example of the Ankara genealogy shows that there was a broader market that included not only Ottoman but also Turkmen and Safavid patrons. After the first few years of the seventeenth century, the production of illustrated manuscripts in Baghdad waned. This coincides with the rekindling of warfare with the Safavids in 1603, turmoil in Baghdad caused by the uprising of Tavilzade Muhammed in 1608, and with Shah ʿAbbas I gaining the upperhand after having stabilized the eastern frontiers of his dominions bordering the Uzbeks, allowing him to initiate reforms and turn his attention to recapturing lands occupied by the Ottomans. The corpus of over thirty manuscripts attributed to Baghdad has often been defined or accepted as a “school” of painting, without questioning the notion itself or the conditions under which

178 i­llustrated manuscripts were produced. Archival research has not yet shed light on the particularities of the production of illustrated manuscripts, such as the acquisition of materials, payment of artists, and organization of the preparation of manuscripts in Baghdad (nor in other centers, like Shiraz, Mashhad, Tabriz and Qazvin). However, even the “eclecticism” associated with Baghdad points in the direction of a more complicated picture, wherein the movement of patrons, artists, and objects played a crucial part. While the questions of how, where, by and for whom the manuscripts were prepared in Baghdad cannot be answered fully, given the limited nature of available documents, a consideration of the corpus as a whole suggests a multilayered view of the production and consumption processes. We need perhaps to think of different models or conditions of production. For example, the Cāmīʿü’s-Siyer (Collection of Biographies) of Governor Hasan Paşa (d.  1602) or the large-scale Shāhnāma (tpml, H. 1486) with fifty-five paintings, and the large-sized and luxury manuscript of the Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Garden of Purity) (British Library, Or. 5736) would require a different form of organization of pigments, materials, artists and calligraphers than the much smaller illustrated genealogies, not to mention the differing status of their patrons/buyers. Perhaps further research may also shed more light on the conditions of production and acquisition of multiple illustrated copies of the same text. While not every manuscript studied in the present book has retained its original binding, there are certain similarities as well as differences. As a whole, the group of manuscripts attributed to Baghdad do not share the striking similarity of bindings that characterizes Shiraz manuscripts and the group of Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ (Stories of the Prophets) manuscripts, or the truncated Shāhnāmas. While the bindings of most of the Baghdad manu­ scripts are brown leather with a centrally placed, gilded shamsa (sunburst motif), and corner pieces, they are not identical across the corpus. The same observation can be extended to the calligraphy. However, as pointed out in C ­ hapter 2,

Concluding Remarks

the calligrapher of the Ankara Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā (Besim Atalay 7294) also copied the Rawżat alṢafāʾ (Or. 5736) and likely the second volume of the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (tpml H. 1230) as well. Here, we can also look to another example, this time not from Baghdad but from Damascus. From the late 1580s through the first decade of the seventeenth century, we find a calligrapher named Derviş Muhammed Ahlaki, who copied seven manuscripts of the Hümāyūnnāme (The Imperial Book), the translation of the Anwar-i Suhaylī (Lights of Canopus) of Kashifi.4 In addition, a calligrapher named ʿAbdülhalik b. Derviş Muhammed (perhaps Derviş Muhammed Ahlaki’s son?) also copied a manuscript of the Hümāyūnnāme (Süleymaniye Library, Ayasofya 4349) in 1610.5 Derviş Muhammed, according to Parladır, may have traveled from Damascus to Baghdad, and worked on the illustrated Hümāyūnnāme (tpml R. 843) there. This observation is based on affinity of style in calligraphy. The manuscript, unfortunately, contains no information about its place of production. However, its paintings are stylistically akin to those of Baghdad manuscripts. Assuming it was copied in Baghdad by Derviş Muhammed Ahlaki, then we can ask: did the calligrapher move from Damascus to Baghdad in search of patronage? What do the multiple copies of Hümāyūnnāme (localized to Damascus, Cairo, Baghdad) in the late sixteenth century suggest about the popularity of this text? A similar question can be raised about the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā and the illustrated genealogies in Baghdad. Considering that certain works achieved popularity in certain places, could or would artists and calligraphers move in order to find continued patronage? What about a particular specialization of an individual calligrapher in copying a certain text? In the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, we can note Derviş Muhammed Ahlaki’s occupation as a calligrapher 4 For a list of these works copied by this calligrapher see Şebnem Parladır, “Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebi’nin Hümāyūnnāmesi” (PhD. diss, Ege Üniversitesi, 2011), 12. 5 Ibid.

Concluding Remarks

of Hümāyūnnāmes. In the 1620s, we also see the case of Ibrahim Cevri, who copied multiple manuscripts of the Mathnawī following his retirement. Turning the initial assumption around, can we also consider the scenario in which Derviş Muhammed remains in Damascus and copies the Topkapı Hümāyūnnāme, which could then be illustrated in Baghdad or even Damascus? These questions are certainly hypothetical, but stem from the crucial example of the illustrated Freer Haft Awrang (46.12) of Jami (d. 1492) produced for the Safavid prince Ibrahim Mirza (d. 1577). The case of the Freer Haft Awrang—which is extraordinary for the amount of documentation it contains concerning the process of production—shows that different parts of the manuscript were copied over a period of nine years (between 1556–65) by different calligraphers in different locations (Mashhad, Qazvin, Herat). Marianne Shreve-Simpson observes that the Safavid kitābkhāna was not part of the official bureaucracy but a private institution convened by a patron rather than an artist (unlike the Italian artists’ workshops of the Renaissance).6 Calligraphers and painters who were involved in the production may or may not be salaried members of the workshop. Here the examples from the Ottoman realm of Kalender Efendi (d. 1616) and Nakkaş Hasan Paşa (d. 1622) also point to alternative career paths.7 Moreover, artists and calligraphers could also move with the Safavid court, as was the case with one of the calligraphers of the Freer Haft Awrang, Malik al-Daylami, who completed parts of the work in Mashhad and Qazvin. 6 Marianna Shreve-Simpson, “The Making of Manuscripts and the Workings of the Kitab-khana in Safavid Iran,” in The Artist’s Workshop, ed. Peter M. Lukehart (Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1993), 105–23, 111. See also by the same author, Sultan Ibrahim Mirza’s Haft Awrang: A Princely Manuscript from Sixteenth Century Iran (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997). 7 Emine Fetvacı, “Enriched Narratives and Empowered Images in Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Manuscripts,” Ars Orientalis 40 (2011): 243–66; Serpil Bağcı, “Presenting Vassal Kalender’s Works: The Prefaces of Three Ottoman Albums,” Muqarnas 30 (2013): 255–315.

179 While we are still a long way from a concrete understanding of how the kitābkhāna functioned or the process of manuscript production, the example of the Haft Awrang paints a more versatile picture. While we know that the Ottoman court atelier in Istanbul had a much more centralized organization as revealed in payment registers (ehli hiref defterleri), this was not the case with artists employed in provincial capitals like Aleppo or Baghdad.8 With the more complicated picture provided by Shreve-Simpson in mind, and currently with a lack of archival evidence, we can at least raise hypothetical questions about the conditions under which illustrated manuscripts were made in Baghdad. Could Hasan Paşa or other governors have had their own kitābkhānas, just as some of their colleagues did in Istanbul? How would other patrons, such as Mustafa ʿĀli, access/approach painters and calligraphers? Where did artists work? In the case of the illustrated manuscripts of the Munājāt (Invocations) of ʿAbdullah Ansari and several calligraphic samples, we saw that the Shiʿi shrine of Imam Husayn also functioned as a site of artistic production. We also know, for instance, that illustrated pilgrimage scrolls and manuscripts were produced in or near the Masjid-al Haram in Mecca for both Sunni and Shiʿi pilgrims. Additionally, it has frequently been remarked that the painter Sadiqi Beg showed that the coffeehouse could be a place of exchange or sale of art.9 Can we 8 Even within the Ottoman capital a group of artists could come together on an ad hoc basis for projects. See Emine Fetvacı, Picturing History at the Ottoman Court, 59–101; idem, “Office of the Ottoman Court Historian,” in Studies on Istanbul and Beyond, ed. Robert Ousterhout (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007), 7–21. 9 Quoted in Sussan Babaie, “The Sound of the Image/ The Image of the Sound: Narrativity in Persian Art of the 17th Century,” in Islamic Art and Literature, ed. Oleg Grabar and C. Robinson (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 149–50. On this episode and on the life and works of Ṣādiqī Beg see also Tourkhan Gandjeī, “Notes on the Life and Work of Ṣādiqī,” Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kultur des Islamischen Orients 52 (1975): 112–18, and Ferenc Csirkés,

180

Concluding Remarks

also consider the coffeehouse, or the Sunni Mawlawi lodge, or Shiʿi Bektashi convents in Baghdad as places where artworks could be created or purchased? If so, sectarian and Sufi affiliation could have exercised an impact on intended customers. Furthermore, given the similarity of compositions in the Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ and the Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl or the illustrated genealogies, how can we imagine the creative process of artists? These questions remain unanswered but I hope that this book opens avenues for further exploration into the production of manuscripts outside of the royal court. A further implication of this work focused on Baghdad is the importance of studying the frontier zone at both the micro- and macro-levels. Baghdad was unique among other Ottoman provinces concerning its art market due to its specific geopolitical condition and location and the apparent availability of materials, artists and patrons to support that market. However, other frontier provinces could present different aspects of a cultural admixture in different ways. Focused studies on the Buda province on the Ottoman Empire’s western frontier, for example, would paint a different picture of relations between the Ottomans and the Habsburgs.10 Likewise, Mecca as a pilgrimage site and trade center would be a point of interest. Outside the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, we can also consider the Deccan, particularly art production in various sultanates in the sixteenth and mid-seventeenth centuries, for example. In this work, contacts (artistic or otherwise) with India were hinted at. Indeed, in addition to the unusual predominance of figures from Indian history, such as the painting of the nominal ruler of Somnath included in the Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer (fig. 70), stylistic similarities between Baghdad, Shiraz, and Deccani

10

“‘Chaghatay Oration, Ottoman Eloquence, Qizilbash Rhetoric’”: Literature in Ṣafavid Persia” (PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2016). See, for example, Robyn Dora Radway, “Vernacular Diplomacy in Central Europe: Statesmen and Soldiers Between the Habsburg and Ottoman Empires, 1543–1593” (PhD diss., University of Princeton, 2017).

painting can also be observed, a point first raised by Milstein.11 Questions on the movement of artists and objects have been elaborated to some extent throughout the present book. Further research on relations between the Ottomans, Mughals and Deccani rulers will shed more light on the specifics of contacts. The implications of a focused microlevel study on a frontier zone that also takes into account the macro-level history, interactions, and encounters, I propose, may be a fruitful approach for other frontier zones as well, such as the Deccan, regardless of its possible contacts with Baghdad. The frontier, in the case of Baghdad, was a zone or place of cultural and religious coalescence, as it was a vibrant center of trade at the confluence of the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean traffic as well as a pilgrimage center. As such, it comes close to Mecca, more than any other Ottoman city, and to a lesser degree, Konya. This amalgamation becomes more concrete in Baghdad when seen against the opposite sides of that very frontier. With the (loose and changing) boundaries of empire in mind, the present book also poses further questions on relations between center and province, relations among the provinces, and the different imperial images projected by the center onto its provinces. In the case of Baghdad, the Ottoman bureaucrat Mustafa ʿĀli was one point of contact with Istanbul, in addition to other officials appointed to that province. His important treatise on calligraphers and painters was begun in Baghdad. There, he also connected with a network of poets and calligraphers. In addition to the case of Mustafa ʿĀli, this book also pointed to possible influences and interactions between Istanbul and Baghdad particularly through the examples of ­single-page paintings and illustrated genealogies. Can we also consider the seventeenth-century painter Nakşi as another individual contributing to a possible 11

Rachel Milstein, “From South India to the Ottoman Empire: Passages in 16th Century Miniature Painting,” in 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi, Bildiriler: 23–27 Eylül 1991, Vol. 2 (Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1991): 497–506, 498.

Concluding Remarks

Figure 70 The captive ruler of Gujarat being paraded. Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, fol. 163b

181

182

Concluding Remarks

connection between Baghdad and the Ottoman capital?12 This idiosyncratic painter, whose name is mentioned in the epilogue to the 1621 illustrated Tercüme-i Şaḳāʿiḳ-i Nuʿmaniye (Translation of the Crimson Peonies), has p ­ roduced a ­number of paintings in several illustrated manuscripts and single-page paintings created at the court in Istanbul. In his paintings, Nakşi merges elements from European and Persianate works, and synthesizes them within an Ottoman visual idiom, while maintaining his personal style. His figures have large heads with characteristic faces. He plays with the sizes of figures and includes elements that are not directly related to the text but that either show his personal eyewitness experience, or are represented as witty quotations. Together with his inclusion of humorous details (another common feature in Baghdad paintings), the most striking element in Nakşi’s paintings is the use of an intuitive and experimental perspective in archways and windows. Sometimes rendered in black ink—that distinguishes it from the rest of the painted composition—Nakşi’s representations of architecture stand out as his calling card. Like Baghdad paintings, an “eclectic” style has often been attributed to this painter. Moreover, details of architectural elements included in Nakşi’s paintings, especially his depiction of minarets, very closely resembles that of Baghdad painting. Note, for example, the tapering minaret in the painting depicting the early sixteenth-­ century shaykh al-islam (chief jurisconsult) ­Zenbilli ʿAli Efendi (d. 1526) delivering answers to legal questions by means of a basket (zenbil) in his

12

On this painter, see Esin Atıl, “Ahmed Nakşi, An Eclectic Painter of the Early 17th Century,” in Fifth International Congress of Turkish Art, ed. Géza Fehér (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1978), 103–20; Süheyl Ünver, Ressam Nakşi: Hayatı ve Eserleri (Istanbul: Kemal Matbaası, 1949) and the more recent publication by Tülün Değirmenci, İktidar Oyunları ve Resimli Kitaplar: ii. Osman Devrinde Değişen Güç Simgeleri (Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2012), esp. Chapter 5, “Osman’ın Sarayından Ulemaya Sesleniş: Tercüme-i Şakāʾiku’n-Nuʿmānīye,” 281–320.

residence in Istanbul (tpml H. 1263, fol. 159b).13 This painting is one among many showing Nakşi’s witticism. The door and windows of Zenbilli ʿAli Efendi’s abode show the artist’s attempts at perspective, while the statement of the legal question (‘bu mesʾele beyānında’) as it is written on the paper is legible, and the rocks in the background have transformed into human faces. The inclusion of a single-page painting by Nakşi, depicting the Ottoman sultan Mehmed iii in the Topkapı Palace Museum album, H. 2165 (fol. 61b), which also contained paintings from Baghdad (figs. 23, 24), shows the accord that the compiler of the album found between these paintings. While I do not suggest direct connections between Baghdad and Nakşi, on whose life we know little, it is worth questioning whether further connections pointing to a twoway traffic between the capital and the province of Baghdad can be teased out in future research. As I have suggested in the final chapter, it is likely that the illustrated genealogies show an influence moving from the capital to the province, and then back to the capital. Perhaps further research into these connections, not only in painting but other aspects of art and architecture, among provinces and between provinces and the capital will shed more light into dynamics of exchange. Indeed, further research may show that these dynamics were not unidirectional from the capital to the provinces, but that the provinces also influenced the capital in turn. Finally, while the present book has concentrated particularly on Baghdad as a center of art production and consumption, relations among provinces in the Arab lands and eastern Anatolia must also be considered in addition to relations between Baghdad and the Ottoman capital. Extending the current research to a broader region that encompasses other Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire as well as eastern Anatolia may highlight dynamic relations among provinces and between the provinces and their metropolitan 13

For an illustration of this painting, see Serpil Bağcı et  al., Osmanlı Resim Sanatı (Istanbul: T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları, 2006), 211.

