ART IN IRAN, History of

vii. Islamic pre-Safavid

This article will present the broad history of artistic development in Iran from the Islamic conquest to the advent of the Safavids in four chronological sections. The first section will deal with the artistic heritage of the region and its effect on the formation of Islamic taste; the second will analyze trends during the formative period of the eighth to eleventh centuries; the third will consider the period of fulfillment in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries; and the final section will consider developments between the Mongol invasions and the sixteenth century. For each period the principal media considered will be: calligraphy and manuscript production, ceramics, and metalwork.

A. Heritage of the past and its influence.

Of especial importance for the development of art in Islamic Iran was the cultural and artistic legacy of the immediate past: that of the Sasanians for the western regions and that of the city states of Central Asia for the eastern ones. The Sasanian empire was noted for its production of luxurious silk fabrics, and a direct continuity probably existed between textiles produced in the Sasanian and Islamic periods (R. B. Serjeant, Islamic Textiles, Beirut, 1972, pp. 711; Christensen, Iran Sass., pp. 12627). Sasanian literature, particularly the Xwadāy-namāg, also provided a link between the two epochs. This text and other literary works served to perpetuate knowledge of pre-Islamic taste and traditions for Islamic scholars and artists (Christensen, ibid., pp. 5962).

Ruled by local princely families, the oasis cities of Khorasan and Central Asia had populations that were religiously and ethnically diverse. Local merchants, particularly the Sogdians who traveled widely dealing in silk thread and cloth, provided a link between this region and distant areas of Asia and Europe. In both its eclecticism and its enthusiasm for luxury goods, the taste of this region appears to have influenced Islamic culture.

Especially significant was an appreciation of wall painting that can be seen from the frescoes which decorated princely dwellings and sanctuaries at Panjikent and Afrāsīāb. Some paintings show links with the art of India or China (A. M. Belenizki, Mittelasien: Kunst der Sogden, Leipzig, 1980, pp. 21319). The local appreciation of figural painting may have influenced both Islamic art and literature. Islamic poets of the region often describe human beauty in terms of its similarity to the ideal of a Buddhist image. It has been suggested that this literary terminology was paralleled by the imitation of the physical traits of Buddhist images in paintings on pottery and in other media during the Islamic period (A. S. Melikian-Chirvani, “Le legs littéraire du bouddhisme iranien,” Le monde iranien et l’Islam 2, 1974, pp. 171).

B. The formative period: 8th to 11th centuries.

During these centuries, the political center of the Islamic world lay outside of Iran—at first in Arabia, then in Syria and finally in Iraq. Hence, artistic developments in Iran were often affected or even caused by trends having their origin elsewhere.

Little is known of artistic developments in Iran during the first Islamic century, but it is evident that the rise of the ʿAbbasid dynasty and the establishment of its center at Baghdad was probably of crucial importance for Iran. During the 3rd/9th and 4th/10th centuries the cultural influence of Baghdad was felt in various regions of Iran.

In western Iran, the cultural dominance of Baghdad was of even longer duration. Indeed, despite the political and military ascendancy of the Buyid dynasty (320-450/932-1062) over the caliphate, western Iran does not appear to have acquired an independent artistic identity before the late eleventh century when Isfahan became the center of the Saljuq empire.

The origins of a distinctive Iranian Islamic culture are to be sought in eastern Iran, particularly Khorasan. During the Islamic conquest the indigenous population had been augmented by Arab settlers. From this mixture of Arab and local groups arose a PersianIslamic culture in both its religious and secular manifestations. The critical role that Khorasan and the adjacent parts of Central Asia had played in the establishment of the ʿAbbasid dynasty also gave the region close ties to Iraq. Even when ʿAbbasid political control over the region declined with the establishment of strong local rulers under the Taherids (206-60/821-73) and Samanids (204-395/819-1005), cultural links to Iraq remained significant. At the same time, however, these dynasties and their successors, the Ghaznavids (367-582/977-1186) also encouraged the development of local traditions. In its formative stages, therefore, the art of eastern Iran combines features reflecting the taste of the ʿAbbasid capital with those of local origin.

1. The introduction of the Arabic language and alphabet. One of the fundamental changes brought by Islam was the introduction of the Arabic language and of the script in which it was written. At the present time it is difficult to separate the history of Iranian calligraphy from that of Iraq. The development of calligraphy in the Islamic world is often linked to innovations made by scribes in government employ. Thus, scripts created by scribes working at the Omayyad court in Damascus (1st/7th-2nd/8th centuries) are probably the basis of the script known as kūfī that was widely used for Koranic manuscripts and monumental epigraphy in the Islamic world, including Iran (A. Grohmann, Arabische Paläographie II, Vienna, 1971, p. 7192).

