BRILL ‘MELIS TANER AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Whiting of the years just before Baghdad fell to the Safa vvids in 1625, the seventeenth-century Baghdadi author Seyhoglu notes that the province is “caught, desolate, between two tribes: one is the shah of ‘Ajam; the other is the sultan of Rum..When the shah of ‘Ajam invades it, he says ‘Oh, Abu Hanifa, the Sunnit’ And when the House of ‘Osman takes it, he says, ‘Oh, shahsevan, Shit and heretic!" Evliya Celebi repeats this sentiment in his travelogue, written after the re-conquest of Baghdad by the Ottoman ruler Murad IV (t.624-40) ina638, adding, he nation of Baghdad islike a person caught in a whisl- wind" (Bu kavm-i Bagdad bir girdabda kalmus kisi gibi dir)? Indeed, the province had changed hands rapidly Jbetween the Aqgoyunla, the Safavids, and the Otlomans ‘throughout the sixteenth and the first half of the seven: teenth centuries. The reciprocal denigeation noted by Seyhoglu and. Evliya Gelebi gives aprima facieimpression of difference between two rival dynasties. Italso hints at the complex- ity of interactions between the “Rum" (Ottoman) and the “Ajam” (Iranian) inhabitants of the city. This essay focuses on an early seventeenth-century illustrated ge- nealogy at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara (MS 8457), which is stylistically Baghdadi while iconographi- cally and textually pro-Safavid ata time when Baghdad ‘was under Ottoman rule. The Ankara genealogy hints at recurrent tensions, whether pronounced sectarian dif- ferences or political rivalries. However, it also indicates case and flexibility in what seems at first glance to be an insurmountable difference. As an illustrated genealogy, ‘form which first appeared in the post Mongol Persian- ate world and became widespread in the Ottoman realm in the mid-sixteenth century, the Ankara manuscript adapts the Ottoman genealogical tree tradition with a particularly Safavid tenor. I argue that, with its im- mediate visual accessibility and claim to legitimacy through genealogy asa methodological tool, the Ankara manuscript represents contested identities in the lim- inal region of Baghdad. Asa frontier province between the Ottomans and the Safavids, Baghdad stands out for its hybridity. In the carly modem period, the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mu- ghals purposefully formulated their imperial identity through distinctive architecture, painting, decoration, and objects. At a point when the three rival empires were consolidating imperial idioms and cultural poli tics, Baghdad appears to be caught between Ottoman and Safavid painting styles, much like Evliya Gelebi’s characterization. His “whirlwind” simile captures the fluidity of fluctuation and confusion at the time: a whirl- wind quickly moves, shuffles, uproots. The swirling as- pect of the whirlwind suggests a moment when everything is blown together, while its aftermath points toaneed forself(re)definition. It isin the context ofthis charged environment, from the end of the Ottoman- Safavid War of 578-go until the rekindling of animosity between the two powers in the early seventeenth cen- ‘tury, that I examine the Ankara manuscript. ‘THE COMPOSITION OF GENEALOGIES AT THE OTTOMAN COURT Literally meaning ‘chain’ in Arabic, the term silsila de- notes aline of descent or lineage. Be ita certification of training, an affiliation to a particular master and Sufi order, ora confirmation of consanguinity, the genealogy (silsilanéma)in the form ofatabulated list, diagrammatic146 tuee, ornarrative text serves the purpose of constructing an identity and tradition as well as providing a synopsis ofhistory. The compilation of genealogies further relates to certification or ‘sna, the practice of authentication through a chain of transmission commonly used in the study ofhadith, The legitimating function of such chains of transmission underlies their use in genealogical reg: isters, whether of Sufi orders, dynasties, orin biographi- cal dictionaries. Like isnad, the geneological register is employed for variety of purposes, from linking disciple and master to showing dynastic or universal histories. Succinetly and palpably, genealogical registers legitimate and dis- tinguish individuals by virtue of linking them $ Univer- sal and dynastic histories that run from Adam, the first ‘man, through a succession of biblical prophets and pre- Islamic and Islamic rulers create a chain of transmission that accords authenticity. The fact that universal histo- ries and genealogies are sometimes combined in asingle text demonstrates the malleability ofthe genre. Indeed, “universal histories in prose share much in terms of con- tent with schematic genealogies. While the genealogical register has a long history in the Islamic context, with examples dating from the ear- ly fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the earliest Otto- man dynastic silslandmas—an unillustrated Persian genealogy and two illustrated Latin genealogies—date from the reign of Bayezid Il (r,1481-1512). The composi- tion of the unillustrated Persian genealogy (Topkap: Palace Museum Library, H. 1590) coincides with the re- institution of the office of the nagib al-ashraf (marshal ofthe nobility) during the reign of Bayezid Il after abrief interim rescission during the reign of Mehmed II (x. 1451-81). Interestingly, itis 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 Hunga: rie Bohemie & C. Regi (The Genealogy of Turkish Emper- ors, the Laws of the Empire and the Military, Dedicated (o Prince Wladislaw of Hungary, and King of Bohemia and Croatia), was prepared by the advisor of Matthias Corvinus (r.1438-90) and his successor Wladislas I, Fe- lixPetancius, who undertook diplomatic missions to the Ottoman empire and dedicated the illustrated scroll to King Wladislas Il of Hungary (r.1490-1516)* ‘MELIS TANER Following these Persian and Latin examples itis only in the micl-sixteenth century that an Ottoman Turkish ¢gencalogy was composed or translated, and only in the late sixteenth century that illustrated versions of Otto- man dynastic genealogies began to be produced. In the late sixteenth century, particularly in the context of im- perial projects that sought to portray the Ottomans as the culmination of universal history, the dynastic gene- alogy tradition in the Ottoman realm was revived. Inaddition to the composition of universal histories at the Ottoman court, the last two decades ofthe sixteenth ‘century saw a strong interest in royal portraiture, These ‘two factors undoubtedly contributed to the appearance ‘fnew genealogies in the form ofillustrated portrait me: dallionsin Baghdad. There are close to a dozen extant i lustrated copies of such genealogies that were produced {in Baghdad in the late sixteenth and the early seven- teenth centuries, Much smaller and with less grandeur than the official illustrated histories produced in Istan- bul, these Baghdadi silsilanama manuscripts provide a summary of universal history with short stories about the lives and reigns of important figures. Between eigh- teen to thirty folios in length with simple brown leather bindings, these smaller manuscripts are inexpensive productions that, I suggest, were produced for the spee- ulative market in Baghdad, Of the dozen late-sixteenth- and early-seventeenth-century slsilandma manuscripts attributed to Baghdad, three bear colophons with the date 1006 (1597-98) and the names of scribes who were all residents of Baghdad * ‘That several of these illustrated genealogies were pro- ‘duced in the span of afew years (or even months), and that some of these end with well wishes to the reader, suggests that there was a market in Baghdad for brief, affordable illustrated universal histories told through genealogical succession.