183

Concluding Remarks

centers and the Ottoman capital. In terms of “connected histories,” Baghdad is closely tied to Aleppo, Mosul, and Diyarbekir, as well as eastern Anatolian provinces. Many of the governors of Baghdad hailed from Van, Erzurum, Diyarbekir, Mosul, Damascus, Aleppo, Shahrizol, Najd, and Lahsa. Governors and their households often rotated among these provinces, creating further networks of relations, as revealed in architectural projects during the sixteenth century and beyond.14 For example, Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa remained in the BaghdadBasra-Najd-Lahsa region, eventually retiring to Aleppo. He was known to have acquired great property there. His nephew, Germi, was appointed as district governor in the provinces of Basra and Lahsa; his son, Arslan, remained for some time in Baghdad and was in the household of the son of the leader of the ʿazeb forces (light infantry troops), Mehmed Kanber.15 Arslan was also ­appointed as 14

15

On architectural patronage in the eastern provinces and the Arab lands under Ottoman domination see Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), esp. Chapter 12, 439–75. Hereafter Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan. According to Selānikī, Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa was distinguished among his peers in terms of his possessions. Sources are not always very clear on dates of appointment of governors. Among governors appointed to Baghdad, Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa ruled for a comparatively longer time. Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa also rebuilt the dome of the shrine of Imam Husayn in Karbala. In the tadhkira section of the Künhü’l Ahbār, Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī mentions Germī, the nephew of Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa. Germī was appointed as district governor in various districts in Basra and Lahsa. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī notes that when Germī’s request for a favor was not met favorably by Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa, Germī composed a satirical verse: “When Lahsa was ruined, you went toward Basra / After Basra is ruined, pray tell, where will you go?” It appears, from Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan elBaġdādī’s account, that Elvendzāde ʿAlī Paşa’s son Arslan Beg remained in Baghdad and he was a bölükbaşı (commander of a janissary unit) in the household of Derviş Meḥmed, son of Meḥmed Kanber. He was charged with collecting tax and sending the yield every few years to the capital. The author writes that it had been five or six years that he had not sent this

district governor in Hilla and Maʿarra, Syria. Furthermore, he was known to have fostered relations with the upstart Abaza Mehmed Paşa (d. 1634) and was thus executed in 1625–26.16 The case of Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa and his family is one example of the interconnected relations in these regions. Asafi Dal Mehmed Çelebi is another example of connections between Istanbul, Erzurum, Qazvin, Isfahan, Shiraz, Basra, and Baghdad. Further research into rapidly ­circulating governors, commanders, their households, and scribes associated with their divans may shed light into the dynamics within the larger region that not only includes Baghdad and its immediate hinterland but also Aleppo, Diyarbekir, Erzurum, Van,

16

to Istanbul and that Derviş Meḥmed had seized this yield; it was through this that Arslan Beg had grown rich. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-yi Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 98b– 100a; Selānikī Muṣṭafa Efendi, Tārīh-i Selānikī, Vol. 1, p. 317, 328–29; Vol. 2, p. 710, 721; Mustafa İsen, Künhü’l Ahbar’ın Tezkire Kısmı (Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayını, 1994), 323. Abdul-Raḥīm Abū Ḥusayn in his study on provincial leadership in Syria also points to the complex links between provincial leaders. He writes that following the death of Yūsuf Sayfā in 1625, Muṣṭafa Paşa b. Iskender, who was appointed as governor of Tripoli, collaborated with Fakhr al-Dīn Maʿn against the Sayfas, who, under Yūsuf Sayfā, had been the power-holders in Tripoli for almost a century. Yūsuf Sayfā’s nephew, Sulaymān Sayfā, was killed by the bedouin chief Mudlij al-Hayarī, with whom he had sought refuge in Salamiyya. The Bedouin chief had been an ally of Hāfıẓ Aḥmed Paşa in his attempts to regain Baghdad from the Safavids. In the meantime, Arslan Paşa (at the time, district governor of Maʿarra, and formerly district governor of Ḥilla, and importantly, son of the above-mentioned Elvendzāde ʿAli Paşa) was also in Salamiyya and was suspected of acting against the Ottomans, and of siding with the governor-turned-rebel Abaza Meḥmed Paşa. The Bedouin chief was ordered by Hāfıẓ Aḥmed Paşa to execute Arslan Beg and Sulaymān Sayfā in 1625–26. Abdul-Raḥīm Abū-Ḥusayn, Provincial Leaderships in Syria, 1575–1650 (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1985), 55–6; Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan elBaġdādī, Tevārīh-i Fetiḥnāme-yi Baġdād, Bodleian Or. 276, fols. 98b–100a.

184

Concluding Remarks

etc. Trade relations and the movement of objects, including books, will also add to this picture, already demonstrated in the case of architectural patronage.17 Thus, moving from the specifics of Baghdad as a frontier zone between the Ottomans and the Safavids, we must also consider the region of eastern Anatolia down through Aleppo, Mosul, Baghdad, and Basra. This broader region was constantly being reclassified, through changes in governance between the Aq Qoyunlu and Qara Qoyunlu Turkmen confederations, the Safavids, and the Ottomans and through changes in administrative divisions of the provinces. The present research has concentrated on the period following the peace treaty between the Ottomans and the Safavids in 1590 and the rekindling of war between the two empires in the early seventeenth century. By extending our geography to a wider frontier zone and a broader chronology we may comprehend that much better the geopolitical and cultural effects of culturally porous and 17

For the concept of an Ottomanized frontier zone in eastern Anatolia and Syria as distinct from Iraq, Cairo and North Africa, which were also not integrated into the timar system and hence less Ottomanized, see Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan, 455–75.

changing borders. Likewise, this more expansive approach necessarily brings to light cultural and artistic connections and networks in and around the frontiers. Imperial projects of incorporating newly acquired lands never simply were just about expanding imperial space; much more is at work. The case study of late sixteenth- and early s­eventeenth-century Baghdad is one such example of the vibrancy of the edge, the liminal. The particular geopolitical, social, and economic context that allowed for a balance between artists seeking patronage and enough independence and wealth on the part of buyers created a prolific art market. In this whirlwind of a world, the distinctive style of Baghdad paintings reflects the creativity of this liminal space, which then petered out as open hostilities between the Ottomans and Safavids resumed. However, further future research may shed light on possible continuations of art production in Baghdad that more closely reflect the stylistic affinities with the province’s Safavid overlords. It is my sincere wish that this book may serve as a launchpad for scholars to explore new, as yet undiscovered, whirlwinds spinning and tossing things about in the Iraqi borderlands in the later seventeenth century and beyond.

Appendix 1

Illustrated Manuscripts Attributed to Baghdad Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Süleymaniye Library Fatih 4321, Istanbul Date: Shawwal 1002 (June/July 1594) Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Etnografya Müzesi, Besim Atalay Env. 7294, Ankara Date: Zi’l hijja 1008 (June/July 1600) Calligrapher: ʿAli b. Muḥammed el-Tustarī

Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, Lāmīʿī Çelebi Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art, T. 1968, Istanbul Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, Lāmīʿī Çelebi British Library, London Or. 7238 Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl, Lāmīʿī Çelebi Czartoryski Library, Nr. 2327 iii, Krakow, Poland

Muhammad bin Sulayman, known as Fuzuli (ca. 1483– 1556). Manuscript of the Hadiqat al-Su`ada (Garden of the Blessed) of Fuzuli, AH 1011 / 1602–3 c.e. Opaque ­watercolor, ink and gold on paper; leather binding, 5 1/2 x 9 3/4 in. (14 x 24.8 cm) Brooklyn Museum, Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Charles K. Wilkinson, 70.143

Nafaḥāt al-Uns, Jāmī Chester Beatty Library T. 474, Dublin Date: 1003 (1594–5)

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī British Library, Or. 12009, London

Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, Maḥmud Dede Pierpont Morgan Library, M. 466, New York

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī British Library, Or. 7301, London

Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, Maḥmud Dede Topkapı Palace Museum Library, R. 1479, Istanbul Date: Zi’l ḳaʿde 1007 (May/June 1599)

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Bibliothèque nationale de France, Supp. turc 1088 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Mevlana Museum 101, Konya Date: 20 Ramaḍan 1013 (9 February 1604) Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Museum of Turkish and Islamic Art, T. 1967, Istanbul Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Dar al-Kutub, Talaat 81 Tarikh Turki, Cairo Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ, Ḥusayn Wāʾiẓ Kāshifī Berlin Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Ms. Diez A Fol. 5, Berlin

Manāqib al-ʿĀrifīn, Aflākī Uppsala University Library, MS O Nova 94, Sweden Calligrapher: Kemāl el-Kātib

Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAli Çelebi Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 357, Istanbul Date: Jumada 1013 (September 1604) Calligrapher: Derviş Muḥammed Ahlāḳī Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAlī Çelebi Topkapı Palace Museum Libary, R. 843, Istanbul Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAlī Çelebi British Library Add. 15153, London Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, A. 3110

186 Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1324 Date: 1006 (1597) Calligrapher: Yusuf b. Muḥammad al-Dizfulī Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1591 Date: 1006 (1597) Calligrapher: Yusuf b. Muḥammad al-Dizfulī Silsilenāme Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1624 Silsilenāme Badische Landesmuseum, Rastatt 201, Karlsruhe Silsilenāme Bibliothèque nationale de France, Supp. turc 126, Paris Date: 1013 (1604–5) Copied in Baghdad

Appendix 1 Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Muḥammed Ṭāhir Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1230, Istanbul Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer, Muḥammed Ṭāhir Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1369, Istanbul Beng u Bāde, Fużūlī Sächsichen Landesbibliothek Dresden Eb. 362 Date: 1008 (1599–1600) Calligrapher: Muṣṭafa b. Muḥammed el-Rıżāvī elḤüseynī Copied for Sokolluzāde Ḥasan Paşa (d. 1602) Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ, Mirkhwand British Library Or. 5736, London Date: 1008 (1599–1600) Calligrapher: ʿAlī b. Muḥammad Tustarī Shāhnāma, Firdawsi Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1486, Istanbul

Silsilenāme Dar al-Kutub, 30 Tarikh Turki Khalil Agha, Cairo

Akhlāq-i Muḥsinī, Ḥusayn Waʾiẓ Kāshifī Topkapı Palace Museum Library, R. 392, Istanbul

Silsilenāme Los Angeles County Museum of Art M.85.237.38, Los Angeles

Ṣıfat al-ʿĀshiqīn, Hilālī Cairo National Library, 114 Adab Farsi

Silsilenāme Chester Beatty Library, T. 423, Dublin Date: 1006 (1597–8) Calligrapher: Abū Ṭālīb Iṣfahānī (sākin-i Baġdād) Silsilenāme Museum of Ethnography, 8457, Ankara Silsilenāme The Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, MS. 581 Silsilenāme Kuwait National Museum, lns 66 MS Silsilenāme Istanbul University Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, T. 6092

Laylī u Majnūn, Fużūlī Bibliotheque nationale de France, Turc 316 Mathnawī, Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī New York Public Library, Spencer Collection Pers. MS 12 Date: Ramaẓān 1011 (February/March 1603) Sefernāme, Muḥliṣī Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127, Paris Munājāt, ʿAbdullah Ansārī Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 281 and R. 1046, Istanbul Copied by: Ḥasan ʿAlī in Karbala Shāhnāma, Firdawsī Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1496

Illustrated Manuscripts Attributed To Baghdad Date: Muḥarrem 1037 (October/November 1627) and 22 Jumada ii 1038 (16 February 1629) Copied by: Walī Bayat (in Baghdad) Ajāʾīb al-Makhlūqāt wa Gharāʾīb al-Mawjūdāt Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 400 Date: 1110 (1699)

187

Gūy u Chawgan, ʿArifī Christie’s, Art of the Islamic and Indian Worlds 25 April 2013, Lot. 113 Copied by: Aḥmad al-Ḥusaynī

Appendix 2

Single-page Paintings and Dispersed Leaves Attributed to Baghdad Hunting scene Los Angeles County Museum of Art, M85.237.25, Los Angeles

Princely Party, Album Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, Cod. Mixt. 313, fol. 28b

Discussion in an Interior Setting, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2149, fol. 7a

Miʿraj of the Prophet. (Dispersed leaf) Los Angeles County Museum of Art, M. 85.237.44, Los Angeles

Gathering Outdoors, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2149, fol. 8b Two Scenes of Discussion Indoors, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2149, fols. 10b–11a A Prisoner Brought Before a Ruler, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2149, fol. 19a Two Youths, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2145, fol. 19a Riders Shooting Arrows at a Pole Topkapi Palace Museum Library, H. 2165, fol. 6a A Youth and Female, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2169, fol. 22b Youth on Horseback, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2168, fol. 25a Youth on Horseback with Attendants, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, H. 2165, fol. 44b The Beggar Bringing the Polo Ball to the King, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, Istanbul, fol. 20a Audience Scene, Album Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 2133–34, fol. 19b

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Abraham Catapulted into Flames) Los Angeles County Museum of Art, M.85.237.35, Los Angeles Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (ʿAlī Murdered by Ibn Muljam) Wereldmuseum, 60948, Rotterdam Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Death of ʿAlī) British Museum, 1949,1210,0.8, London Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Death of Ḥasan) British Museum, 1949, 1210,0.9, London Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Death of Ḥasan) Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1979.211, New York Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Expulsion from Paradise) Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1564 (Painting pasted to the beginning of a manuscript of the Ḳıyāfetü’s İnsāniyye fī Şemāʾilüʾl ʿOsmāniyye) Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) Kraus Collection, E.J. Grube, Islamic Paintings from the 11th to the 18th Century in the Collection of Hans P. Kraus (New York: H.P. Kraus, 1972), 208–09, no. 179