During the ninth to eleventh centuries, scribes working in Iraq developed a number of cursive hands for use in government correspondence and in the copying of manuscripts. Although the evolution of these scripts was probably gradual, their formalization is traditionally associated with two ʿAbbasid calligraphers: Ebn Moqla (272328/885940) and Ebn al-Bawwāb (d. 413/1022). The latter calligrapher also served the Buyid ruler of Shiraz Bahāʾ-al-dawla, so that it would be logical to expect strong Iraqi influence among western Iranian scribes (D. S. Rice, The Unique Ibn al-Bawwab Manuscript in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, 1955, pp. 5, 78). Unfortunately the absence of dated and localized manuscripts hinders the investigation of this question.

A particular development, probably centered in eastern Iran and Central Asia, was the adaptation of the kūfī script for copying manuscripts other than the Koran. An early example of this combination is seen in a manuscript on the biographies of grammarians written by ʿAlī b. Šāḏān Rāzī in 367/986 (N. Abbott, “Arabic Paleography,” Ars Islamica 8, 1941, p. 82).

During the course of the eleventh century a script known as “Eastern Kūfī” that combines angular and curvilinear features became popular in eastern Iran and Afghanistan, where it was used extensively for the copying of Korans. This script is characterized by extremely elongated vertical letters that are contrasted with strongly curving letter terminals (M. Lings, The Quranic Art of Calligraphy and Illumination, London, 1976, nos. 1119).

Although eastern Iran thus appears to have developed its own style of calligraphy, the region was, in other respects, closely tied to intellectual currents of Iraq. During the late eighth and early ninth centuries scholars working in Iraq translated into Arabic a number of texts in Greek, Pahlavi, and other languages. Subsequently, revisions or translations of these texts were produced in eastern Iran and Central Asia. The De Materia Medica of Dioscurides translated in Iraq by Ḥosayn b. Esḥāq was revised by the Khorasani scholar Natīlī who prepared an illustrated copy of the text in 990-991 for a Samanid notable. A copy of this version made in 1083 is preserved in Leiden (M. M. Sadek, The Arabic Materia Medica of Dioscuride, Quebec, 1983, pp. 11-13, 15). Ebn al-Moqaffaʿ’s Arabic translation of Kalīla wa Demna was translated into Persian and illustrated for a Samanid amir (T. W. Arnold, Painting in Islam, Oxford, 1928, pp. 2526).

2. Ceramics during the formative period. The degree of artistic attention accorded to ceramics in Islamic art is one of its distinguishing features, and those of Islamic Iran are noted for the variety of their techniques of decoration and for their colorful glazes. During both the Sasanian and Omayyad periods ceramics appear to have served only utilitarian purposes. It is probable that the diversification of ceramic wares associated with Islamic Iran arose only in the ʿAbbasid period. Two factors have been suggested to account for the variety and quality of ceramics in Islamic Iran: religious scruples against the use of vessels made of precious metals, and a new consciousness, created by an acquaintance with Chinese vessels, of the decorative potential of ceramic wares (A. Lane, Early Islamic Pottery, London, 1947, pp. 10-11). Although religious concerns may indeed have been a catalyst for the development of Islamic ceramics, several features of those vessels suggest that Chinese models were influential in determining the course of that evolution.

a. The influence of China and Iraq. Ceramic finds from Sīrāf, a port on the Persian Gulf, demonstrate that by the year 184/800 trade links with China were well established (D. Whitehouse, “Chinese Stoneware from Siraf: the Earliest Finds,” in South Asian Archaeology, ed. N. Hammond, London, 1973, pp. 250-53). Texts mention gifts of Chinese porcelain to the caliph Hārūn al-Rašīd (r. 170-194/786-809) and indicate that already by his time Chinese vessels had acquired a reputation of excellence that was tinged with elements of magic—they were said to reveal the presence of poisons or provide a glimpse of the future (P. Kahle, “Chinese Porcelain in the Lands of Islam,” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society, 1940-41, pp. 27-46). Fragments of Chinese ceramic vessels have been recovered in the excavations of a number of important Islamic sites in Iran, but the evidence from Sīrāf is the most detailed. The earliest arrivals appear to have been glazed stoneware storage vessels that were imported along with their contents. These were followed by painted stoneware and later by green and white wares some of which were decorated with irregular splashes of color (Whitehouse, op. cit., pp. 244-50).