® Ottoman archival book regis- ters also point to the popularity of silslanamas.” Most likely produced on speculation (rather than being com- missioned), the illustrated sifsilandmas can be likened toa similar popularization of the illustrated Majalis al: Ushshag (The Assemblies of the Lovers) that occured carlierin the century in Shiraz.* While questions ofread- ership and the popularity of certain genres at a particu- lar time or place require further study, the high number of illustrated silsilandma manuscripts indicates thatAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS these became popular in Baghdad at the turn ofthe sev- enteenth century. THE TEXTS AND THEIR TRANSLATIONS Scholars commonly attribute several authors to the Persian, Turkish, and Arabic versions of the dynas- tic genealogy variously known by the titles Subhat al Ahbar (The Rosary of World History), Subhat al-Ahyar (The Rosary of the Good), Subhat al-Abbar ve Tuhfat al-Ahyar (The Rosary of World History and the Gift of the Good), and Ziibdeti’t-Tevarih (The Quintessence of Histories). It is assumed that the “original” was a Persian text composed by either Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan or by Shafi‘i al-Sharif, who worked during the reign of the Ottoman ruler Siileyman I (r 1520-66), and that a Turkish translation was prepared bby Yusuf bin ‘Abdillatif® This assumption stems from the information given by the seventeenth-century Ottoman scholar Katip Gelebi (d. 1657) in his biblio- graphical dictionary, Kesft’ Ziiniin (The Uncovering of Ideas), in which he mentions a genealogical scroll composed by Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan."° The same information is repeated by Franz Babinger (4.1967), who writes that Darvish Muhammad bin Ra: madhan’s universal history was translated into Ottoman Turkish by Yusufbin ‘Abdillatifin i545. The name of the latter as translator is also provided in a mid-eighteenth- century unillustrated genealogy." A close reading ofillustrated and unillustrated genea- logical 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 tohighlight a particular dynasty or lineage. The potency of these registers is underscored by the fact that they ‘were occasionally fabricated to suit a specific political purpose.!? Thave come across only one such work—a scroll— that names its author as Shafi‘ al-Sharif, This is an unil- lustrated scroll composed in Persian, with annotations around medallions in Turkish, which were most likely added at alater date. As this scroll, held at the Metro- politan Museum of Art (67.272), contains the name of a7 the author in ts introductory section, I begin with this Persian text and compare it with the two other Persian genealogies and the ones in Ottoman Turkish. Of the two Persian-language genealogies, one is an unillustrat- ced scroll at the Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek in ‘Vienna (Cod. Mixt. 487). The other is the illustrated manuscript preserved at the Museum of Ethnography in Ankara, which is the focus of this paper. ‘The preface to the Metropolitan Museum of Artscroll begins with praise to God, who “with the hand of provi- dence and compass of design...created Adam from clay over forty mornings. It continues by noting the select nature ofhumanity and of the Prophet Muhammad. The author writes that he had wished to compose a work of history, but since many others had composed histories before him, he wanted instead to create a genealogical scroll. After noting the difficulties of such an endeavor and the criticism of his enemies, a praise of Sultan Siiley- ‘man follows. The sultan is culogized as the *padishah of caliphal essence, king of kings of clement disposition, Iskandar of Aristotle-mind, sun ofthe heavens, guardian of the world, the purest substance of the house of Os- man." This is followed by an overview of the organiza tion of the scroll and the diagrammatic genealogy: it features two red circles for prophets and one circle for others, connected by ines; prophets in the middle ofthe page; and the sons of Gayamars, the Kayanians, and oth- ersat the top, all the way to the Ottomans at the bottom. Next, the length of time from Adam to major prophets before and after the Deluge are noted. The scroll then lists dynasties before and after the rise of Islam and pro- vides 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 Stileyman 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 ofthe layout of the scroll, the length of rule of prophets and kings, and a table of dynasties after the advent of Islam. 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148 ‘MELIS TANER Table 1 si Persian A “Museum of Ethnography (Nr. $457) ‘Turkish A 4 Bibliotheque nationale de France, Supp. Ture 126 (dated 1013 AR; copied in Baghdad) ‘© Topkapr Palace Museum Library H. 1324 (dated 1006 AH / copied by Yusuf. Muhammad Dizfuli/ includes Arabie imtroduction) + Topkaps Palace Muscum Library H. 1591 (Gated 1006 AH/ copied by Yusut. “Muhammad Diafuli includes Arabie introduction) Chester Beatty Library T. 423 (dated 1006 AIL/ copied by Abu Talib Isfaiani, resident of Baghdad / includes Arabic introduction) Topkapi Palace Museum Library A. 3110 ‘Topkap Palace Museum Library H. 1624 Ostorrichische Nationabibliothek A.F. 50 Los Angeles County Museum M.85.237.38 Dar al-Kutub, 30 Tarikh Turki Khalil Agha, Cairo Vakaflar Genel Midarlag Nr. 1872 ‘Istanbul University Rare Books Library, T 6092 the Persian text. One is currently at the Sakip Sabanet Museum (190-0592). The preface of this work, in Turk ish, gives the name of the author as Sharif alShafii, The Sabanci Museum scroll highlights Sultan Sileyman, 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 ilename Versions N Metropolitan Muscum of Art 67.272 Osterreichische Nationalbiblihek Persian B (Cod, Mint 487 Turkish B + Sakip Sabunet Museum 190.0392, {author noted as Shaft al-Shari) (not illustrated) + Topkap: Palace Museum Library B.196 (translator noted as Yusutb, Abdi) {ot illustrated) ‘Mehmed III (r. 1595-1603). The other Ottoman Turk- ish translation is an unillustrated genealogy dating to the mid-cighteenth century, which