Single-page Paintings and Dispersed Leaves Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī (Dispersed leaf) (Ḥusayn Addressing the Umayyad Army in Karbala) Harvard Art Museums, 1985.227, Cambridge, MA Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Dispersed leaf) (ʿAlī Swearing Allegiance) Harvard Art Museums, 1985.229, Cambridge, MA Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Dispersed leaf) (Prophet Muhammad Preaching) Metropolitan Museum of Art, 55.121.40, New York Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Dispersed leaf) (Death of ʿAli) Princeton University Library, No. 1958.111, New Jersey Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Dispersed leaf) (Ubaydullah b. Ziyad Going from Basra to Kufa to Have Muslim b. ʿAqil Killed) Arts of the Islamic World, 20 April 2016, Sotheby’s, Lot 42 Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Dispersed leaf) (Jonah and the Whale) Israel Museum, Dawud Collection, 903.69, Jerusalem Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Dispersed leaf) (Joseph Among the Ishmaelites) Israel Museum, Dawud Collection, 622.29, Jerusalem Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ (Dispersed leaf) (King Nimrod Ascending to Heaven) Israel Museum, Dawud Collection, 539.69, Jerusalem Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, Maḥmud Dede (Mawlānā Distributing Sweetmeats) Museum of Fine Arts, 07.692, Boston (Dispersed leaf) The Prophet at the Kaʿba Walters Art Gallery, No. 10.679 a-b, Baltimore Miʿraj Los Angeles County Museum of Art, M. 85.237.44 Tercüme-i Sevāḳıb-ı Menāḳıb, Maḥmud Dede (Mawlānā Dancing)

189 L.M. Mayer Memorial Institute, MS 58–69, Jerusalem Dīvān, Bāḳī (Dispersed leaf) (Süleymān i’s Procession on Horseback/ Depicting a qasīda for Süleymān i) risd Museum, 17.459, Providence, RI Dīvān, Bāḳī (Dispersed leaf) (Entry of the Safavid Prince Ḥaydar Mirzā) Metropolitan Museum of Art, 45.174.5, New York Dīvān, Bāḳī (Dispersed leaf) (Ebussuʿud Efendi/Depicting Bāḳī’s Winter Ode dedicated to the shaykh alislam) Metropolitan Museum of Art, 25.83.9, New York Mehmed iii Enthroned, Folio from an Unidentified Manuscript Harvard Art Museums, 1985.226 Ahvāl-i Ḳıyāmet (Dispersed leaf) (Day of Judgment) Free Library Rare Book Department, Lewis Ms. O.-T4, Philadelphia Ahvāl-i Ḳıyāmet (Dispersed leaf) (Scene from Purgatory) Free Library Rare Book Department, Lewis Ms. O.-T5, Philadelphia Ahvāl-i Ḳıyāmet (Dispersed leaf) (Hellfire) Free Library Rare Book Department, Lewis Ms. O.-T6, Philadelphia Ahvāl-i Ḳıyāmet (Dispersed leaf) (Believers in Paradise) Free Library Rare Book Department, Lewis Ms. O.-T7, Philadelphia Portrait of Vali Tutunji, Drawing attributed to Muhammad Qasim 1630s Bibliothèque nationale de France, O.D. 41, fol. 33b

190

Appendix 2

Unillustrated Manuscripts Copied in Baghdad

Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAlī Çelebi Sadberk Hanım Müzesi, No. 419, Istanbul Date: 6 Shaʿban 981 (1 December 1573) Calligrapher: Ādem b. Sinān Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAlī Çelebi Arkeoloji Müzesi, No. 196, Istanbul Date: Muḥarram 990 (January-February 1582) Calligrapher: Ḳuṭbuddin

Calligrapher: ʿAbdī el-Baġdādī Tācüʾt Tevārīh, Hoca Saʿdeddin Bibliothèque nationale de France, Supp. turc 150, Paris Date: 999 (1590) Mirʾat-ı Kāināt, Nişancızāde Meḥmed Ḳudsī (d. 1622) Topkapı Palace Museum Library, E.H. 1389, Istanbul Date: 1022 (1613) Copied by: Muṣṭafa b. Şemseddin b. Kemāleddin Baġdādī

Hümāyūnnāme, ʿAlī Çelebi Arkeoloji Müzesi, No. 198, Istanbul Date: Jumada ii 997 (April-May 1589) Calligrapher: Muḥammed İsḥaḳ Baġdādī, resident of Najaf

Dīvān, Anvarī Istanbul University Rare Books and Manuscripts ­Library, F. 358, Istanbul Date: 1026 (1617) Calligrapher: Muḥammad b. Naṣr ʿAlī (copied in the shrine of Imām Ḥusayn)

Dīvān, Fużūlī Āstān-ı Quds-i Rażavī, Mashhad Date: 991 (1583) Calligrapher: Rūhī b. Ḥayrī Baġdādī

Duʿanāme, Ebu’s suʿud Efendi Ayatullah Marashi Najafi Library, Nr. 2851, Qum Date: Ziʾl ḥicce 1062 (November/December 1652) Calligrapher: Muḥammed Rıża (copied in Baghdad)

Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā, Fużūlī Medrese-i Ali-i Şehid Mutahhari Kütüphanesi, Nr. 446 Date: 992 (1584–5) Calligrapher: ʿAbdullah b. Necibullah (copied in Baghdad)

Ravżat el-Ebrār, Ḳaraçelebizāde ʿAbdülʿazīz Topkapı Palace Museum Library, E.H. 1376, Istanbul Date: 1089 (1678–9) Calligrapher: Derviş b. ʿOsmān Şerif (copied in Baghdad)

Tācüʾt Tevārīh, Hoca Saʿdeddin Topkapı Palace Museum Library, R. 1106 Date: 1002 (1593–4)

Düstūrüʾl İnşā, Reʾisüʾl küttāb ʿAbdullah Efendi Topkapı Palace Museum Library, K. 1940, Istanbul Date: 1089 (1678–9) Copied by: Ḥacı ʿAlī el-Baġdādī

Appendix 3

Timeline of Major Events Discussed in the Book Note: Between 1534 and 1623 governors appointed to Baghdad usually remained in office from several months to three or four years, and some were appointed more than once. Unfortunately, the appointment dates of governors are not always clear or accurate, so this timeline must be viewed with some caution when it comes to the appointment dates of governors. Where there have been conflicting accounts in terms of dates in the various accounts and archival materials, I have chosen to give the approximate date to give a sense of the succession of events. 1590      Treaty of Constantinople 1592       Appointment of Cigalazade Sinan Paşa to Baghdad 1593–1606     Ottoman-Habsburg war 1593        Appointment of Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa to Baghdad; After several months, he is appointed to Najd 1595 January    Death of Murad iii (r. 1574–1595) Accession of Mehmed iii (r. 1595–1603) c. 1595/6      Rebel Uzun (Tavil) Ahmed gains eminence in Baghdad and Karayazıcı resorts to rebellion in Anatolia 1596 April     Death of Koca Sinan Paşa 1597       Appointment of Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa once again to Baghdad 1598       Death of Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa Appointment of Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa to Baghdad 1598/9        Çerkes Yusuf Paşa is appointed as governor of Van 1602 September Çerkes Yusuf Paşa leaves Istanbul for Baghdad and Basra 1602 December  Çerkes Yusuf Paşa reaches Mosul and from there he goes to Baghdad 1602       Death of Karayazıcı; his brother Deli Hasan rebels Death of Sokolluzade Hasan Paşa Appointment of Sinan Paşazade  Mehmed Paşa to Baghdad 1603 September Resumption of war between the Ottomans and the Safavids Re-conquest of Tabriz and Nakh ichevan by the Safavids

1603 December  Accession of Ahmed i (r. 1603–1617) At this time, Çerkes Yusuf Paşa is already in Basra c. 1603/4        Çerkes Yusuf Paşa is appointed to the eastern campaign against the Safavids 1604         Re-conquest of Yerevan by the Safavids Appointment of Kasım Paşa to Baghdad; he fails to show up for duty 1605      Death of Sinan Paşazade Mehmed Cigalazade Sinan Paşa is defeated at Sufiyan Cigalazade Sinan Paşa has Canpul­ adoğlu Hüseyin Paşa executed for his failure to join the eastern campaign, leading to the uprising of the latter’s nephew Canpuladoğlu Ali, in 1606 1605/6      Çerkes Yusuf Paşa is appointed to Baghdad 1606      Nasuh Paşa is appointed as governor of Baghdad Nasuh Paşa, along with his father-inlaw Mir Şeref ruler of Jizra, Veli Paşa, governor of Şehrizol, and Piyale Paşa, former governor of Basra, tries to subdue Tavilzade Muhammed, and fails Nasuh Paşa is sent to Diyarbekir Death of Cigalazade Sinan Paşa Death of Deli Hasan 1607       Kuyucu Murad subdues Canpuladoğlu Ali

192 c. 1608      Tavilzade Muhammed claims sole authority in Baghdad Cigalazade Mahmud is appointed  to Baghdad and subdues Tavilzade Muhammed c. 1608/9     Çerkes Yusuf Paşa is sent to Bursa to subdue Kalenderoğlu 1610      Hafız Ahmed joins Kuyucu Murad on the eastern campaign Appointment of Kadızade ʿAli Paşa to Baghdad 1611       Death of Kuyucu Murad Paşa Appointment of Nasuh Paşa as grand vizier after the death of his rival Kuyucu Murad 1612 November   Peace established between the Ottomans and the Safavids 1612 December    Marriage of Nasuh Paşa with the daughter of Ahmed i Appointment of Dilaver Paşa to Baghdad 1614 October   Execution of Nasuh Paşa Death of Çerkes Yusuf Paşa c. 1614/5     Appointment of Mustafa Paşa to Baghdad while his son Mehmed Paşa is appointed as sancaḳ begi to Hilla

Appendix 3 Mehmed Paşa goes to Basra to subdue Sayyid Mubarak 1615      Appointment of Hafız Ahmed Paşa to Baghdad; his predecessor, Mustafa Paşa, is appointed as governor to Diyarbekir 1616        Death of Kadızade ʿAli Paşa, son-inlaw of Kuyucu Murad Paşa c. 1616/7    Death of Sayyid Mubarak 1617 November   Accession of Mustafa i (r. November 1617–February 1618) 1618 February  Accession of Osman ii c. 1619–20     Famine in Baghdad Appointment of Yusuf Paşa as governor to Baghdad 1622 May     Death of Osman ii Accession of Mustafa i (May 1622– September 1623) Abaza Mehmed Paşa rebels Death of Dilaver Paşa 1623 September  Accession of Murad iv (r. 1623–1640) 1623–24    Fall of Baghdad to the Safavids

Bibliography

Archival Documents



Prime Ministry Ottoman Archives



Unpublished Primary Sources

Ali Emiri-Ahmed i 321/4. Mühimme Defteri 5.1526.556. Mühimme Defteri 22.125. Mühimme Defteri 22.234. Topkapı Palace Museum Archives. D. 4057. D. 6460.

Anonymous. Mecmuʿa. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 140. Kemāl bin Jalāl. Tārīkh-i Kemāl. Süleymaniye Library, Atıf Efendi 1861. Muḥliṣī. Sefernāme-i Yusuf Paşa. Bibliothèque nationale de France, Turc 127. Muṣṭafa ʿAlī. Nuṣretnāme. British Library Add. 22011 and Topkapı Palace Museum Library H. 1365. Muṣṭafa b. Mulla Rıḍvan el-Baġdādī. Tevārīh-i Fet­ iḥnāme-i Baġdād be-dest-i Pādişāh-ı Dīn-penāh Sulṭān Murād Hān Ġāzī (Histories on the Conquest of Baghdad at the Hand of the Religion-protecting Sultan Murad Han Gazi). Bodleian Library Or. 276; Süleymaniye Library, Nuruosmaniye 3140/3; Leiden University Or. 1183, fols. 525b–721b. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża. Teẕkire-i Evliyā-yı Baġdād. Süleymaniye Library, Halet Efendi 241. Seyyīd Loḳman. Hünernāme, Vol. 2. Topkapı Palace Museum Library, H. 1524. Şafiʿī el-Şerīf. Silsilenāme. Metropolitan Museum of Art. 67.272. Şeyhoġlu. Kitāb-ı Tārih-i Darü’s selām-ı Baġdād’ıñ Başına Gelen Aḥvālleri Beyān İder fi Sene 1028 (1619). Leiden University, Or. 1278. Şeyh Vefāʿī Muḥammed. Tevārīh-i Ġazavāt-ı Sulṭān Murād-ı sālis. Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, Hist. 66. Taʿlīḳīzāde. Tārīh-i ʿOsman Paşa. Topkapı Palace Museum Library, R. 1300.



Published Primary Sources

ʿAhdī. Gülşen-i Şuʿarā. Edited by Süleyman Solmaz. Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2005. ʿAlī Enver. Semāhāne-i Edeb. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2013. ʿAli Suʿad. Seyahatlerim. Istanbul: Kanaat Matbaası, 1332 [1916]. Anonymous. A Chronicle of the Carmelites in Persia and the Papal Mission of the xviith and xviiith Centuries. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1939. Anonymous. Tarih-i Osman Paşa: Özdemiroğlu Osman Paşa’nın Kafkasya Fetihleri (H. 986–988/M. 1578– 1580) ve Tebriz’in Fethi (H. 993/M. 1585). Edited by Yunus Zeyrek. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı, 2001. Āṣafī Dal Meḥmed Çelebi. Şecāʿatnāme. Edited by Mustafa Eravcı. Istanbul: MVT Yayıncılık, 2009. ʿĀşıḳ Çelebi. Meşāirü’ş-Şuʿarā: İnceleme, Metin. Edited by Filiz Kılıç. Istanbul: Istanbul Araştırmaları Enstitüsü, 2010. Baġdādlı Rūhī. Bağdatlı Ruhi Divanı, Karşılaştırmalı ­Metin, 2 Vols. Edited by Coşkun Ak. Bursa: Uludağ Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2001. Beyānī. Tezkiretü’ş Şuʿarā. Edited by İbrahim Kutluk. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1997. Evliyā Çelebi. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi iv. Kitap Topkapı Sarayı Bağdat 305 Numaralı Yazmanın Transkripsiyonu—Dizini. Edited by Yücel Dağlı and S. Kahraman. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2000. Evliyā Çelebi. Seyāhatnāme (iii. ve iv. Cilt) İndeksli Tıpkıbasım, 2. Cilt. Edited by Seyit Ali Kahraman. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayınları, 2013. Fażlī Beg Khuzānī Isfahānī. Afżal al-Tawarīkh. Edited by Kioumars Ghereghlou. Cambridge: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2015. Fighānī. Dīvān-i Ashʿār-i Bābā Fighānī. Edited by Ahmad Suhayli Khvansari. Tehran: Iqbal, 1983. Gédoyn, Louis. Journal et Correspondance de Gédoyn “le Turc,” consul de France à Alep, 1623–1625. Edited by A. Boppe. Paris: Societe d’Histoire Diplomatique, 1909.