Sometime during the ninth century the importation and appreciation of Chinese ceramics gave rise to their imitation. Iraq seems to have played a crucial role in the creation of these new types of Islamic ceramics. The most popular vessel type was a shallow bowl with a white glazed surface. Although similar in shape to Chinese vessels, the Islamic ones differed in both technique and decoration. In place of the clear glazes and porcelaineous body found in Chinese vessels, Islamic potters used an opaque white glaze over an earthenware body. They also usually added painted decoration in various colors, blue and green being the most popular (Lane, op. cit., pp. 1014).

Another important innovation of the ʿAbbasid era was the use of luster-painting over a surface covered with an opaque glaze. The exact place and date where this technique originated is still unknown—some would place it in Iraq, specifically Baghdad, while others would connect it with Egypt and link it to techniques of glass production in that region (Lane, op. cit., pp. 1416). Wherever or however it originated, luster-painted ceramics became the hallmark of Islamic taste. Potters in ninth and tenth-century Iraq used both abstract decorative schemes and figural designs. Iraqi luster vessels were widely exported and have been found at various Iranian sites.

A third type of ceramics popular in the ʿAbbasid period, known as “splash ware,” has often been ascribed to Chinese influence. This category includes several different decorative schemes. Sometimes the decoration consists merely of spots or dashes of green, yellow or brown applied under a clear glaze. In other examples a design is also incised into the vessel’s fabric. Vessels with both dotted and incised designs were excavated in Iraq at Samarra and therefore assumed to be of tenth-century date. The Samarra finds also included fragments of Chinese vessels decorated with similar colors and it has been widely believed that Near Eastern “splash ware” was created under Chinese inspiration (Lane, op. cit., p. 12; Whitehouse, “Islamic Glazed Pottery in Iraq and the Persian Gulf: the Ninth and Tenth Centuries,” Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 39, [N.S. 29], 1979, pp. 4950). Excavations in both China and the Near East (Sīrāf, Susa, Taḵt-e Solaymān [Takht-i Sulaiman], and Laškarī Bāzār) have cast doubt on these assumptions. The Chinese ware long assumed to be the prototype of the Islamic vessels appears to have been primarily a funerary ware and its production diminished sharply after the middle of the eighth century whereas finds from Sīrāf, Susa, Taḵte Solaymān and Laškarī Bāzār suggest that “splash ware” using spots of color was an indigenous Near Eastern type that became popular during the tenth century. The use of incised patterns began later, probably during the eleventh century, and may have remained in use into the twelfth century. This ware may have been developed in Iraq and spread from there to other centers (Y. Crowe, “Early Islamic Pottery and China,” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society 41, 1975-77, pp. 268-71; Whitehouse, op. cit., pp. 50-52, 54, 56; J. C. Gardin, Céramiques et monnaies de Lashkari Bazar et de Bust. Lashkari Bazar II: Les trouvailles, Paris, 1963, pp. 133-44).

b. Iranian ceramics in the formative period. The earliest Islamic ceramics from western Iranian sites such as Sīrāf, Susa, and Eṣṭaḵr closely resemble those excavated at Samarra. The influence of Iraq was strong in eastern Iran as well, and glazed ceramics appear to have been introduced there only in the ʿAbbasid period. Most clearly connected to Iraqi models are the bowls with an opaque white glaze. Some appear to copy designs from Iraqi vessels decorated in cobalt blue. Also linked to Iraqi taste is the widespread use of green, yellow, and brown decoration with and without incised patterns. Although during the ninth and tenth centuries the use of the luster-painting technique appears to have been confined to Iraq, Iranian potters copied the designs used on luster vessels in other techniques (C. Wilkinson, Nishapur: Pottery of the Early Islamic Period, Greenwich, 1973, pp. 5458, 17982). How and when luster painting was introduced to Iran is uncertain, but by the twelfth century it was being produced in the city of Kāšān (see below).