was originally orga- nized as a scroll but is presently in the form of a codex (Tlopkap: Palace Museum Library, B. 193). It provides us with yet another name, the person who translated this work into Turkish: Yusuf bin ‘Abdillati” Both the Metropolitan scroll and the Topkaprmanuscriptrefer to the title of the work as Subhat al-Ahbar.AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS 14s Fig. Moses and his rod tured into a dragon (top right), From Zilbdetit Tevarih, Istanbul, Topkaps Palace Museum Library, HL 1624, fol. 7b. The Persian-language preface found in the Ankara manuscript is quite different from the one in the Metro- politan and Vienna examples. Although the two ver- sions of the preface share similar content and Qur’anic quotations, their wording is quite different, which sug- gests that the preface ofthe Ankara manuscript is likely the work of another author. Whether the author is the Darvish Muhammad bin Ramadhan mentioned by Katip Gelebiis not substantiated, However, itis this An- kara version of the Persian text, rather than the Metro- politan/Vienna preface, 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 trans- lation of the Ankara text, with only the verbs changed from Persian to Turkish, In these illustrated Ottoman Turkish copies from Baghdad, a diagrammatic genealogical tree beginning with Adam follows the preface. The figures in medal- lions 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 also 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 tumed into a dragon (fig. 1), most of the paintings portray the prophets and kings in an iconic manner (fig. 2). Figures are placed on a pricked150 ‘MELIS TANER fos, b-a1a. gold 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 (BnF Supp. ture 126) whose drawn illustrations may have been added later, gives the date of 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 paint- ings, appended to this genealogy is a painting depict- ing Mehmed Il on a throne (fig. 3). Above, there are +s. Nab (top left on fol. 20b), From Zubdeti't Tevarih, 1597, Istanbul, Topkapt Palace Museum Library H. 159% ‘two blank cartouches, Compositionally, this ean be lik- ‘ened to the portraits of sultans found in the Kyafeti’t insaniyye fi Semail’Osmaniyye (Human Physiognomy ‘concerning the Personal Dispositions of the Ottomans), where two cartouches placed above the sultans contain a hemistich in each. These provide a summary of the ruler's qualities or invite the reader to consider the at- tributes of the sultan portrayed. ‘The repetitive and iconic nature of the paintings in the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies, as well as the structure and format of manuscripts produced with- in several years of each other, hint at the use of models in these short, popular universal histories. These paint- ings also highlight how the Ankara manuscript, whileAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig. 5, Portrait of Mehmed IIL From Sillaname, Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Cod, Rastat 20, fl. sb stylistically similar to the illustrated Ottoman Turkish _gencalogies, is iconographically more elaborate and pro- Safavid in text and image. ‘THE ANKARA SILSILANAMA ‘The Ankara silsilandma isa relatively small manuscript, ‘measuring 250 «145 mm. Ithas18 folios. The manuscript has not retained its original binding and presently has a black checkered board binding, In the re-binding pro- cess, some folios were misplaced. The folioshave been 151 damaged and trimmed at the edges of the ruling and have not been re-margined. In addition to the altera- tions resulting from the rebinding process, some early modifications to the text are evident, which will be dis- cussed below. ‘The manuscript opens with an illuminated ‘unwan (headpiece), which is predominantly gold and blue with stylized maroon lotus flowers on the upper section. The central lobed gold cartouche, which lacks the ttle ofthe work, is outlined in orange, a color often found in ‘unwans of ikuminated manuscripts from Baghdad. The text is composed in Persian and written in nasta'lg. Qur’anic quotations and Arabic phrases are written in thuluth in blue ink, The opening two folios of text have {nterlineal 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 (fig. 4). The rest of the fo- lios ate decorated with small floral designs in gold, ex- cept for several sheets decorated with animal or tree designs. There are 146 painted medallions depicting prophets from the Hebrew Bible, the Prophet Muham- ‘mad, ‘Ali 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) (fig. 5), the son of the Sa- favid Shah Muhammad Khudabanda (r. 1578-87) and the elder brother of the future Safavid Shah ‘Abbas | (1-1588-1629), ‘The text of the Ankara silsilandma consists of two parts: a short introduction in prose and the illustrated genealogical tree, which includes short biographical in- formation written around the medallions, The prose introduction begins by praising God as the cteator ofthe universe and attributes existence to God. Above all, Adam is distinguished as God's choice creation because of his purity. After voicing gratitude to the creator, the author wnites that the universe and all existence are but ‘one dtop in the sea of God's generosity." Interspersed ‘with quotations from the Qur'an that emphasize cre- ation and the elect nature of mankind, the introduction likens creation to the act of writing. After noting Adam's pristine nature, the author moves on to praise the prophets and saints, who are honorable and special on account of their divine blessing (kardmat). Here, too,152 MELIS TANER Fig. 4 Adam, Gayamars, Cain, and Abel, From Cem“i Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b. (Photo: Melis Taner)AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig. 5. Hamza Mirza hunting, detail, From Cem“ Tart, An- kara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 8a. (Photo: ‘Melis Taner) appropriate Qur’anic verses and hadiths are chosen to hhighlight the nature of prophets. Muhammad is distin- guished as the lord of the prophets. The author quotes a Quranie verse which points out the role of Prophet Mu- hammad as a messenger among other messengers (3244). The florid encomium ends with blessings on the Prophet and on ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, his deputy. ‘The next section of the introduction following this “divine encomium, and (having established] the funda- mentals of the guidance of prophecy"® shows evidence of textual modification. Two lines in the middle of fotio 2a have been replaced (figs. 6-7). Upon examining the manuscript, a different calligraphic hand as well as dif ferent paper can be observed." The revised line praises the Ottoman ruler Ahmed I (r.1603-17): “Shah Ahmed, the ruler of the auspicious conjunction of the time (sahib-qirdn-i zaman), the outcome of the world, pos- 153 sessor of good fortune, undaunted against the enemy with the sword of the prophet, lover