194 Ḥasan Beg Rūmlū. A Chronicle of the Early Safawis: being the Aḥsanut Tawārikh of Ḥasan-i Rumlu. Edited by C.N. Seddon. Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1934. Herbert, Thomas. Some Years Travels into Africa and Asia the Great, Especially Describing the Famous Empires of Persia and Hindustan, as Also Divers Other Kingdoms in the Oriental Indies, 1627–30. Edited by John A. Butler. Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2012. İbrāhīm Peçevī. Tārīh-i Peçevī. Istanbul: Matbaa-i Amire, 1865–7. Iskandar Munshī. History of Shah ʿAbbas the Great (Tārīkh-i ʿĀlam-ārā-yi ʿAbbāsī). Translated by Roger Savory. Boulder: Westview Press, 1978–1986. Jalāl al-Din Muḥammad Munajjim Yazdī. Tārīkh-i ʿAbbasī ya Ruznāmeh-i Mulla Jalāl. Edited by Seyfullah Vahidinya. Tehran: Vahid, 1987. Kelāmī. Kelāmī Dīvānı. Edited by Mustafa Karlıtepe. MA Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi, 2007. Kelāmī-i Rūmī. Vekāyiʿ-i Ali Paşa (Yavuz Ali Paşa’nın Mısır Valiliği 1601–1603). Edited by Soner Demirsoy. Istanbul: Çamlıca, 2012. Ḳınalızāde Ḥasan Çelebi. Teẕkiretü’ş Şuʿarā. Edited by İbrahim Kutluk. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1981. Lāmīʿī Çelebi. Tercüme-i Nefahāt al-Uns min Hażarāt alḲuds. Edited by Süleyman Uludağ. Istanbul: Marifet Yayınları, 1980. Maṭraḳçı Naṣūḥ. Naṣūḥü’s Silāḥī (Maṭraḳçī), Beyān-ı Menāzīl-i Sefer-i ʿIrāḳeyn-i Sulṭān Süleymān Hān. Edited by Hüseyin Yurdaydın. Ankara: Üniversite Basımevi, 1976. Meḥmed b. Meḥmed er-Rūmī. “Mehmed b. Mehmed er-Rumi (Edirneli)’nin Nuhbetü’t Tevarih ve’l Ahbar’ı ve Tarih-i Al-i Osman’ı (Metinler-Tahlilleri).” Edited by Abdurrahman Sağırlı. PhD diss., Istanbul Üniversitesi, 2000. Minadoi, Giovanni Tommaso. The History of the Vvarres Betvveene the Turkes and the Persians (London, John Windet for Iohn Wolfe, 1595). Mīr Ṭāqī al-Dīn Kāshānī. Khulaṣat al-Ashʿār wa Zubdat al-Afkār (Chāp-ı ʿAks bar Asās-ı Nuskha Haṭṭī-i Kitābkhāna India Office, London, Shomāre 667), 6 Vols. Tehran: Safir-i Ardihāl, 2014. Mirzā Tāqī Nāṣirī. Titles and Emoluments in Safavid Iran: A Third Manual of Safavid Administration.

Bibliography Translated by Willem Floor. Washington, D.C.: Mage Publishers, 2008. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī. Mustafa ʿAli’s Counsel for Sultans of 1581: Edition, Translation, Notes. Translated by Andreas Tietze. Vienna: Verl. d. Österr. Akad. d. Wiss, 1979– 82. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī. Muṣṭafa ʿAlī’s Description of Cairo of 1599: Text, Transliteration, Translation, Notes. Translated by Andreas Tietze. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1975. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī. Künhü’l Ahbār, Dördüncü Rükn, 1599. Facsimile edition with an introduction by Ali Çavuşoğlu and A. Uğur. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2009. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī. Künhü’l Ahbar’ın Tezkire Kısmı. Edited by Mustafa İsen. Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Yayını, 1994. Muṣṭafa ʿĀlī. Mustafa ʿAli’s Epic Deeds of Artists: A Critical Edition of the Earliest Ottoman Text about the ­Calligraphers and Painters of the Islamic World. Translated and edited by Esra Akın-Kıvanç. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Muṣṭafa Ṣāfī. Mustafa Sāfī’nin Zübdetü’t Tevārīh’i. Edited by İbrahim Hakkı Çuhadar. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2003. Muṣṭafa Selānikī. Tārīh-i Selānikī. Edited by Mehmet İpşirli. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1999. Naʿīmā. Tārīh-i Naʿīmā. Ed. Mehmet İpşirli. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2007. Naẓmīzāde Murtaża. Gülşen-i Hulefā: Bağdat Tarihi 762–1717. Edited by Mehmed Karataş. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2014. Niyāzī. “Zafername-i Ali Paşa (Transkript ve Değerlendirme).” Transcribed by Hamza Üzümcü. MA Thesis, Afyonkarahisar Kocatepe Üniversitesi, 2008. Oruch Beg. Don Juan of Persia: A Shiʿah Catholic, 1560– 1604. Edited by G. Le Strange. London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1926. Parry, William. A New and Large Discourse of the Trauels of Sir Anthony Sherley Knight, by Sea, and Ouer Land, to the Persian Empire Wherein Are Related Many Straunge and Wonderfull Accidents: And Also, the Description and Conditions of Those Countries and People He Passed By: With his Returne into Christendome. London: Valentine Simmes for Felix Norton, 1601.

195

Bibliography Pietro della Valle. The Travels of Sig. Pietro della Valle, a Noble Roman, into East-India and Arabia Deserta: in which, the Several Countries, Together with the Customs, Manners, Traffique, and Rites both Religious and Civil, of those Oriental Princes and Nations, are Faithfully Described, in Familiar Letters to his Friend Signior Mario Schipano: whereunto is Added a Relation of Sir Thomas Roe’s Voyage into the East Indies. London: J. Macock, 1665. Pietro della Valle. Viaggi di Pietro Della Valle Il Pellegrino con Minuto Ragguaglio di Tutte le CoseNotabiliti Osservate in Essi: Discritti da lui Medesimo in 54 Lettere Familiari. Rome, Appresso Vitale Mascardi, 1650. Pedro Teixeira. The Travels of Pedro Teixeira; with his “Kings of Harmuz,” and Extracts From his “Kings of Persia,” Tr. William F. Sinclair. London: Hakluyt Society, 1902. Qāḍī Aḥmad Qummī. Calligraphers and Painters: A Treatise by Qāḍī Aḥmad, Son of Mīr Munshī. Translated by V. Minorsky Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1959. Qāḍī Aḥmad Qummī. Gulistān-ı Hunar. Edited by Aḥmad Suhaylī-Khvansārī. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Bunyād-i Farhang-i Īrān, 1973. Qāḍī Aḥmad Qummī. Khulāṣat al-Tawārīkh. Edited by E. Eshraqi. Tehran, 1981. Rahimizāde. Gencine-i Fetḥ-i Gence. Edited by Günay Karaağaç and A. Eskikurt. Istanbul: Çamlıca, 2010. Rauwolff, Leonhard. A Collection of Curious Travels & Voyages: In Two Tomes: The First Containing Dr. Leonhart Rauwolff’s Itinerary into the Eastern Countries, as Syria, Palestine, or the Holy Land, Armenia, Mesopotamia, Assyria, Chaldea, &c. The Second Taking in Many Parts of Greece, Asia Minor, Egyot, Arabia Felix, and Petraea, Ethiopia, the Red-Sea, &c. from the Observations of Mons. Belon, Mr. Vernon, Dr, Spon and others; to Which are Added, Three Catalogues of Such Trees, Shrubs, and Herbs as Grow in the Levant by John Ray. Translated by Nicholas Staphorst. London: S. Smith and B. Walford, 1693. Sādīqī Beg. Majmaʿ al-Khawaṣṣ. Edited by Abd al-Rasul Khayyāmpūr. Tabriz: Akhtar-i Shumāl, 1948. Sāḳıb Dede. Sefīne-i Nefīse-i Mevleviyān. Bulak, 1283 [1866–67].

Ṣolaḳzāde Meḥmed Hemdemī. Ṣolaḳzāde Tārīhi. Istanbul: Mahmut Bey Matbaası, 1298 [1880–81]. Al-Tabari. Tārīkh al-Rusul wa’l Mulūk, Vol. 3. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985–2007. Topçular Kātibi ʿAbdülḳādir (Ḳadrī) Efendi, Topçular Kātibi ʿAbdülḳādir (Ḳadrī) Efendi Tarihi (Metin ve Tahlil). Edited by Ziya Yılmazer. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 2003. Taqī Awḥādī, ʿArafāt al-ʿAshiqīn wa ʿAraṣat al-ʿArifīn. Edited by Ẕavīḥ Allah Ṣaḥibkārī. Tehran: Mīrās-ı Maktub: Bā Hamkārī-i Kitābkhānah, Mūzih va Markaz-i Asnād-i Majlis-i Shūrā-yi Islāmī. 1389 (2010/1).



Secondary References

Abu-Husayn, Abdul-Rahim. Provincial Leaderships in Syria, 1575–1650. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1985. Afyoncu, Erhan. “Sokulluzade Hasan Paşa.” 366–68. Diyanet İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 37. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2006. Ágoston, Gabor. “A Flexible Empire: Authority and its Limits on the Ottoman Frontiers.” In Ottoman Borderlands: Issues, Personalities, and Political Changes, edited by Kemal H. Karpat et al., 15–33. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2003. Akdağ, Mustafa. Celali Isyanları (1550–1603). Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basım Evi, 1963. Alam, Muzaffar and Sanjay Subrahmanyam. “A Place in the Sun: Travels with Faiẓī in the Deccan, 1591– 1593.” In Les Sources et le Temps (Sources and Time): A Colloquium, Pondicherry 11–13 January 1997, edited by François Grimal, 265–307. Pondicherry: Institut Français de Pondichéry, 2001. Alam, Muzaffar and Sanjay Subrahmanyam. “The Deccan Frontier and Mughal Expansion, Circa 1600.” In Writing Mughal World: Studies on Culture and Politics, 165–203. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. And, Metin. Ritüelden Drama: Kerbela-Muharrem-Taziye. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2002. Andrews, Walter and M. Kalpaklı. The Age of Beloveds: Love and the Beloved in Early Modern Ottoman and

196 European Culture and Society. Durham: Duke University Press, 2005. Anetshofer, Helga. “Meşāiru’ş Şuʿarā’da Toplum-tanımaz Sapkın Dervişler.” In Āşık Paşa ve Şairler Tezkiresi Üzerine, edited by Hatice Aynur and Aslı Niyazioğlu, 88–93. Istanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2011. Arcak-Casale, Sinem. “Gifts in Motion: Ottoman-Safavid Cultural Exchange, 1501–1618.” PhD diss., University of Minnesota, 2012. Arslan, İhsan. “Abbasi Devleti’ndeki Komutanların Siyasi ve Idari Sahalarda Etkileri, Munisü’l Muzaffer Örneği (The Influence of the Commanders in the Abbasid State on the Political and Administrative Fields, the Example of Munisü’l Muzaffer).” The Journal of International Social Studies 26 (2013): 57–76. Arslan, Harun. “Kitāb-ı Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl (Giriş-Metinİnceleme-Sözlük-Adlar Dizini)” PhD diss, Istanbul University, 2001. Artan, Tülay. “Arts and Architecture.” In The Cambridge History of Turkey, Vol. 3, edited by Suraiya Faroqhi, 408–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Artan, Tülay. “A Book of Kings Produced and Presented as a Treatise on Hunting.” Muqarnas 25 (2008): 299–330. Artan, Tülay. “Ahmed I’s Hunting Parties: Feasting in Adversity, Enhancing the Ordinary.” Princeton Papers: Interdisciplinary Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 16 (2011): 93–138. Aşki, İbrahim. Fuzuli Hakkında Bir İki Söz. Istanbul: Ali Şükrü Matbaası, 1919. Atıl, Esin. “The Nakkaşhane.” In The Age of Sultan Süleyman the Magnificent, edited by Esin Atıl, 33–35. Washington: National Gallery of Art, 1987. Atıl, Esin. Art of the Arab World. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1975. Ayan, Gönül. “Sevakıb-ı Menakıb ve Mevlana.” In iii. Uluslararası Mevlana Kongresi, 5–6 Mayıs, 2003: Bildiriler (3rd International Mevlana Congress, 5–6 May, 2003: Papers), edited by Nuri Şimşekler, 79–84. Konya: T.C. Selçuk Üniversitesi, 2004. Aycibin, Zeynep. “Katib Çelebi, Fezleke, Tahlil ve Metin.” PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi, 2007. Azzawī, ʿAbbās. Tārīkh al-ʿIrāq, Vol. 4. Baghdad: Maṭbaʿat Baghdad, 1935–1949.

Bibliography Azzawī, ʿAbbās. Tārīkh al-Adab al-ʿArabī fī al-ʿIrāq. Baghdad: Iraqi Academy Press, 1962. Babacan, İsrafil. Klasik Türk Şiirinin Son Baharı, Sebk-i Hindi (Hint Üslubu). Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları, 2010. Babaie, Sussan. “The Sound of the Image/ The Image of the Sound: Narrativity in Persian Art of the 17th Century.” In Islamic Art and Literature, edited by Oleg Grabar and C. Robinson, 143–62. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001. Babayan, Kathryn. Mystics, Monarchs, and Messiahs: Cultural Landscapes of Early Modern Iran. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002. Babinger, Franz. Osmanlı Tarih Yazarları ve Eserleri. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı, 1992. Bağcı, Serpil. “Presenting Vassal Kalender’s Works: The Prefaces of Three Ottoman.” Muqarnas 30 (2013): 255–315. Bağcı, Serpil et al. Osmanlı Resim Sanatı. Ankara: T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları, 2006. Bağcı, Serpil. “From Adam to Mehmed iii: Silsilanama.” In The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, edited by Selmin Kangal, 188–201. Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000. Bağcı, Serpil. “Seyyid Battal Gazi Türbesi’nin Gümüş Kapısı Üzerine Bazı Gözlemler.” In 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi: Bildiriler, 23–27 Eylül 1991, 225–38. Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1995. Bağcı, Serpil. “A New Theme of the Shirazi Frontispiece Miniatures: The Divan of Solomon.” Muqarnas 12 (1994): 101–11. Bağcı, Serpil. Konya Mevlana Müzesi Resimli Elyazmaları. Istanbul: MAS Matbaacılık, 2003. Barkan, Ömer L. “The Price Revolution of the Sixteenth Century: A Turning Point in the Economic History of the Near East.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 6 (1975): 3–28. Barkey, Karen. Bandits and Bureaucrats: The Ottoman Route to State Centralization. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994. Barthold, W., “Celebi.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. First Edition (1913–1936). Edited by M. Th. Houtsma, T.W. Arnold, R. Basset, R. Hartmann. Brill Online, 2015. Reference. Harvard University. 21 September 2015 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com.ezp-prod1 .hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-1/

Bibliography celebi-SIM_1696; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004082656, 1913–1936. Bayerle, Gustav. Ed. The Hungarian Letters of Ali Pasha of Buda, 1604–1616. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1991. Bayley, Edward C. The History of India as Told by its own Historians, The Local Muhammadan Dynasties: Gujarat. New Delhi: S. Chand & Co., 1970. Beder, Erkan. “Iğdır İlinde Muharrem Ayı Törenleri.” MA Thesis, Atatürk Üniversitesi, 2011. Bernardini, Michele. “Helali Astarabadi Jagataʾi” Encyclopaedia Iranica, xii, 152–54. Available online http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/helaliastarabadi-jagatai-mawlana-badr-al-din. Beşe, Enver. “Anadolu Bektaşi Köylerinde Muharrem Ayini.” Halk Bilgisi Haberleri 10 (1941): 158–60. Binbaş, İlker E. “Structure and Function of the Genealogical Tree.” In Horizons of the World: Festschrift for İsenbike Togan (Hududu’l Alem: İsenbike Togan’a Armağan), edited by İlker Evrim Binbaş et al, 465– 545. Istanbul: Ithaki, 2011. Bosworth, C.E. The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: The Tahirids and Saffarids. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999. Bozdoğan, Sibel and Gülru Necipoğlu. History and Ideology: Architectural Heritage of the “Lands of Rum.” Muqarnas 24 (2007). Börekçi, Günhan. “Factions and Favorites at the Courts of Sultan Ahmed i (r. 1603–17) and his Immediate Predecessors.” PhD diss., Ohio State University, 2010. Braude, Benjamin. “The Sons of Noah and the Construction of Ethnic and Geographical Identities in the Medieval and Early Modern Periods.” The William and Mary Quarterly 54 (1997): 103–42. Brosh, Naʿama and Rachel Milstein. Biblical Stories in Islamic Painting. Jerusalem: Israel Museum, 1991. Bruijn, J.T.P. de. “Takī Awḥadī.” Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzelʿ, W.P. Heinrichs. Brill Online, 2015, Reference. Harvard University 21 July 2015 http://referenceworks.brillonline.com .ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclopediaof-islam-2/taki-awhadi-SIM_7336; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007.

197 Calmard, Jean. “Les Rituels Shiites et le Pouvoir.” In Études Safavides, edited by Jean Calmard, 109–50. Paris: Institut Français de Recherche en Iran, 1993. Calmard, Jean. “Shiʿi Rituals ii” In Safavid Persia, edited by Charles Melville, 139–91. London: I.B. Tauris, 1996. Calmard, Jean. “Muḥarram Ceremonies and Diplomacy (A Preliminary Study).” In Qajar Iran: Political, Social and Cultural Change, 1800–1925, edited by Edmund Bosworth and Carole Hillenbrand, 213–28. Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1983. Canbakal, Hülya. Society and Politics in an Ottoman Town: ʿAyntab in the 17th Century. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Canby, Sheila. The Golden Age of Persian Art, 1501–1722. London: British Museum Press, 1999. Casale, Giancarlo. The Ottoman Age of Exploration. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Cezar, Mustafa. Osmanlı Tarihinde Levendler. Istanbul: Çelikcilt Matbaası, 1965. Chelkowski, Peter. Taʿziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran. New York: New York University Oress, 1979. Chelkowski, Peter. “Shia Muslim Processional Performances.” Drama Review 29 (1985): 18–30. Coke, Richard. Baghdad: The City of Peace. London: Butterworth, 1927. Contadini, Anna, Ed. Arab Painting: Text and Image in Illustrated Arabic Manuscripts. Boston: Brill, 2010. Crane, Howard and Esra Akın. Sinan’s Autobiographies: Five Sixteenth-century Texts. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Csirkés, Ferenc. “‘Chaghatay Oration, Ottoman Eloquence, Qizilbash Rhetoric’: Turkic Literature in Ṣafavid Persia.” PhD Dissertation, University of Chicago, 2016. Çağman, Filiz. “Şehname-i Selim Han ve Minyatürleri.” Sanat Tarihi Yıllığı 5 (1973): 411–42. Çağman, Filiz. “xvi. Yüzyıl Sonlarında Mevlevi Dergahlarında Gelişen bir Minyatür Okulu.” In i. Milletlerarası Türkoloji Kongresi, 651–77. Istanbul: Tercüman Gazetesi ve Türkiyat Enstitüsü, 1979. Çağman, Filiz and Zeren Tanındı. “Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations.” Muqarnas 13 (1996): 132–48. Çağman, Filiz and Zeren Tanındı. “Manuscript Production at the Kazaruni Orders in Safavid Shiraz.”

198 In Safavid Art and Architecture, edited by Sheila ­Canby, 43–48. London: British Museum Press, 2002. Çağman, Filiz and Zeren Tanındı. “Illustration and the Art of the Book in the Sufi Orders in the Ottoman Empire.” In Sufism and Sufis in Ottoman Society, edited by A.Y. Ocak, 501–27. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2006. Çağman, Filiz and Zeren Tanındı. “Tarikatlarda Resim ve Kitap Sanatı.” In Osmanlı Toplumunda Tasavvuf ve Sufiler, edited by Ahmet Yaşar Ocak, 503–33. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2005. Çağman, Filiz and Nurhan Atasoy. Turkish Miniature Painting. Istanbul: R.C.D. Cultural Institute, 1974. Çıpa, Erdem and E. Fetvacı, Eds. Writing History at the Ottoman Court: Editing the Past, Fashioning the Future. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013. Daniel, Elton. The Political and Social History of Khurasan under Abbasid Rule, 747–820. Minneapolis & Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1979. Dankoff, Robert. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi Okuma Sözlüğü. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2008. Değirmenci, Tülün. “Osmanlı Tasvir Sanatında Görselin ‘Okunması’: Imgenin Ardındaki Hikayeler (Şehir Oğlanları ve Istanbul’un Meşhur Kadınları).” The Journal of Ottoman Studies 45 (2015): 25–55. Değirmenci, Tülün. “Sözleri Dinlensin, Tasvuru İzlensin: Tulūʿī’nin Paşanāme’si ve 17. Yüzyıldan Eşkiya Hikayeleri.” Kebikeç 33 (2012): 127–48. Değirmenci, Tülün. “An Illustrated Mecmua: The Commoner’s Voice and the Iconography of the Court in Seventeenth-Century Ottoman Painting.” Ars Orientalis 41 (2011): 186–218. Değirmenci, Tülün. “Kahve Bahane, Kahvehane Şahane: Bir Osmanlı Kahvehanesinin Portresi.” In Bir Taşım Keyif: Türk Kahvesinin 500 Yıllık Öyküsü, edited by Ersu Pekin, 120–36. Ankara: T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, 2015. Dilçin, Cem. Studies on Fuzuli’s Divan. Cambridge, MA: The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, 2001. Dorn, Berhnard et al. Catalogue des Manuscrits et Xylographes Orientaux de la Bibliothèque Impériale Publique de St. Pétersbourg. St. Petersburg: Impr. de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences, 1852.

Bibliography Duda, Dorothea. Islamische Handschriften ii: Die Handschriften in Türkischer Sprache. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008. Duman, Süleyman. “Celali Isyanları Örneğinde Canbuladoğlu Ali Paşa Isyanı.” MA thesis, Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi, 2011. Duri, A.A. “Baghdad” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth. Brill Online, 2016. Reference. Harvard University. 06 March 2016 http://referenceworks .brillonline.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/entries/ encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/baghdad-COM_0084; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Empey, Heather. “The Shiʿi Passion: Taʿziyeh, Tragedy and the Sublime.” PhD diss., McGill University, 2004. Eravcı, Mustafa. Mustafa ʿAli’s Nusret-name and Ottoman-Safavi Conflict. Istanbul: MVT, 2011. Eravcı, Mustafa. “Niyazi’nin Zafernāmesi ve Bağdat Beylerbeyi Ali Paşa’nın Faaliyetleri.” In İslam Medeniyetlerinde Bağdat (Medinetü’s Selam) Uluslararası Sempozyumu, 7–8–9 Kasım, 2008, 2 Vols, edited by İsmail Safa Üstün, 677–89. Istanbul: M.Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları, 2011. Eryılmaz Arenas-Vives, Fatma S. “The Shehnamecis of Sultan Süleyman: ʿArif and Eflatun and their Dynastic Project.” PhD diss., University of Chicago, 2010. Ettinghausen, Richard. Arab Painting. Cleveland: Skira, 1962. Far, Mahnaz S. “The Impact of Religion on the Painting and Inscriptions.” Central Asiatic Journal 47 (2003): 250–93. Farhad, Massumeh. “Safavid single page painting 1629– 1666.” PhD diss., Harvard University, 1987. Farhad, Massumeh and M. Shreve-Simpson. “Sources for the Study of Safavid Painting and Patronage, or Méfiez-vuos de Qazi Ahmad.” Muqarnas 10 (1993): 286–91. Farhad, Massumeh and S. Bagci. Falnama: The Book of Omens. Washington, D.D.: Smithsonian Institution, 2009. Faroqhi, Suraiya. “Making a Living: Economic Crisis and Partial Recovery.” In An Economic and Social H ­ istory

Bibliography of the Ottoman Empire, edited by Halil Inalcık, 433–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Faroqhi, Suraiya. Pilgrims and Sultans: The Hajj Under the Ottomans. London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 1994. Faroqhi, Suraiya. “Keepsakes and Trade Goods from Mecca” In Travel and Artisans in the Ottoman Empire: Employment and Mobility in the Early Modern Era, 89–98. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2014. Fetvacı, Emine. “The Production of the Şehname-i Selim Han.” Muqarnas 26 (2009): 263–317. Fetvacı, Emine. “Love in the Album of Ahmed i.” Journal of Turkish Studies 34 (2010): 37–51. Fetvacı, Emine. “The Album of Ahmed i.” Ars Orientalis 42 (2012): 127–39. Fetvacı, Emine. “Enriched Narrative and Empowered Images in Seventeenth Century Ottoman Manuscripts.” Ars Orientalis 40 (2011): 243–67. Fetvacı, Emine. Picturing History at the Ottoman Court. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2013. Fetvacı, Emine. “Office of the Ottoman Court Historian.” In Studies on Istanbul and Beyond, edited by Robert Ousterhout, 7–21. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007. Fisher, Carol. “The Pictorial Cycle of the Siyer-i Nebi: A Late Sixteenth Century Manuscript of the Life of Muhammad.” PhD diss., Michigan State University, 1981. Fleischer, Cornell. Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa Ali (1541–1600). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986. Flemming, Barbara. “Lāmiʿi.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by P. Bearman et al. Brill Online. 2016. Reference. Harvard University, 02 February 2016. http://referenceworks.brillonline. com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclo paedia-of-islam-2/lamii-SIM_4635; First appeared online; 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Flood, Finbarr B. Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval “Hindu-Muslim” Encounter. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

199 Floor, Willem and Edmund Herzig. Iran and the World in the Safavid Age. London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012. Flügel, Gustav. Die Arabischen, Persischen, Türkischen Handschriften der Kaiserlichen und Königlichen Hofbibliothek zu Wien. Hildesheim, New York: Olms, 1977. Frigo, Alberto. “Can One Speak of Painting if One Cannot Hold a Brush? Giulio Mancini, Medicine, and the Birth of the Connoisseur.” Journal of the History of Ideas 73 (2012): 417–36. Frye, R.N. “The Political History of Iran Under the Sassanids.” In The Cambridge History of Iran, edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 116–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gage, Frances. “Exercise for Mind and Body: Giulio Mancini, Collecting, and the Beholding of Landscape Painting in the Seventeenth Century.” Renaissance Quarterly 61 (2008): 1167–202. Gandjei, Tourkhan. “Notes on the Life and Work of Ṣādiqī.” Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Kultur des Islamischen Orients 52 (1975): 112–18. George, Alain F. “The Illustrations of the Maqāmat and the Shadow Play.” Muqarnas 28 (2011): 1–42. Ghereghlou, Kioumars. “The Question of Baghdad in the Course of the Ottoman-Safavid Relations According to the Safavid Narrative Sources.” In İslam Medeniyetlerinde Bağdat (Medinetü’s Selam) Uluslararası Sempozyum, 7–8–9 Kasım, 2008, 2 Vols., edited by İsmail Safa Üstün, 603–21. Istanbul: M.Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları, 2011. Golombek, Lisa. Persian Pottery in the First Global Age: The Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Leiden, Brill, 2013. Gonella, Julia and J. Kröger, Eds. Angels, Peonies, and Fabulous Creatures: The Aleppo Room in Berlin. ­Rhema-Münster: Museum für Islamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, 2008. Gökçek, Mehmet. “xvii. Yüzyılın İlk Yarısında Bağdat’ta Osmanlı-Safevi Mücadelesine Dair Bir Eser: ŞeyhOğlu’nun Kitābu Tārīhi Dāri’s-Selām’ı.” Turkish Studies 11/6 (2016): 31–60. Gölpınarlı, Abdülbaki. Mevlanadan Sonra Mevlevilik. Istanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 1953.

200 Gölpınarlı, Abdülbaki. Fuzūlī Dīvānı. Istanbul: İnkılap Kitabevi, 2005. Grabar, Oleg. “A Newly Discovered Illustrated Manuscript of the “Maqāmat” of Hariri.” Ars Orientalis 5 (1963): 97–109. Grabar, Oleg. The Illustrations of the Maqamat. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1984. Grabar, Oleg. “Pictures or Commentaries: The Illustrations of the Maqāmāt of al-Harīrī.” In Studies in Art and Literature of the Near East in Honor of Richard Ettinghausen, edited by Peter Chelkowski, 85–104. New York: New York University Press, 1974. Grabar, Oleg. “The Illustrated Maqāmāt of the Thirteenth Century: The Bourgeoisie and the Arts.” In The Islamic City, edited by Albert H. Hourani, 207– 22. Oxford: Cassirer; Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1970. Griswold, William. The Great Anatolian Rebellion 1000– 1020/1591–1611. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1983. Grube, Ernst J. “Some Observations Concerning the Ottoman Illustrated Manuscripts of the Kalīlah wa Dimnah: Alī Çelebī’s Humāyūnnāme.” In 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi, Bildiriler: 23–27 Eylül 1991, Vol. 2, 195–206. Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1991. Grube, Ernst J. Islamic Paintings from the 11th to the 18th Century in the Collection of Hans P. Kraus. New York: H.P. Kraus, 1972. Gruber, “Between Logos (Kalima) and Light (Nur): Representations of the Prophet Muhammad in Islamic Painting.” Muqarnas 26 (2009): 229–62. Gülcü, Erdinç. “Osmanlı İdaresinde Bağdat (1534–1623).” PhD diss., Fırat Üniversitesi, 1999. Güngör, Şeyma. Hadikatü’s Süʿeda, Fuzuli. Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1987. Günther, Sebastian. “Maqātil Literature in Medieval Islam.” Journal of Arabic Literature 25 (1994): 192–212. Haral, Hesna. “Osmanlı Minyatüründe Mevlana’nın Yaşam Öyküsü: Menakıbü’l Arifin ve Tercüme-i Sevakıb-ı Menakıb Nüshaları.” PhD diss., Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi, 2014. Hathaway, Jane. “The Military Household in Ottoman Egypt.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 27 (1995): 39–52.