of the four ca- liphs."22 The altered text continues with a call for vic- tory against the Safavid Qinilbash: May the tent ropes of felicity an! happiness, the curtains founded on the firmament, and the heavenly tent of that ‘magnanimous sultan foreverbe strong. And may his sword neverbelacking rom the necksofthe redheads swrbisardn) and may he be forever victorious against that enemy. May the pillars of his reign and the days of his fortune be ever present on is realms and the sun of his benevolence for ever shine on his subjects all the way fom the fish tothe soon, until the day of fudgment > ‘The rest of the encomiastic section of the introduction is original; it ends with the author naming the work as Cem‘ Tarih (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 catego- rized into two groups: those that came before the advent of Islam (the jahiliyya), and those that came alter (the Islamiyya). These are further classified according to their respective dynasty, with information provided on the number of rulers and the number of years each dy- nasty was in power. Emphasis is placed on the Safavids in this text, Alter 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 ate fourteen [rul- ers] —who ruled to this day, the year 1015 [1606-7], for 315 years." This date corresponds to thereign of Ahmed | 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 ofthe 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 di- vine characteristics and their glorious feats"25 ‘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 prophets and154 Fig. 6, Introduction, detail. From Cem Tarif, Ankara, Mu- seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 2a, (Photo: Melis Taner) rulersadded around the painted medallions. Individuals are divided according to their respective dynasties by vertical ines. Contemporary rulers or prophets appear next to each other on the same page. This format per- mits a synchronic and a diachronic synopsis of universal history. large painted medallion portrays the Archangel Ga- biel presenting Adam with a tablet; on the right is Eve holding two sons, presumably Cain and Abel (fig. 8). 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 (fig. 9). From the descendants of ‘Adam's third son Seth (Shith)—Enosh (Anush), Kenan (Kan‘an), Mahalalel (Mahla‘l), 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 Ja- pheth and Shem are represented in red ink within a blue medallion, and those of Ham, who was unfavored, in ‘blue ink within ared medallion. The color coding of blue ink for the names and red ink for the medallions is fol- owed for some of the pre-Islamic Iranian kings as well. ‘The names of many of the biblical prophets are written in red ink in blue medallions. For example, Abraham ‘MELIS TANER os dh ae ae Fig 7. Introduction, detail. From Cem Tarth, Ankara, Mu- seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 2b. (Photo: Melis Taner) (Ibrahim) and Aaron (Harun) are identified inthis man- ner, whereas Nimrod (Nimrud), who had cast Abraham into fire according to this text.2# 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 acon- tinuous 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 paint- ing serve as markers of relative importance and provide both a legible summary of universal and dynastic his- tory as well as a quickly-graspable display of legitimacy, ‘The manuscript currently ends with a large portrait me- dallion of the Safavid prince Hamza Mirza on folio 18a (fig. 5). The text begins by relating how valiantly Hamza Mirza fought the ranks of the Ottomans, and that amongAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig. 8. Adam and Eve with Cain and Abel and the Archangel Gabriel, detail. From Cem Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Bth- ography, MS 8457, fol. 3b. (Photo: Melis Taner) the Ottomans he was known as“Kog Kapan’ (Ram Seiz- 1), Hamza Mirza is often mentioned in sixteenth-cen- tury Ottoman chronicles because of his role in the Ottoman-Safavid War of 1578-go during Murad II's reign, Hamza Mirza is further highlighted in Ottoman sources, especially the Seca‘atndme (Book of Courage) of Asai Dal Mehmed Gelebi (d. 597-98), who includes several portraits of the young prince in his ilustrated account of the war Interestingly, Hamza Mirza and ‘Muhammad Khudabanda do not appear in Safavid il- Tustrated manuscripts. While Shah Muhammad Khudabanda managed to remain in control of the affairs of state until 1587, sev- eral Ottoman authors report challenges to his reign dur- ing the Ottoman-Safavid War; some advocated for Hamza Mirza, some for Tahmasp Mirza, and others for Ebu Talib Mirza That news of such affairs reached Ot- yea wearin Si ien pei /; iri Ai 1 $6 g : aS Fig. 9. Cain and Abel, detail, From Cem'i Tardh, Ankara, ‘Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 3b. (Photo: Melis, Taner) toman ears at the peak of war highlights the volatility of rule in the Safavid lands. Hamza Mirza had been de- lared crown prince by a Takkalu-Mawsillu-Turkmen alliance2® However, a Shamlu-Ustajlu alliance declared Muhammad Khudabanda's younger son, ‘Abbas Mirza, asthe heir apparent although he was only eight years old at the time. In the end, it would be ‘Abbas Mirza who replaced Muhammad Khudabanda as Shah ‘Abbas in 1587 alter Hamza Mirza mysteriously died in 1586.°° ‘The text in the Ankara manuscript regarding Hamza Mirza ends with the verse: “Undaunted against the en- ‘emy with a sword like a diamond { Slave of ‘Ali-yi Vali, Shah ‘Abbas. The remark on Shah ‘Abbas, right where the manuscript presently ends, suggests that the geneal- ‘ogy may have continued with an account of Shah ‘Abbas156 1 (x. 1588-1629), This would correspond with the date 1606/7 given in the preface, as also mentioned by Ren- da.* Itis probable that the manuscript is unfinished or, more likely, that itis missing several folios at the end. In all likelihood, the manuscript did not make it to its in- tended owner, thus going back on the speculative mar- ket 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 ofthe reigns of Shah Tahmasp and Shah Muhammad Khudabanda voice praise of the former's support of Twelver Shi‘ism and his destruction of the works of the ahl al-sunna (people of the prophet- ic practice) in that land,*® and express a desire for Shah Muhammad Khudabanda’s success against the Otto- mans:*God willing, with the help of God, the rest [ofthe Ottomans] will be captured." The texts concerning Shah Isma'l | and Shah Tahmasp I are taken from the Mir‘at al-Adwar wa Mirgat al-Ahbar (Mirror of Periods and Staircase of Accounts) of Muslih al-Din Lari (d 1572), who composed a universal history in Persian, among other works 38 It appears that whoever altered the preface either failed to thoroughly review the entire text or intention- ally left conflicting accounts. On the one hand, the in- troduction expresses a hope for success against the Safavids; on the other hand, the brief narratives sur- rounding the portrait