Bibliography Hathaway, Jane. A Tale of Two Factions: Myth, Memory, and Identity in Ottoman Egypt and Yemen. Albany: State University of New York, 2003. Hathaway, Jane. The Politics of Households in Ottoman Egypt: The Rise of the Qazdaglis. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Hathaway, Jane and Karl Barbir. The Arab Lands under Ottoman Rule, 1516–1800. Harlow and New York: Pearson Longman, 2008. Havemann, A. “Naḳīb al-Ashrāf.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P.Heinrichs. Brill Online, 2016. Reference. Harvard University. 03 April 2016. http://referenceworks.brillonline.com-ezp-prod1 .hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclopaedia-of-islam-2/ nakib-al-ashraf-COM_0841 First appeared  ­ online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Huart, Clément. Histoire de Bagdad dans les Temps Modernes. Paris: E. Leroux, 1901. Hussain, Ali J. “The Mourning of History and the History of Mourning: The Evolution of Ritual Commemoration of the Battle of Karbala.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 25 (2005): 78–88. Imber, Colin. “The Persecution of the Ottoman Shiʿites According to the Mühimme Defterleri, 1565–1585.” Der Islam 56, no. 2 (July 1979): 245–73. Imber, Colin. “The Battle of Sufiyan, 1605: A Symptom of Ottoman Military Decline?” In Iran and the World in the Safavid Age, edited by Willem Floor et al, 91–103. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012. İnal, Güner. “The Influence of the Ḳazvīn Style on Ottoman Miniature Painting.” In Fifth International Congress of Turkish Art, edited by Géza Fehér, 457–76. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1978. İnalcık, Halil. Şair ve Patron: Patrimonyal Devlet ve Sanat Üzerine Sosyolojik Bir İnceleme. Ankara: Doğu Batı, 2003. İpekten, Haluk. Fuzuli. Ankara: Akçağ Yayınlar, 1996. Jones, Pamela M. Federico Borromeo and the Ambrosiana: Art Patronage and Reform in Seventeenth Century Milan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Bibliography Kafadar, Cemal. “When Coins Turned into Drops of Dew and Bankers Became Robbers: The Boundaries of Ottoman Economic Imagination at the End of the Sixteenth Century.” PhD diss., McGill University, 1986. Kafadar, Cemal. “Janissaries and Other Riffraff of Ottoman Istanbul: Rebels without a Cause?” In Identity and Identity Formation in the Ottoman World, A Volume of Essays in Honor of Norman Itzkowitz, edited by Baki Tezcan et al, 113–35. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2007. Kafadar, Cemal. “How Dark is the History of the Night, How Black the Story of Coffee, How Bitter the Tale of Love: The Changing Measure of Leisure and Pleasure in Early Modern Istanbul.” In Medieval and Early Modern Performance in the Eastern Mediterranean, edited by Aslı Öztürkmen et al, 243–69. Turnhout: Brepols, 2014. Kalgay, Oben L. “Lamiī Çelebi’nin Maktel-i Āl-i Resūl Adlı Eserinin Tasvirli Bir Nüshası: Istanbul Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesi T. 1958.” MA Thesis, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 2015. Karahan, Abdülkadir. Fuzuli: Muhiti, Hayatı ve Şahsiyeti. Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1995 Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. “Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia.” PhD diss., Harvard University, 2008. Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. “The Forgotten Dervishes: The Bektashi Convents in Iraq and their Kizilbash Clients.” International Journal of Turkish Studies 16 (2010): 1–24. Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. Vefailik, Bektaşilik, Kızılbaşlık: Alevi Kaynaklarını, Tarihini ve Yarihyazımını Yeniden Düşünmek. Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2015. Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer. “Kızılbaş, Bektaşi, Safevi İlişkilerine Dair 17. Yüzyıldan Yeni Bir Belge (Yazı Çevirimli Metin-Günümüz Türkçesi’ne ÇeviriTıpkıbasım).” Journal of Turkish Studies 30/ii (2006): 117–30. Karataş, Saliha. “Kastamonulu Şāzī’nin Maktel-i Hüseyn’i Üzerine Tahlil ve İncemele.” MA Thesis, Fatih University, 2012.

201 Kaymaz, Nejat. Pervāne Muʿinü’d-Din Süleyman. Ankara: Ankara Üniversite Basımevi, 1970. Kennedy, Hugh. The Early Abbasid Caliphate: A Political History. London: Croom Helm, 1981. Kennedy, Hugh. The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates. London: Pearson, 2004. Kennedy, Hugh. “From Oral Tradition to Written Record in Arabic Genealogy.” Arabica T.44, Fasc. 4 (1997): 531–44. Kılıç, Rüya. “The Reflection of Islamic Tradition on ­Ottoman Social Structure: The Sayyids and Sharifs.” In Sayyids and Sharifs in Muslim Societies, edited by Morimoto Kazuo, 123–39. London: Routledge, 2012. Köprülü, Fuad. Fuzuli, Hayatı ve Eseri. Istanbul: Yeni Şark Kütüphanesi, 1924. Kunt, İ. Metin. Sancaktan Eyalete: 1550–1650 Arasında Osmanlı Ümerası ve İl İdaresi. Istanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 1978. Kunt, İ. Metin. The Sultan’s Servants: The Transformation of Ottoman Provincial Government, 1550–1650. New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. Kut, Günay. “Lāmiī Çelebi.” 96–97. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 27. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2003. Kut, Günay. “Lamii Chelebi and his Works.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 35/2 (1976): 73–93. Kütükoğlu, Bekir. Osmanlı-Iran Siyasi Münasebetleri (1578–1612). Istanbul: Istanbul Fetih Cemiyeti, 1993. Kwiatkowski, Will. The Eckstein Shahnama: An Ottoman Book of Kings. London: Sam Fogg, 2005. Landau, Amy. “From the Workshops of New Julfa to the Court of Tsar Aleksei Mikhailovich: An Initial Look at Armenian Networks and the Mobility of Visual Culture,” in Metalwork and Material Culture in the Islamic World: Art, Craft and Text, ed. Venetia Porter, 413–26. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012. van Leeuwen, Richard. Waqfs and Urban Structures: The Case of Damascus. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Lier, Thomas. Haushalte und Haushaltpolitik in Baghdad, 1704–1831. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2004. Loewenstein, David and Michael Witmore, Eds. Shakespeare and Early Modern Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

202 Longrigg, Stephen H. Four Centuries of Modern Iraq. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1925. Lory, P. “Shahrazuri,” 9. In The Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd Edition, ed. H.A.R. Gibbs et al. 11 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1960–2002. Losensky, Paul. “Waḥshī Bāfḳī (or Yazdī).” Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition, ed. P. Bearman et al. Brill Online, 2015. Reference. Harvard University. 10 December 2015 http://referenceworks.brillonline. com.ezp-prod1hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclo paedia-of-islam-2/wahshi-bafki-or-yazdi-SIM_7828; First appeared online: 2012; First print edition:isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Lutz, Jessica. “Evliya Çelebi’s Qasida on Baghdad.” In De Turcicis Aliisque Rebus Commentarii Henry Hofman dedicati: Feestbundel voor professor emeritus H.F. Hofman ter gelegenheid van zijn vijftenzeventigste verjaardag aangeboden door vrienden en studenten, edited by Hendrik Boeschoten, 59–79. Utrecht: Institut voor Oosterse Talen en Culturen, 1992. Mahdum, Abid N. “Ravzatü’ş Şüheda ile Hadikatü’s Süeda Mukayesesinin Işığında Eski Türk Edebiyatında Tercüme Anlayışı.” PhD diss., Istanbul Üniversitesi, 2001. Mahir, Banu. “A Group of 17th Century Paintings Used for Picture Recitation.” In Art Turc, 10e Congres international d’art turc, edited by François Deroche, 443–56. Geneva: Fondation Max van Berchem, 1999. Mahir, Banu. “Osmanlı Murakka Yapımcılığı.” In Uluslararası Sanat Tarihi Sempozyumu, Prof. Dr. Gönül Öney’e Armağan, 10–13 Ekim 2001, Bildiriler, 401–11. İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sanat Tarihi Bölümü, 2002. Majer, Hans G. “Das Buch Quintessenz der Historien” In Die Karlsruher Türkenbeute: Die “Türkische Kammer” des Markgrafen Ludwig Wilhelm von Baden-Baden, Die “Türkischen Curiositaeten” der Markgrafen von Baden-Durlach, edited by Ernst Petrasch, 369–78. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1991. Majer, Hans G. “Ein ungewöhnliches osmanisches Silsilename in Stuttgart.” Tribus 60 (2011): 125–59. Mantran, Robert. “Čaʾūsh.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis et al. Brill Online. 2016. Reference. Harvard U ­ niversity. 21

Bibliography March 2016 http:referenceworks.brillonline.comezp.prod1.hul.harvard.edu/entries/encyclopaediaof-islam-2/caush-SIM_1596; First appeared online: 2012; First Print Edition: isbn: 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Marlow, Louise. “Teaching Wisdom: A Persian Work of Advice for Atabeg Ahmad of Luristan.” In Mirror for the Muslim Prince: Islam and the Theory of the Statecraft, edited by Mehrzad Boroujerdi, 122–60. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2013. Marozzi, Justin. City of Peace, City of Blood. London: Allen Lane, 2014. Marzolph, Ulrich. “From Mecca to Mashhad: The Narrative of an Illustrated Shiite Pilgrimage Scroll from the Qajar Period.” SLWPIA 5 (2013): 1–33. Masters, Bruce. Arabs of the Ottoman Empire, 1516–1918: A Social and Cultural History. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Matthee, Rudi. “Between Arabs, Turks and Iranians: Basra, 1600–1700.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 69 (2006): 53–78. Matthee, Rudi. “Loyalty, Betrayal and Retribution: Biktash Khan, Yaʿqub Khan and Shah ʿAbbas I’s Strategy in Establishing Control over Kirman, Yazd and Fars.” In Ferdowsi, the Mongols and the History of Iran: Art, Literature and Culture from Early Islam to Qajar Persia, edited by Robert Hillenbrad et al, 184– 201. London&New York: I.B. Tauris, 2013. Matthee, Rudi. “The Ottoman-Safavid War of 986– 998/1578–90: Motives and Causes.” International Journal of Turkish Studies 20, Nos. 1&2 (2014): 1–20. Matthee, Rudi. “Relations Between the Center and the Periphery in Safavid Iran: The Western Borderlands v. the Eastern Frontier Zone.” Historian (2015): 431–63. Meredith-Owens, G.M. “A Copy of the Rawẓat al-Ṣafa with Turkish Miniatures.” In Paintings from Islamic Lands, edited by R. Pinder-Wilson, 110–24. Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1969. Meredith-Owens, G.M. “A Genealogical Roll in the Metropolitan Museum.” In Islamic Art in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, edited by Richard Ettinghausen, 87–90. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1972. Milstein, Rachel. Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad. Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1990.

Bibliography Milstein, Rachel. “Nimrod, Joseph and Jonah: Miniatures from Ottoman Baghdad.” Bulletin of the Asia Institute (1987), 123–38. Milstein, Rachel. “ha-Tsiyur ha-dati shel ha-Derṿishim ha-meraḳdim bi-khetav ha-yad ‘Targʾame tʾ.vaḳib’ (Religious Painting of the Wailing Derwishes: Tardjome-i Thawaqib, Pierpont Morgan Library Ms M 466)” PhD diss., Hebrew University, 1979. Milstein, Rachel. “Illustrations of the Hajj Route.” In Mamluks and Ottomans, Studies in Honour of Michael Winter, edited by David J. Wasserstein and Ami Ayalon, 166–94. London and New York: Routledge, 2006. Milstein, Rachel. “Kitāb Shawq-nāma––An Illustrated Tour of Holy Arabia.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 25 (2001): 275–342. Milstein, Rachel. “From South India to the Ottoman ­Empire––Passages in 16th Century Miniature Painting,” In 9. Milletlerarası Türk Sanatları Kongresi, Bildiriler: 23–27 Eylül 1991, Vol. 2, 497–506. Ankara: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, 1991. Milstein, Rachel et al. Stories of the Prophets: Illustrated Manuscripts of the Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 1999. Mulder, Stephennie. The Shrines of the ʿAlids in Medieval Syria: Sunnis, Shiʿis and the Architecture of Coexistence. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014. Necipoğlu, Gülru. The Age of Sinan: Architectural Culture in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2005. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “The Dome of the Rock as Palimpsest: ʿAbd al-Malik’s Grand Narrative and Sultan Sulayman’s Glosses.” Muqarnas 25 (2008): 17–105. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “From International Timurid to Ottoman: A Change in Sixteenth-Century Ceramic Tiles.” Muqarnas 7 (1990): 136–70. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “A Kanun for the State, A Canon for the Arts: Conceptualizing the Classical Synthesis of Ottoman Art and Architecture.” In Soliman le Magnifique et son Temp, Actes du Colloque de Paris Galeries Nationales du Grand Palais, 7–10 Mars 1990, edited by Gilles Veinstein, 194–216. Paris: Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, 1992.

203 Necipoğlu, Gülru. “Early Modern Floral: The Agency of Ornament in Ottoman and Safavid Visual Cultures.” In Histories of Ornament: From Global to Local, edited by Gülru Necipoğlu et al, 132–56. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Palaces.” Ars Orientalis 23 (1993): 303–42. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “Süleyman the Magnificent and the Representation of Power in the Context of OttomanHabsburg-Papal Rivalry.” The Art Bulletin 71 (1989): 401–27. Necipoğlu, Gülru. “The Serial Portraits of Ottoman Sultans in Comparative Perspective.” In The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, edited by Selmin Kangal, 22–61. Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2000. Newman, Andrew. Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2006. Nihat, Mustafa. Metinlerle Muasır Türk Edebiyatı Tarihi. Istanbul: Kanaat Matbaası, 1916. Ocak, Ahmet Y. Kültür Tarihi Kaynağı Olarak Menakıbnameler: Metodolojik Bir Yaklaşım. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1992. Okuyucu, Cihan. “Kelāmī Mahlaslı İki Divan Şairi: Kelāmī Cihan Dede ve Kelāmī-i Rūmī.” Divan Edebiyatı Araştırmaları Dergisi 1 (2008): 205–40. Okuyucu, Cihan. “Muhlisi’nin Çerkes Yusuf Paşa’nın Basra Valiliği Dolayısı ile Yazdığı Seyahatname.” Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları 67–69 (1990): 115–35. von Oppenheim, Max F. Die Beduinen, Band iii, Teil 2. Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz, 1952. Özcan, Abdülkadir. “Çorbacı,” 369–70. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 8. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 1993. Özcan, Tahsin. “Nazmizade Murtaza Efendi,” 461–63. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 32. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2006. Özcan, Tahsin. “Mulla Arap,” 240–41. Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi, Vol. 30. Istanbul: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı, 2005. Özçelik, Kenan. “Lāmīī Çelebi’nin Kitāb-ı Maktel-i Āl-i Resūl’ü.” In Bursalı Lāmīī Çelebi ve Dönemi, edited by Bilal Kemikli and Süleyman Eroğlu, 273–79. Bursa: Bursa Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2011.

204 Özdemir, Coşkun. “Fransız Milli Kütüphanesinde Bulunan “Sefernāme” (Turc-127) Elyazmasının Minyatürleri.” MA Thesis, Selçuk Üniversitesi, 2014. Pamuk, Şevket. “The Price Revolution in the Ottoman Empire Reconsidered.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 33 (2001): 69–89. Pancaroğlu, Oya. “Socializing Medicine: Illustrations of the Kitāb al-Diryaq.” Muqarnas 18 (2001): 155–71. Parladır, Şebnem. “Resimli Nasihatnameler: Ali Çelebi’nin Hümāyūnnāmesi.” PhD diss., Ege Üniversitesi, 2011. Porter, Yves. “From the ‘Theory of Two Qalams’ to the ‘Seven Principles of Painting’: Theory, Terminology and Practice in Persian Classical Painting.” Muqarnas 17 (2000): 109–18. Raby, Julian. “Opening Gambits.” In The Sultan’s Portrait: Picturing the House of Osman, edited by Selmin Kangal, 64–96. Istanbul: İşbank, 2000. Radway, Robyn D. “Vernacular Diplomacy in Central Europe: Statesmen and Soldiers Between the Habsburg and Ottoman Empires, 1543–1593.” PhD diss., University of Princeton, 2017. Rahimi, Babak. Theater State and the Formation of Early Modern Public Sphere in Iran. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Rieu, Charles. Catalogue of the Turkish Manuscripts in the British Museum. London: British Museum, 1888. Rizvi, Kishwar. The Safavid Dynastic Shrine: Architecture, Religion and Power in Early Modern Iran. London: I.B. Tauris, 2011. Refik, Ahmet. On Altıncı Asırda Istanbul Hayatı (1553– 1591). Istanbul: Devlet Basımevi, 1935. Renda, Günsel. “Ankara Etnografya Müzesi’ndeki 8457 No.lu Silsilaname Üzerine Bazı Düşünceler.” In Kemal Çığ’a Armağan, 175–202. Istanbul: Bozok Matbaası, 1984. Renda, Günsel. “Topkapı Sarayı Müzesindeki H. 1321 no.lu Silsilename’nin Minyatürleri.” Sanat Tarihi Yıllığı 5 (1973): 443–95. Renda, Günsel. “New Lights on the Painters of the Zubdat al-Tawarikh in the Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts in Istanbul,” 83–200. In IVème Congrè International d’Art Turc, Aix-en-Provence turc (Aix-enProvence, 10–15 Septembre, 1971). Aix-en-Provence: Éditions de l’Université de Provence, 1976.

Bibliography Renda, Günsel. “Istanbul Türk ve İslam Eserleri Müzesindeki Zübdetü’t Tevarih’in Minyatürleri.”    Please check the page ranges in this reference. Sanat 6 (1977): 58–6. „„ Roxburgh, David J. The Persian Album, 1400–1600: From Dispersal to Collection. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2005. Roxburgh, David J. “In Pursuit of Shadows: Al-Hariri’s Maqāmat.” Muqarnas 31 (2014): 171–212. Roxburgh, David J. “‘Many a Wish Has Turned to Dust’: Pir Budaq and the Formation of Turkmen Arts of the Book.” In Envisioning Islamic Art and Architecture, edited by David J. Roxburgh, 173–223. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Roxburgh, David J. Prefacing the Image: The Writing of Art History in Sixteenth-Century Iran. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Roxburgh, David J. “Visualising the Sites and Monuments of Islamic Pilgrimage.” In Treasures of the Aga Khan Museum: Architecture in Islamic Arts, edited by Margaret Graves, Benoît Junod, 31–42. Geneva: Aga Khan Trust for Culture, 2011. Roxburgh, David J. “Pilgrimage City.” In The City in the Islamic World, edited by Salma Jayyusi et al, 753–74. Leiden: Brill, 2008. Rührdanz, Karin. “Zwanzig Jahre Bagdader Buchillustrations– Zu Voraussetzungen und Spezifik eines Zweiges der Türkischen Miniaturmalerei.” In Mittelalterliche Malerei im Orient, 143–159. Halle (Saale): Martin Luther Universität Halle-Wittenberd, 1982. Rypka, Jan. History of Iranian Literature. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1968. Sahillioğlu, Halil. “Osmanlı Döneminde Irak’ın Idari Taksimatı.” Belleten 211 (1990): 1233–254. Savory, Roger. “Ḳızıl-Bāsh,” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. ed., P. Bearman et al. Brill Online, 2016. Reference. Harvard University. 15 March 2016 First appeared online: 2012 . First Print Edition: isbn 9789004161214, 1960–2007. Savory, Roger. Iran Under the Safavids. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Schmidt, Jan. Catalogue of Turkish Manuscripts in the Library of Leiden University and Other Collections in the Netherlands. Leiden: Brill, 2012.

Bibliography Schmitz, Barbara. Islamic Manuscripts in the New York Public Library. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Sezgin, Ursula. Abū Mihnaf: Ein Beitrag zur Historiographie der Umaiyadischen Zeit. Leiden: Brill, 1971. Shreve-Simpson, Marianna. Sultan Ibrahim Mirza’s Haft Awrang: A Princely Manuscript from Sixteenth Century Iran. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997. Shreve-Simpson, Marianna. “The Making of Manuscripts and the Workings of the Kitab-khana in Safavid Iran.” In The Artist’s Workshop, edited by Peter M. Lukehart, 105–23. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1993. Smith, Suzanne. “Religious Law and the Visual Secular.” Harvard Divinity Bulletin 43 (2015). Stchoukine, Ivan. La Peinture Turque d’après les Manuscrits Illustrés. Paris: Libraire Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1966. Le Strange, Guy. Baghdad During the Abbasid Caliphate. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1900. Subrahmanyam, Sanjay. “Connected Histories: Notes Towards a Reconfiguration of Early Modern Eurasia.” Modern Asian Studies 31 (1997): 735–62. Subtelny, Maria. “Husayn Vaʾiz-i Kashifi: Polymath, Popularizer and Preserver.” Iranian Studies 36 (2003): 463–67. Sümer, Faruk. “Ramazanoğulları.” İslam Ansiklopedisi 34 (2007): 442–45. Szombathy, Zoltán. The Roots of Arabic Genealogy: A Study in Historical Anthropology. Piliscsaba: The Avicenna Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, 2003. Tanındı, Zeren. “Bağdat Defterdarının Resimli Şahnāmesi.” In Uluslararası Islam Medeniyetinde Bağdat Sempozyumu, edited by İsmail Üstün, 329– 43. Istanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi, 2008. Tanındı, Zeren. “Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi’nde Veli Can İmzalı Resimler.” Journal of Turkish Studies 15 (1991): 287–313. Tanındı, Zeren. “Transformation of Words to Images: Portraits of Ottoman Courtiers in the ‘Diwans’ of Bākī and Nādirī.” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 43 (2003): 131–45. Tanındı, Zeren. Siyer-i Nebī: İslam Tasvir Sanatında Hz. Muhammed. Istanbul: Hürriyet Vakfı Yayınları, 1984.

205 Tanındı, Zeren. “Osmanlı Yönetimindeki Eyaletlerde Kitap Sanatı.” In Orta Doğu’da Osmanlı Dönemi Kültür İzleri, Uluslararası Bilgi Şöleni Bildirileri (Hatay, 25–27 October 2000), Vol. 2, edited by Şebnem Ercebeci, 501–09. Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Yayınları, 2002. Tanındı, Zeren. “Resimli Bir Hac Vekaletnamesi.” Sanat Dünyamız 9 (1983): 2–6. Tezcan, Baki. “The Monetary Crisis of 1585 Revisited.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 52 (2009): 460–504. Tezcan, Baki. Searching for Osman: A Reassessment of the Deposition of the Ottoman Sultan Osman ii (1618–1622). PhD diss., Princeton University, 2001. Tezcan, Baki. The Second Ottoman Empire: Political and Social Transformation in the Early Modern World. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Thackson, Wheeler. Album Prefaces and Other Documents on the History of Calligraphers and Painters. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Titley, Norah. Persian Miniature Painting and Its Influence on the Art of Turkey and India: The British Library Collections. London: The British Library, 1983. Turner, Nancy et al. “Living on the Edge: Ecological and Cultural Edges as Sources of Diversity for ­Social-Ecological Resilience.” Human Ecology 31 (2003): 439–61. Uluç, Lale. “Vezir-i Azam Sinan Paşa’dan Gelen Kitabdır—Sene 999.” In Günsel Renda’ya Armağan (Essays in Honor of Günsel Renda), edited by Zeynep Yasa Yaman and Serpil Bağcı, 245–53. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Hastaneleri Basımevi, 2011. Uluç, Lale. “The Shahnama of Firdausi in the Lands of Rum” In The Reception of Firdausi’s Shahnama, edited by Charles Melville and G. van den Berg, 159–80. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Uluç, Lale. Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans and Ottoman Collectors: Sixteenth Century Shiraz Manuscripts. Istanbul: İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2006. Uluç, Lale. “The Majālis al-ʿUshshaq: Written in Herat, Copied in Shiraz, Read in Istanbul.” In M. Uğur Derman Armağanı, edited by Irvin Cemil Schick, 569– 602. Istanbul: Sabancı Üniversitesi, 2000.

206 Uluç, Lale. “Selling to the Court: Late-Sixteenth-­Century Manuscript Production in Shiraz.” Muqarnas 17 (2000): 73–96. Üçel-Aybet, Gülgün. Avrupalı Seyyahların Gözünden Osmanlı Dünyası ve İnsanları, 1530–1699. Istanbul: İletişim, 2010. Ünver, Süheyl. Sevakıb-ı Menakıb, Mevlana’dan Hatıralar. Istanbul: Organon, 1973. Üstün, İsmail S. Ed. İslam Medeniyetinde Bağdat (Medinetü’s Selam) Uluslararası Sempozyum, 7–8–9 Kasım, 2008, 2 Vols. Istanbul: M.Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları, 2011. Üzümcü, Hamza. “Niyazī ve Zafer-nāme-i Ali Paşa.” Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi 4 (2015): 105–20. Watenpaugh, Heghnar Z. “An Uneasy Historiography: The Legacy of Ottoman Architecture in the Former Arab Provinces.” Muqarnas 24 (2007): 27–43. Watenpaugh, Heghnar Z. The Image of an Ottoman City: Imperial Architecture and Urban Experience in Aleppo in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Watenpaugh, Heghnar Z. “Deviant Dervishes: Space, Gender, and the Construction of Antinomian Piety in Ottoman Aleppo.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 37 (2005): 535–65. Watenpaugh, Heghnar Z. “The City’s Edge: Rethinking Sources and Methods for the Study of Urban Peripheries.” Annales Islamologiques 46 (2012): 129–44.

Bibliography White, Sam. “The Real Little Ice Age.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 44 (2013): 327–52. White, Sam. “The Little Ice Age.” In Water on Sand: Environmental Histories of the Middle East and North ­Africa, edited by Alan Mikhail, 71–91. New York: ­Oxford University Press, 2013. Wright, Elaine. Islam: Faith, Art, Culture: Manuscripts of the Chester Beatty Library. London: Scala Publishers, 2009. Wüstenfeld, Ferdinand. Der Tod des Husein ben ʿAli und die Rache. Göttingen, 1882. Yarshater, Ehsan. Ed. The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 3: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Yazıcıoğlu, Mustafa S. “Hızır Bey ve Kaside-i Nuniyyes’si.” Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 26 (1983): 549–88. Yıldız, Özlem. “Text and Image in the Divan of Baki: An Illustrated Manuscript in the British Library (Add. 7922).” MA thesis, SOAS, 2018. Yorulmaz, Bülent. “Kerbela ve Fuzuli’ye Dair.” In I. Uluslararası Hacı Bektaş Veli Sempozyumu Bildirileri. Ankara: Hacı Bektaş Anadolu Kültür Vakfı, 2000. Yusufoğlu, Mehmet. “Gümüş Kapı.” Anıt ½ (1949): 4–6. Yürekli, Zeynep. Architecture and Hagiography in the Ottoman Empire: The Politics of Bektashi Shrines in the Classical Age. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2012.

Index ʿAbbasids 29, 34, 35, 44, 51, 152, 164, 173 caliph, al-Nasir 28n8 caliph, Harun al-Rashid 41, 44 caliph, al-Mutawakkil 41, 43, 44 caliph, al-Muqtadir 44, 53 caliph, al-Mustaʿasim Billah 44, 46, 47 vizier, Yahya b. Khalid Barmaki 53 ʿAbd al-Baqi al-Mawlawi, calligrapher 99, 100 ʿAbd al-Qadir al-Gilani 47, 48 Abraham, prophet 65, 114, 154 Fire Ordeal 119, 121, 154 Sacrifice of Ishmael 110, 111, 163 Grave of, Ishmael praying in front of 164 Abu Hanifa 47 Afrasiyab, ruler of Basra 22, 55, 59, 149 ʿAhdi 76, 77n28, 98, 107, 176 Ahmed I 13, 56, 153, 157, 171, 172, 173, 174 Albums 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 82, 85, 89, 91, 96, 101, 102, 182 Album of Ahmed I 77, 101, 102 Aleppo 3, 16n14, 18, 18n24, 19, 24, 28, 47, 74, 74n11, 77, 96, 98, 176, 179, 183, 184 ʿAli bin Abi Talib 152, 153, 156 Receiving the Bayʿa At the battle of Nahrawan 129 Death Shrine 4, 6 Swearing of Allegiance 126 ʿAli Quli Khan Shamlu 77 Allahverdi Khan 7 ʿArafāt al-Āshiqīn wa ʿAraṣāt al-ʿĀrifīn 1 Art market 3, 4, 5, 12, 25, 70, 72, 74, 103, 104, 177, 180, 184 Asafi Dal Mehmed Çelebi 6, 7, 154, 183 ʿAyntab 62, 65 ʿAzeb 18, 19, 21, 183 Baghdad 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 47, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 66, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76, 91, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 147, 148, 151, 156, 160, 171, 173, 175, 180, 183 Architecture in 29 Conquest by the Shah Ismaʿil 2, 3 Conquest by Süleyman I 3, 6, 11, 15, 82, 97, 167 Conquest by Shah ʿAbbas 4, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 98, 100 Conquest by Murad iv 3, 4, 11, 15, 24 Conquest by the Mongols 44 Famine 20 Sacred topography of 12, 85, 96, 97, 143, 144, 145 Style 5, 9, 41, 59, 62, 77, 78, 79, 82, 85, 89, 108, 110, 111, 114, 119, 135, 141, 152, 163, 164, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 182, 184 Visitors to, traders in 101, 146 uprisings in 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 30, 31, 34, 65, 69, 161