medallion of Shah Muhammad Khudabanda voice hope for success against the Otto- mans. The sudden change in the introduction was per- haps aimed to suit a possible Ottoman audience, When Juxtaposed with the unaltered texts in the rest of the manuscript, the altered introduction may further em- phasize the Ottoman attempt to dominate the Safavids With its curious provenance and confused text, the An~ kara 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 silsilandma found in the former. As mentioned above, the introductory prose section and the biographies of biblical prophets surrounding the portrait medallionsin the Ottoman Turkish genealogies are taken almost ver- ‘MELIS TANER nui: Fig 10. The Prophet and his deputy and son-in-law ‘Ali to- gether with the Archangel Gabriel, detail, From Cem'i Tart, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 7b. (Photo: Melis Taner) batim from the version attested in the Ankara manu- script, with only the verbs changed from Persian to ‘Turkish, The introduction in the Ottoman Turkish texts, however, lacks any mention of Imam ‘Alias the deputy of the prophet. This is not surprising, as the genealogies in Ottoman Turkish highlight the Sunni Ottoman dy- nasty. In the Ankara manuscript, ‘Ali is given further distinction by his placement alongside the Prophet Mu- hammad and Archangel Gabriel (fig. 0). Furthermore, the portraits of the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs are missing in the Ankara manuscript, whereas in most of the illustrated Ottoman Turkish genealogies the Proph- et Muhammad is portrayed together with the four ca- liphs (fig. nae). Remarkably, however, none of the Ottoman Turkish silsilandmas include the invocation of success againstFig. ua, The Prophet with the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. From LACMA M85~237-36, fol. 6b, the Safavids that is presentin the Ankara manuscript. In the Ottoman Turkish copies, the encomiastic title ‘the ruler ofthe auspicious conjunction ofthe time, the prod- uct of the world, undaunted against the enemy of the sword of the prophet" is reserved for Siileyman 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 (surkhsaran) is missing in all of the Turkish translations, and the text FFig ub, The Prophet with the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. 1597; from CBL T. MS 423, fol, ab. (Photo: The Trustees of the Chester Beatty Library) 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 to the fish in the sea."5* ‘The addition of the name of Shah Ahmed, his descrip- tion as the “friend of the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs* (muhibb-i Chahér Yar), as well as the invocation of vie- tory against the Qizilbash, are potent modifications in an otherwise pro-Safavid manuscript. It is most likely158 MELIS TANER Fig. ud. The Prophet with the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. 1597, from TPML H. 1324, fol. 3b.AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS 158 Fig. ue, The Prophet with the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. that this alteration was made early in the life of the man- ‘script during the reign of the Ottoman ruler Ahmed I. A similar appeal for success against the Qizilbash ap- pears in contemporary Ottoman texts, reflecting recur rent tensions between the two rival neighbors in the carly seventeenth century. One example can be found in the Bahdriyye (Spring Ode) of Ca‘fer Efendi (4. after 1623), the biographer of the architect Mehmed Aga, The gasida praising the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed is embed- ded in the text of Ca‘fer Efendi's Risdle-i Mmariye (Treatise on Architecture), an early seventeenth-centu- ayarchitectural treatise that also provides the biography ofthe architect. The treatise was written in 1614/15, when the dome of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed was complet- ed. The gasida provides an ekphrastic description of the ‘mosque, likening parts of the mosque to spring flowers and vegetation. Finally, the gasida praises “the victori- ous shah and sovereign sultan, Ahmed Khan,"*” and ends with an invocation of success against the “Shah of the Heretics, saying: From TPML A. 3uo, fol. sb. (0 God, bless him with long life like the Prophet Hizs! Make the all-knowing saint the companion of that Sultan! ‘Overwhelm his enemies with torment and subjucation! 0 Irresistible One, give not importance to his enemies! Lt the Shah ofthe Heretics be perpetually powesless before ‘im! Let the infidels groan under the blows of his [Ahmed Khan's] sword! Lot him be triumphant and victorious, and a vanguisher and ataker of spoils ™ Similar wordingis used in Mustafa Sais rendering of the chief architect Sinan's (1588) autobiography. In prais- ing the reigning sultan Murad III (r. 1574-95), Mustafa Sali concentrates on the sultan’s easter conquests and. his victories against the Safavids; he wnites: [He] imprisoned him in his squate and checkmated him, ‘One ofhis army columns conquered the domainsofShirvan, ‘The lion cut Van off rom the enemy. [The cha] suffered the blow of the Rumi He deemed it the claw of an iron dog. ‘Think not that he lost (but) Kare and Yerevan!160 He lost hi goods. He lost his fe ‘While the shab] was sovereign of the world, alas, They [the Ottomans] made his crown too tight forhis head. Those who blaspheme the Friends are hypocrites. [They] deserve whatever suffering is inflicted on them. Long live the sultan, refuge ofthe world! May the celestial sphere be to him aa imperial tent? ‘These wishes for success against the Safavid shah hint at the prevalent mood in Baghdad. Slightly over a decade after the peace of1590, hostilities between the Ottomans and Safavids broke out anew, especially between 1603 and 1607 and then again after 1612, The date of 1606/7 conesponds to the precarious aftermath of these con- flicts, when the Celali rebels occupied Baghdad. ‘THE ANKARA MANUSCRIPT AND ITS PAINTINGS In addition to its curious provenance, the Ankara manu- script is remarkable in terms ofits composition and ico- ography. Whereas most silsilanamas provide 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 Qisas al-Anbiya (Stories of the Prophets) or the Shahndma (The Book of Kings) 4° 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.8).On the lower right, Cain, dressed in an animal-skin garment, lifts a rock to strike Abel, who has already fallen (fig. 9). Inthe distance, wo goats watch the scene behind green hills. The reason for Abel's murderis jealousy, as implied in the laconic account given in the text: Fire took Abel's sacrifice and Cain struck Abel in the head with a rock."*! ‘The text continues: ‘Eve parted herself from Cain. Abel hhad many sons. They resided in Yemen and Aden and built fire-houses/temples, And Idris [Enoch] fought with them, The offspring of Cain reached forty thousand." The cursory text assumes a familiarity with the sto- ries of the prophets in the Hebrew Bible. Similarly, the narrative nature of the images hints at visual links be- tween this silslandma and other illustrated works such asthe Qisas al-Anbiya, Hadikati’s Si‘eda (Garden of the ‘MELIS TANER Fig. a2, Gayumars, detail, From Com“é Tarih, Ankara, Mu- seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol 3b. (Photo: Melis Taner) Blessed), or the Shaknama. Sharing the same page as ‘Adam and his sons is a painting of Gayumars, the leg- cenday first king of ran, and the first earthly ruler. Ga- yumars is frequently portrayed inilustrated Shahnamas ‘dressed in animal skin, Here too he is dressed in animal skin, but unlike the iconic images of Gayumars found in other illustrated genealogies, the Ankara silsilandma portrays Gayumars with a flock of animals and with other people who are likewise dressed in animal skin (ig. 12), ‘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 is murdered by his broth- cers, Salm and Tur (fig.13). In the painted medallion, Tur ‘can be seen grasping Iraj by the hair and slitting hisAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig. 13, Murder of Iraj, detail, From Gem Tarih, Ankara, ‘Museum of Ethnography, MS $457, fol. 4b. (Photo: Melis Taner) Fig. 14, Saleh and the camel, detail. From Cem¢ Tarih, An- kara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 4b. (Photo: Me- lis Taner) throat, while Salm seems to be pinning him down. On the same page as Irajis a painting depicting the prophet Saleh and the camel that he caused to appear from the rocks (fig. 14). 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 Fig 15. Bahram Gur, detail. From Cem‘ Tari, Ankara, Mu- seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 7a. (Photo: Melis Taner) page, the story of the prophet Eber (Hud) isrelated. The painted medallion shows the prophet standing on the right, with hands clasped before him, while the tribe of ‘Ad has been stricken with a thunderous storm. Bahram Gur, the Sasanid king whose fame is immortalizedin the Haft Paykar (Seven Beauties) of Nizami (d. 1209) and in the Shahndma of Firdawsi, is shown seated on a throne flanked by two lions (fig. 15). One of the stories in the Shahndma tells how Bahram Gur slayed two lions to gain his crown, The Ankara sifsiandima 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 Shahnama or the Qisas al-Anbaya such as Cain killing Abel, Noah andhis ark, the sacrifice of Ishmael, or the prophet Salch and the camel, some of the paintings show a closer162 Fig 16, Virgin Mary with the Infant Christ and Joseph (?), detail. From Cem" Tardh, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. sb. (Photo: Melis Taner) relationship to the text itself. For example, while itis common to depict the Infant Christ on the lap of Mary, the Ankara sisilandma includes abearded man kneeling next to the Virgin Mary and the Infant Christ (fig. 16). Renda suggests that this is the man who was crucified instead of Jesus.** Around the painting itis written that: Some of the Jews rejected him and tried to kill him. God placed bis ikeness (surat) on aJew, and they crcified him. At the age of thirty-three, by the order of God, Jesus as- cendded to the fourth heaven, And atthe end oftime, he ill return to earth, Jill the Deceal, and pray with Imam Mu- ‘bammad al- Mahdi Given the close relationship between text and image, the kneeling man may indeed be the man who was cru- cified 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 ‘MELIS TANER Fig. 17. Ishmael praying in front ofthe Ka’ba, detail. From Com‘ Tari, Ankara, Mseum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fl 3h. (Photo: Melis Taner) European-style hatin his hands is Joseph. Indeed, many of the paintings from late-sixteenth-century Baghdad include images of contemporary Europeans, anachro- nisms that also point to possible Western visual sources and interaction with Furopeans through diplomacy and trade, Another painting that shows the close relationship between text and image is that of Ishmael (Ismail) pray- ing in front of the Ka’ba (fig. 17). The grave of his father Abraham is also marked on the painting, The text notes that Ishmael went to Mecca after the death of his father and visited his grave, and the painting shows this mo- ment. The text around the painting also adds that Ish- ‘mael was given prophethood and invited to Islam people who were idolaters, some of whom converted. In addition to biblical prophets and visual links to other textual genres, the way some of the rulers areAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig 18. Atabeg Qutluq Khan and Shaykh Sadi, detail From, Cem“é Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fo sob, (Photo: Melis Taner) Fig.20. Plato, detail. From Cem‘ Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 2b. (Photo: Melis Taner) Fig 19. Mehmed If, detail. From Cem' Tarth, Ankara, Mu- seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. gb. (Photo: Melis Taner) 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 de- scriptions 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 Muzaf- farid ruler Shah Mansur (d, 1393) is represented on a dappled grey horse, looking back at a woman who is ad- dressing him. His contemporary, Khwaja ‘Ali al- Mu‘ayyad (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. Qutlug Khan Abu Bakribn Sa‘d ibn Zangi (r.1226- 59), the Salghurid atabeg, is portrayed as a young ruler seated on a throne, while a bearded man identified as Sa‘di kneels before him, presenting a book to him (fig164 18). Itisnoted that Qutlug Khan was aust ruler and that his faimess was known all around the world; that he sup ported shaykhs and men of knowledge of Shiraz, and areatly cultivated and built Shiraz; and that Sadi of Shi- raz dedicated the Gulistan (Rosegarden) to him. As per the text, the atabeg is depicted together with Sadi, The ruler, identified as ‘Osmaniyan dan Sultan Mehmed Fatih (Sultan Mehmed the Gonqueror from among the Otto- mans), is depicted together with a white-bearded man, most likely a member of the ulema, holding a book (fg. 19) 8 In addition to the biblical prophets and kings, this manuscript also includes representations of Plato (fig. 20), Pythagoras, and Nasir al-Din Tusi (d. 1274); their portraits are otherwise rarely included in illustrated ge- nealogies. As noted above, among all the rulers depicted, the Safavids are given pride of place. The members of the Safavid dynasty are al positioned centrally on the page, whereas contemporary Ottoman, Uzbek, and Mughal rulers appear to float on the left and right sides of the pages rather than following a consistent line as would have been expected, Somewhat less disorganized than the contemporary Ottoman Turkish silsilandmas, the Ankara manuscript first introduces the Safavid dynasty witha section taken from the Mirat al-Adwarwa Mirqat al-Ahbar, detailing the battle that its founder, Shah Ismail] (r.1501~24), fought against the Aqqoyuntu ruler Alvand (1. 