Bahaʾ al-Din Walad 47, 49, 101, 135n80 Bahram Gur 35, 38, 163 Baqiʿ Cemetery 141 Baki 77, 176 Divan 10, 12, 26 Basra 4, 6, 7, 13, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26n1, 27, 29n16, 30, 31, 44, 51n56, 54, 55, 56, 59, 65, 66, 67, 69, 71, 78, 98, 146, 149, 183, 184 Bedouins 20n35, 30, 67, 122, 183n16 Bekir Subaşı 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 55, 176 Bektashi 10, 12, 143, 145, 146, 176 Convent 6, 96, 97, 98, 100, 180 Beng u Bāde 9, 10, 12, 26, 29, 53, 54 Beyān-ı Menāzil-i Sefer-i ʿIraḳeyn 97 Border provinces, regions 15, 17, 31, 69, 85, 98, 103, 107, 184 Burc-u evliyā 10, 97, 144 Cain and Abel 108, 154, 161, 162, 163 Cairo 3, 20n39, 47, 96, 110, 178, 184n17 Calligraphy, calligrapher 70, 72, 73, 76, 77, 85, 89, 91, 99, 145, 178 Cāmiʿüʾl Buhur der Mecālis-i Sūr 73, 74 Cāmiʿü’s-Siyer 10, 12, 26, 27, 29, 31, 34, 35, 41, 44, 47, 51, 53, 54, 70, 85n40, 101, 129n80, 141n87, 178, 180 Canpuladoğlu ʿAli Paşa 15 Cigalazade Mahmud Paşa 11, 17n19 Cigalazade Sinan Paşa 11, 26, 100n21, 103 Collecting of art 12, 54, 72, 73, 177 Confessional clashes, coexistence 1, 2, 23, 66, 69, 102, 145, 175, 176 Cosmopolitanism 4, 5, 6, 9, 177 Currency devaluation 14, 15, 26 Çorbacı 19n31 Damascus 3, 19, 28, 47, 97, 98, 105, 135, 178, 179, 183 Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan 148, 149, 151 Derviş Mehmed 12, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24n64, 24n65, 183n15 Derviş Muhammed Ahlaki 178, 179 Dhu’l-Qadirids governorship of Fars 7, 8 patronage of art 8 Dilaver Paşa 11, 17, 18 Diyarbekir 19, 20, 22, 28, 183 Diyār-ı ʿAcem 146 Diyār-ı Rūm 146 Eclecticism 4, 9, 178 Egypt 6, 19, 26n1, 97, 98, 129 Elvendzade ʿAli Paşa 11, 26, 54, 103, 183

208 Erzurum 7, 22, 28, 62n95, 183 Expulsion from Paradise 108, 116, 122 Evliya Çelebi 2, 97, 100, 106, 107, 175, 176 Fazli, son of Fuzuli 1, 2, 44, 74, 77, 101 Fazli Isfahani 15 Fuzuli 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, 29, 53, 82, 96, 99, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 110, 111, 114, 116, 119, 122, 126, 129, 135, 143, 144, 176 Frontier 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 13, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24n64, 27, 65, 67, 69, 97, 146, 171, 176, 177, 180, 184 Gayumars 150, 162, 165 Genealogy (silsilenāme) 12, 27, 59, 75, 77, 78, 79, 104, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 155, 161, 162, 171, 172, 173, 175, 176, 178, 182 Gujarat 51, 181 Ḥadīḳatü’s-Süʿedā 9, 10, 12, 29n17, 59n86, 69, 70n115, 75, 96, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 116, 119, 122, 126, 129, 135, 141, 143, 144, 145, 178, 180 Hafız Ahmed Paşa 19, 20, 22, 23, 145, 183n16 Haft Awrang 179 Hamza Mirza 152, 154, 155, 167, 168, 170, 171, 172 Haydar Mirza 28 Hasan ʿAli Mashhadi, calligrapher 77, 78, 91, 98, 145, 176 Hasan Paşa, son of Sokollu Mehmed Paşa 9, 10, 11, 12, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 44, 47, 51, 53, 54,62, 66, 69, 70, 100, 101, 102, 103, 178, 179 Eger campaign 34 Hasan bin ʿAli 119, 141n87 Death 29, 129, 133, 134, 135, 136 Hilla 17n19, 105, 143, 183 Hormuz 69 Hümayunnāme 10, 51n56, 70, 75, 103, 178, 179 Husayn bin ʿAli 108 Death 29, 105 Shrine 4, 6 Huwaiza 31, 67 Hybridity 5, 28, 175, 176 Ibn Muljam 30, 129 Ibrahim Peçevi 22, 28, 53 Illustrated histories 30, 148 Imperial identity 3, 4, 5, 148, 176, 177, 180, 184 India 31, 35, 38, 51, 180 art of 4, 5, 9, 51 Iraj murdered by his brothers 162, 166 Isfahan 5, 7, 8, 177, 183 Iskandar Munshi 21, 23, 171n53 Istanbul 5, 17n19, 175, 177, 179, 180, 182, 183 Jamʿ-i Tārīkh 153 Joseph, prophet 34n42, 116, 117, 118 and Jacob 114, 116

index Kadızade ʿAli Paşa 11, 26n2 Kalender Efendi 56, 77, 179 Kalenderoğlu 56 Karayazıcı 62, 149 Karbala 3, 4, 6, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 91, 97, 98, 99, 105, 176 Battle of, texts on 12, 96, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 110, 114, 116, 122, 126, 141, 144, 145 Martyrs of 97, 101, 105, 106, 114, 116, 135, 143 Kasım Paşa, governor of Baghdad 15 Katip Çelebi 22, 149, 151 Kelami 98, 99, 176 Kemankeş Ali Paşa 22 Khuzistan 66 Kınalızade Hasan Çelebi 105, 125n70 Kitābkhāna 179 Konya 29, 47, 51, 59, 96, 99, 100, 101, 119, 180 Köse Sefer 61, 62, 65 Künhü’l Ahbār 41n47, 99, 183n15 Lahsa (al-Hasa) 26n1, 30, 31, 183 Lala Mustafa Paşa 6, 56, 73, 101 Lamiʿi Çelebi 103, 104n35, 119n67, 122, 125n70, 126, 135 Levend 14, 15, 20 Louis Gédoyn 24, 26n2 Majālis al-ʿUshshāq 148 Maḳtel-i Āl-i Resūl 10, 75, 103, 180 Manāqib al-ʿĀrifīn 51, 75, 103 Maqtal literature 104n35, 105, 125 Martyrdom of Zechariah 116, 119 Mashhad 7, 145, 178, 179 Mathnawī-yi Maʿnawī 8, 51, 101, 102, 104, 144, 173, 179 Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi 12, 47, 96 Shrine of 56 Life of 96, 101, 102, 145 Mawlana Shani 1, 77, 101 Mawlawi order 10, 12, 47, 51, 102, 145 lodge, Baghdad 96, 99, 100, 180 lodge, Konya 96, 99, 100 Mecca 28n9, 67, 141n87, 143, 164, 179, 180 Mehmed iii 30, 31, 33, 79, 80, 151, 152, 168, 172, 182 Mehmed Kanber 18n26, 20n35, 21, 24, 183 Menākıb-ı Hünerverān 54, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77 Mir Şeref 62, 64, 65, 66 Mirʾāt al-Adwār wa Mirqāt al-Akhbār 156, 165 Mobility 7, 15, 21, 25, 76, 146 of artisans 71, 180, 183 of members of a household 21, 183 Mongols 29, 44, 46, 51, 53, 175 Mosul 13, 22, 66, 183, 184 Mughal 51n55, 165, 167, 168, 180 ruler, Akbar 31, 168, 172 Muhammad Tahir 27, 29, 30, 35, 44, 47, 51, 53, 69

209

index Muhlisi 28, 54, 55, 56, 59, 62, 65, 66, 67, 69 Munājāt 77, 91, 179 Murad iii 1, 7, 14, 28, 30, 41, 72, 154, 157, 169, 171, 172, 174 Murad iv 2, 4, 11, 15, 21, 22, 24 Mushaʿshaʿ 30, 31, 34, 66 Mustafa I 22, 24 Mustafa ʿĀli 2, 11, 54, 72, 73, 74, 77, 98, 176, 179, 180, 183n15 Mustafa bin Mulla Rıdvan 2, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 55 Nafahāt al-Uns 51, 75, 102 Najaf 3, 4, 6, 97, 98, 99n17, 105, 141n87 Najd 19, 69, 183 Nakşi 180, 181 Nasuh Paşa 17, 56 Nazmizade Murtaza 20, 29, 55, 97, 100 New themes in art 12, 74n15, 75, 89 Nusayra Dede 99, 100 Nuṣḥatü’s Selāṭīn 74 Nuṣretnāme 73, 74, 101 Osman ii 22, 31 Özdemiroğlu ʿOsman Paşa 7 Patronage of architecture 26, 28, 29, 54, 74 non-royal 27, 72, 103 of shrines 97, 187n15 Pedro Teixeira 29, 31, 55 Pietro della Valle 24, 31 Pilgrimage, pilgrims 97, 98, 143, 176, 179 Political negotiation, alliance 15, 21, 23, 154 Popular religious texts 10, 12, 75, 76, 85n40, 96, 100, 101, 102, 103n28, 144, Pr146 Post-Mongol dynasties 153, 164, 173 Prophet Muhammad 3, 9, 10, 29, 30, 66, 67, 96, 103, 104, 105, 108, 110, 111, 114, 126, 127, 128, 135, 141, 142, 143, 145, 150, 152, 153, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162 Final sermon of 119, 122, 123, 124, 129 Provincial art 3, 5, 8, 76, 91 Qasim Khan 23 Qazvin 7, 8, 11, 51n56, 70, 178, 179, 183 Qiṣaṣ al-Anbiyāʾ 34n42, 96, 110, 116, 161, 162, 163, 173n62, 177, 178 Qizilbash 1n2, 22, 23, 65, 66, 82, 146, 153, 156, 157, 170, 171, 172 Qutb al-Din Muhammad al-Yazdi 76 Rahimizade Ibrahim 7 Ramazanoğlu Ismaʿil Beg 59, 62, 65 Rawżat al-Ṣafāʾ 27, 70, 103, 116, 178 Rawżat al-Shuhadāʾ 103, 104, 105, 116, 129, 135, 141, 143, 180 Relations between center and province 2, 11, 180, 181, 182

Representation of non-Muslims 9, 41, 119, 164 of Indians 9, 51, 119n65 of rulers 164, 165, 166, 167 of Bedouins 9, 119n65, 122 Ruhi 98, 99 Sadiqi Beg 76, 77, 176, 179 Safavid dynasty, rulers 107, 153, 154, 156, 157, 165, 166, 173, 176, 184 art, manuscripts 5, 6 war between the Ottomans and Safavids 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 14, 27, 28, 98, 154, 160, 171, 172, 177, 184 Safi Quli Khan 23, 24 Saleh and the camel 34n42, 151, 163, 167 Samarra 6, 98 Sayyid Mubarak 30, 31, 66, 67, 69 School of painting 5n17, 6, 7, 114, 177 Şecāʿatnāme 7, 154 Sefernāme 10, 69, 78 Segbān 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 65 Selaniki 28, 54 Selim ii 28, 30, 174 daughter of, Ismihan 28 Seljuks 51, 53, 59, 101, 149, 164, 173 vizier, Muʿin al-Din Parvaneh 53 vizier, Muhadhdhab al-Din ʿAli al-Daylami 53 ruler, Kay Khusraw ii 53 ruler, Kay Khusraw iii 53 ruler, Kilij Arslan iv 53 Şeyhoğlu 2, 3, 176 Shāh u Dervīsh 89 Shah ʿAbbas I 7, 31, 76, 152, 155, 171, 172, 173, 176, 177 Shah Ismail I 156, 165 Patronage of shrines 3 Conquest of Baghdad 2, 3 Shah Ismail ii 167, 168, 170, 171, 172 Shah Muhammad Khudabanda 7, 152, 154, 167, 170, 171, 172 Shah Tahmasp 156, 167, 168, 169, 170, 172 Shāhnāma 8, 10, 27, 35, 70, 75, 145, 161, 162, 163, 177, 178 Shahrizol 4, 183 Shafiʿi al-Sharif 148, 149, 150, 151 Shams-i Tabrizi 47, 50, 101 Shatt al-ʿArab 31 Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi 47 Shiraz 7, 8, 11, 51n56, 70, 74, 100n21, 104, 144, 148, 164, 177, 178, 180, 183 Shrine of Imam Musa al-Kazim 3, 85, 97 of Imam ʿAli 85 of Abd al-Qadir Gilani 6, 47, 85, 97 of Abu Hanifa 6, 21, 85, 97 of Imam Husayn 78, 85, 91, 98, 99, 145, 179, 183n15 of ʿAli al-Hadi 85

210 Shrine (cont.) of Hasan al-ʿAskari 85, 97 Mawlawi, Konya 29, 56, 59, 101 of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil 78 of Muhammad al-Jawad 97 of Maʿruf al-Karkhi 97 of Salman Farisi 97 of Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi 97 of Imam ʿAli al-Rida, Mashhad 145 of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil 145 visitation of 56, 59, 66, 96, 97, 176 as places of artistic, literary activity 98, 99, 145 Sinan Paşazade Mehmed 66 Single-page paintings 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 41, 75, 76, 78, 85, 89, 91, 96, 182 Siyer-i Nebī 96 Sokollu Mehmed Paşa 12, 28, 30, 32, 34, 53, 100 Solomon, prophet 30 and Belqis 35, 173n62 enthroned 35n42 Stories of the prophets 10, 29, 34, 103, 114, 116, 141, 145, 162 Subḥāt al-Akhbār 148 Subḥāt al-Akhyār 148 Sufi mystics 47 lives of 12, 75, 96, 102, 103, 145 Süleyman I 3, 11, 15, 32, 65, 82, 97, 104, 125n70, 141n87, 148, 156, 167, 170 Şemāʾilnāme 79 Tabriz 3, 7n22, 11, 70, 165, 166, 167, 171, 178 Taqī Awḥadī 1 Taqiyya 146, 175 Tarsus 59, 60, 62 Taxation 14, 15, 29n16, 171, 183n15

index Tavilzade Muhammed 17, 18, 55, 56, 100, 177, 191 Tercüme-i S̱evāḳıbü’l-Menāḳıb 51, 103 Teẕkire-yi Evliyā-yı Baġdād 97 Thawāqib al-Manāqib 99 Topçular Katibi ʿAbdülkadir 17n19, 55, 56 Trade 20, 146, 164, 176, 180, 184 interregional 74 Indian Ocean 25, 31, 51n56, 180 routes 26, 96 Travelers 26, 29, 31 Treaty of Constantinople 3 Turkmen 3, 7, 10, 74, 104, 154, 171, 177, 184 Universal histories 27, 28, 29, 53, 54, 69, 116, 147, 148, 149, 152, 153, 156, 173, 175 Uprisings 3, 8, 12, 14, 15, 22, 24, 27, 34n39, 47, 55, 56, 59, 62, 65, 66, 161, 177 Urfa (Ruha) 17n19, 63, 65, 149 Uzbeks 4n15, 165, 167, 170, 173, 177 Uzun (Tavil) Ahmed 11, 15, 16, 17, 55 Virgin Mary with the Infant Christ 163, 168 Yusuf bin ʿAbdüllatif 148 Yusuf Paşa, Çerkes 10, 11, 12, 26, 27, 31, 44, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 78, 101, 102, 103 Yusuf Paşa (d. 1623), governor of Baghdad 21, 22 Zayn al-ʿAbidin 114, 116 Preaching 129 Ziya al-Din Abu Najib al-Suhrawardi 28n8, 47 Zübdetü’t-Tevārīh 34n42, 110, 148, 163n44, 173