1497-1501). It also covers Isma‘l 's conquest of Tabriz, his defeat of Murad b, Ya‘qub Aqgoyunlu (4. 3514) and Muhammad Khan Shaybani (4.1510), and his possession of ‘Iraq, Fars, and Khorasan, It ends with Isma‘ll’s defeat at Chaliran (1514) by his Ottoman rival Selim I. The text emphasizes Shah Isma‘i Is victories in the first decade of his rule, quickly passing over the de- bacle at Chaldiran before outlining the date of his birth and length of his rule. The attention paid to Isma‘il ’s vvictories against the Aqgoyuniu and the Shaybanids in ‘Tabriz and Khurasan is matched in the manuscript with the inclusion of Aqqoyunlu, Qaraqoyunlu, and Shayba- nid rulers in both portrait medallions and the introduc: tory text. These dynasties do not appear in any of the Ottoman Turkish silsiandmas. Below the text in a rectangular frame, the founder of, the Safavid dynasty is portrayed seated ona baldachined throne surrounded by attendants (fig. 21). He wears a plumed Safavid turban, His retinue too can be identified ‘MELIS TANER by their red turbans wrapped around a baton, as noted in the text above. The founder of the dynasty is distin- guished by the fact that this large rectangular painting is devoted to him rather than a smaller portrait medal- lion, Above, on the upper left of the page, there isa por- trait medallion depicting a seated ruler with a youth facing him. The youth is identified as Sultan ‘Ali Safavi, brother of Shah Isma‘l. A cryptic inscription below the medallion notes: ‘the brother of Shah Isma'il was Hay- dax-i Husayni; martyred in Shirvan."* Itis possible that the figure on the left facing the youth portrays Shaykh Haydar, the father of Isma‘il |, who was killed in Shirvan {in 488, Below this curious double portraits the portrait medallion of the Ottoman ruler Stileyman 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 Sultén Siileyman-t Ritmi, indicating that the manuscript is not addressed to an Ottoman reader. The text regarding Si lJeyman I begins with a speedy overview of his conquest of Belgrade, Baghdad, and Esztergom. I continues with a brief account of the rebel Safavid prince Alqas Mirza (4.1550), with whom Siileyman marched against Tabriz, seizing Van, Mentioned next is Sileyman I's peace trea- ty (in1555) with Shah Tahmasp I, the shath-i ‘alam (ruler of the world). Following this, the text tums to an ac- count of the Ottoman prince Bayezid, who rebelled against his father Suleyman I and sought refuge at the Safavid court. Later, he was handed over to the Otto ‘mans and executed along with five ofhis sons.** The text ends with a brief account of Sileyman I's death during the campaign at Srigetvar (1566). The next double-folio presents the three Safavid rul- cers, Tahmasp I, Isma‘il I (on folio x7b), and Muhammad Khudabanda, as well as the prince Hamza Mirza (on fo- lio 18a). They are all centrally placed on the page within lange circular medallions and linked by a blue lin (figs 22-23), These pages are decorated with gold florals sur- rounding the medallions. Their Uzbek, Ottoman, and ‘Mughal contemporaries are placed on thelleft and right, in smaller portrait medallions. The manuscript ends with a painting of Hamza Mirza hunting. His near con- temporaries, Sultan Mehmed I and the Mughal ruler Akbar (r. 1556-1608), are portrayed on either side in smaller portrait medallions. It is noteworthy that AkbarAN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Te ee Fig. at. Shaykh Haydas, Sultan “Ali Safavi (brother of Isma‘l), Sleyman I, Ismail. From Com'd Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 17a. (Photo: Melis Taner) is depicted seated on a throne on awhite elephant, pos- sibly signifying his ability to dominate wild beasts or command war elephants. Additionally, Hamza Mirza is distinguished not as an enthroned ruler-figure but as a prince hunting with falcons, Rather than serving as an iconic image, this scene sets Hamza Mirza in a specific narrative, portraying him as an active hunter prince. ‘The page with the painting of Shah Tahmasp and Shah Isma‘l has been cut in the middle and the figure of Shah Tahmasp is rubbed off (fig. 23). Interestingly, ‘Murad II's face is also rubbed off, The page was later mended with tape. What remains ofthe portrait ofShah ‘Talmasp 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 obetsance, while a fourth, dressed in or- ange, kneels before the ruler, presenting him with a pe- tition. The text surrounding this portrait medallion begins with Shah Tahmasp’s accession to the throne, his giving currency to the infallible omams and Twelver Shiism, and his destruction of the monuments of the ah «al-sunna, as mentioned previously.*? The second part of the text is devoted to his campaigns, first against the Uzbeks in Jam (in the summer of 528), and then against the padishah-i Rum, Sultan Stileymén in 1535. The text does not mention Shah Tahmasp's defeat by the Otto- ‘mans; instead, it twists the historical account to claim that it was actually the Ottomans who “went back toFig. 22. Shah Muhammad Khudabanda, Emperor Akbar, ‘Mehmed Il, Hamza Mirza. From Cem Tarih, Ankara, Mu seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fl 18a (Photo: Melis Taner) Rum out of fear of the army in whose footsteps victory follows; and peace was made afterwards."#° Shah Tahmasp's successor Shah Ismail lis portrayed enthroned in an outdoor setting; an attendant on the right holds his arrows; another holds a tray of fruits, and third attendant offershim a cup. The attendants on the right and left wear a similar blue fur cap, which is ‘wrapped with a white cloth in the middle, The text sur- rounding this portrait medallion reflects the somewhat turbulent years of the short reign of Shah Isma'il IL not- ‘MELIS TANER Fig. 23. Shah Tahmasp I, Ismail I], Murad Ill, ‘Ubaydallah Khan. From Cem Tarih, Ankara, Museum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fol. 7b, (Photo: Melis Taner) {ng 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.’ Isma‘l II's short reign was ‘marked by an increased influence of Qizilbash elements, many executions of the members of the ulama and the Ustajlu clan, and discord raised by the shab's pro-Sunni ‘inclinations ®* Not viable forthe throne on account of hisnearblind- ness, Muhammad Khudabanda, Shah Isma‘il’s brother,AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS was spared, as were Muhammad Khudabanda’s sons Hamza Mirza and ‘Abbas Mirza, The surviving members of the dynasty are represented on the facing page, on folio 18a (ig. 22). Above, Sultan Muhammad Khudaban- dais shown seated on a rug outside, wearing a gold tur- ban. Seated next to him is a young prince, also wearing a gold aigretted turban, looking at Muhammad Khuda- banda, who is identified not by his given name but by the title ashrafi ‘ali shah (The Most Exalted Shah).** Given that a larger portrait medallion is devoted to Hamza Mirza, the youth seated with Muhammad Khud- abanda is most likely this prince. While Muhammad Khudabanda is given a lofty ttle, the text surrounding the medallion is somewhat critical of his reign, during which viziers and amirs plundered the treasury and exerted taxa- tion on the populace; and great damage was done. From, the west the Rizmiyan (Ottomans) salied fort [ie., Mu- rad [IT's 1578-90 campaign]. The Qiilbash lost Tabriz and Shirvan; Turkmen and Takkalu [tribes] rebelled and were defeated Afterwards, the army of the Ottomans was defeated three times; « hundred thousand Rimniyan ‘were killed; and hopefully, with the help of God, the vest will be captured [presumably under the current ruler, Shab, “Abbas] > The beginning of Shah Muhammad Khudabanda's reign saw the resumption of war with the Ottomans, which ‘was to last until 1590. The spurious reference to the de- feat of the Ottomans in the account regarding Muham- mad Xhudabanda was apt at atime when the two rivals ‘wore at war yet again. The expression of hope forsuccess 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 in the frontiers. Created slightly later than the corpus of illustrated. genealogies produced in Baghdad, the Ankara manu- script 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 icon- ic portraits of prophets and kings in the illustrated Bagh- dad genealogies, who are depicted seated against bbolsters in a timeless plain gold background, the figures 167 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 frag- mentary genealogy presently at the Linden Museum in Stuttgart, which ends with a large portrait of Ahmed | hunting, one of his favorite activities 5” In a centrally placed medallion at the bottom of the page, the young sultan Ahmed lis depicted on horseback, with janissary guards on either side (fig. 24). While the portrayal of a sultan hunting is exceptional in this manuscript, itis also noteworthy that the figure is Ahmed [.It was during the reign of his father Mehmed II that the first illus- trated genealogies were produced and became popu- Jar $8 The Ankara and Stuttgart manuscripts show that the interest in shorter illustrated universal histories in the form of diagrammatic genealogies continued in the carly seventeenth century during the reigns of Ahmed | and Shah ‘Abbas I,a period when conflicts between the Ottomans and the Safavids were rekindled. Given the parallel transformationsin artistic and cultural realms— as well as the fact that Shah ‘Abbas I diminished the influence of the Qizilbash and instead empowered _ghulams (slaves), which can be likened to the Ottoman system of conscripted kuls—the silsilandma represents a familiar, yet subtly potent, medium forlegitimacy and supremacy. This sense of competition is heightened in the Ankara manuscript, for example, 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 high- light the Sunni Abbasid heritage and emphasize links between the early Ottomans and the Seljugs, in effect legitimizing their Sunni Ottoman rule, a point made by Gillru Necipofiu* In these genealogies the Ottoman dynasty is atthe forefront, and other contemporary dy- nasties 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168 MELIS TANER Fig. 24. Selim Il, Murad Ill, Mehmed Ill, Ahmed I. From Silsilandma, Linden-Museum, Stuttgart, (GLinden-Muscum Stuttgart; Photo: A. Drey) LA us, fol. 4b,AN ILLUSTRATED GENEALOGY BETWEEN THE OTTOMANS AND THE SAFAVIDS Fig.25. Abu Muslim, detail. From Cem! Tarih, Ankara, Mu seum of Ethnography, MS 8457, fo. 8a, (Photo: Melis Taner) dynasties such as the Injus, Muzaffarids, Aqqoyuntu, Qaragoyunlu, 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 certi- fication and authentication, These short but heavily il Iustrated manuscripts attest to the popularity of summary universal histories that construct links be- tween religious and historical personages; they also help ‘us understand relations between the court and the prov- inces. The intended audience of the Ankara silsilanama is still an unanswered question. It is unlikely to be a royal Safavid commission, as the manuscript contains a medallion depicting Abu Muslim (4.755) (fig.25), whose ritual cursing was sanctioned during the reign of Shah “Abbas 1 Itis clear, however, that the work was not an Ottoman commission, either. While the question re- mains open, the curious provenance of the manuscript does indicate that the Baghdad market extended be- yond its Ottoman govemors. This conclusion is further strengthened by the dedication of the 1603 illustrated Mathnawi to Imam-Virdi Beg bin Alp Aslan Beg Dhu Qadr (NYPL Spencer Coll. Pers 12). In addition, the fact that there are a dozen extant illustrated genealogies at- ‘ributable to Baghdad on the basis of style shows the popularity ofthese works. Necipoglu provides a point of comparison with Mughal India, where the "emperor Ja- 168 hangir had ordered multiple copies of the Jahangir- ‘ndma (Book of Jahangir), illustrated with a frontispiece miniature depicting his accession to be prepared for dis- tribution to dignitaries and administrators."®! In terms of content, the illustrated sidsilanamas surely exemplify the courtly interest in universal dynastic histories, espe- cially the Zibdeti’-Tevarih, which also contains lines running through the pages.® However, the illustrated silsilandmas also exhibit undeniable originality in terms of their organization of painted medallions. At a certain point, the illustrated genealogies from Baghdad found their way to the Topkapt Palace Library, and it is possi- ble that these works influenced later illustrated gene- alogies that were produced at the court in Istanbulin the 16805. Like the sudden appearance of diagrammic genealo- gies following the Mongol conquest, the flourishing of illustrated genealogies in Baghdad at a time of societal instability makes a claim to Sunni Ottoman identity. In this context, the Ankara manuscript clearly stands apart and tums the genre on its head by positioning the Safa- vids as the culmination of universal history. By means of slight alterations to its text, however, the genealogy could find a new home with an Ottoman owner. Indeed, the flexibility of the Ankara manuscript is signaled by its viability on the market in Baghdad with ‘a major Shii population under Sunni Ottoman rule, where various groups could coexist and interact, their differences at times camouflaged through fear or cau- tion (tagiyya) or otherwise negotiated. This translatabil- ity is embodied in the corpus of illustrated manuscripts from turn-of-the-century Baghdad, Itis through the style ofthese manuscripts, often described as “eclectic,” that the in-betweenness of Baghdad is reflected ** The char- acterization of Baghdad as a person caught in a whirl- wind underlines this eclecticism or hybridity, which contradicts the standard courtly style. Perhaps the lim- inal identity of Baghdad should also serve to challenge ‘our definitions of what may be considered “Ottoman” or “Safavid.” NOTES 1. Seyhoglu, Kitab-« Tari Dari’s Slam Bagdad'vi Basona Gelen Afvalleri Beyan Ider fi Sene 1028 (9619), Leiden