A more distinctive local tradition is evident, however, from sites in eastern Iran, Transoxiana, and Afghanistan. These areas appear to have used similar ceramic vessels. Best known are wares from Nīšāpūr [Nishapur], where several different types of ceramics were in use simultaneously. One type having figural decoration in yellow, green, and black over a buff colored ground is known principally from Nīšāpūr, although it may have links to a pre-Islamic decorative tradition (Wilkinson, op. cit., pp. 3-53). Another, using slips of various hues, had a wide distribution. It has been found from Marv and Samarkand in Transoxiana to Bāmīān and Laškarī Bāzār in Afghanistan (Wilkinson, op. cit., pp. 90-178; Gardin, Céramiques, pp. 55-100). These pieces have a wide variety of decorative themes with calligraphy and vegetal motifs being among the most striking. Where legible, the calligraphy contains moralistic texts in Arabic, a reminder of the importance of Arabic for the culture of eastern Iran (L. Volov, “The Plaited Kufic on Samanid Epigraphic Pottery,” Ars Orientalis 6, 1966, pp. 107-33).

The exact chronology of the use of these various ceramic types is not yet clear, but those imitating Iraqi wares are probably mainly of ninth or tenth-century date. Excavations suggest that slip-painted vessels were produced primarily in the eleventh century, while “splashware” using incised patterns along with green, yellow, and brown decoration was probably produced during the eleventh or twelfth centuries.

c. The metalwork of the formative period. Metal, particularly bronze or brass, was used in the Islamic period to fashion objects that served a wide variety of utilitarian purposes: cooking, lighting, and the storage of personal effects. Most utilitarian objects were undecorated and had standard shapes. Distinct fashions are discernible, however, in the shaping and decoration of a select group of metal objects. These often have inscriptions, either incised or inlaid, as well as geometric, vegetal, or figural decoration. The act of writing was elevated by the use of decorated inkwells and pen boxes. Other objects must have been used primarily on festive or ceremonial occasions: bottles, cups, ewers, basins, trays, candlesticks, and incense burners. A number of important pieces from the twelfth to fifteenth centuries are known, but for the earlier centuries dated pieces are few and their place of production is usually uncertain, making it difficult to reconstruct the beginnings of metalworking in Islamic Iran.

Silver vessels of the Sasanian period established a tradition of royal imagery focusing on the ruler as hunter or enthroned with his entourage (P. Harper, Silver Vessels of the Sasanian Period I: The Royal Imagery, New York, 1981, pp. 4-42, 57-72). Utilitarian objects such as ewers were probably made from various metals; surviving examples are in both silver and bronze. Ewers of the Islamic period sometimes show affinities of shape with those of the Sasanian period but their decorative schemes differ.

The Islamic world had a double attitude toward metalwork objects. On the one hand religious scruples could lead to the avoidance of vessels made from precious metals. On the other hand both surviving objects and literary sources indicate that vessels of precious metal continued to be made and used (J. Allan, “Silver: the Key to Bronze in Early Islamic Iran,” Kunst des Orients 11, 1976, pp. 13-21). Despite this ambiguity it is true that Islamic metalworkers devoted considerable attention to the fabrication and decoration of vessels in less precious materials. In particular, alloys were created that mimicked the appearance of silver. Also, bronze and brass were embellished through creation of relief patterns, or small areas of the vessel’s surface were inlaid with silver or copper (E. Baer, Metalwork in Islamic Art, Albany, 1983, pp. 283-85).

For understanding the metalworking of Islamic Iran, vessels from Central Asia, particularly from its cities, are of critical importance. Studies of these objects by Soviet scholars have demonstrated how metalworking in that region reflected the cosmopolitan culture of its inhabitants. Because of the farflung ties of Sogdian merchants, links can be established between Sogdian vessels and those of Byzantium and China. After the Islamic conquest, Sogdian metalworkers produced vessels for their Muslim rulers. Consequently there is a direct continuity between the pre-Islamic and Islamic traditions of metalworking in eastern Iran (B. I. Marshak, Sogdiĭskoe serebro, Moscow, 1971, pp. 150-55). Studies by V. H. Marshak and A. S. Melikian-Chirvani have demonstrated the principal areas of continuity in vessel shape, decorative techniques, and decorative repertoire. Some of the most distinctive Sogdian vessels are lobed cups and bowls decorated with gracefully stylized foliage and figures of recumbent animals. The impact of these vessels can be seen in the shaping of cups and in the decoration of both ewers and drinking vessels. Some of these cups, manufactured of hightin bronze, provide close analogies in form to those of the Sogdian vessels. Drinking vessels of this material are mentioned as a product of Transoxiana by the tenth-century geographer Moqaddasī. The popularity of hightin bronze during the ninth and tenth centuries has been explained as a reflection of prohibitions against the use of gold and silver vessels introduced to Iraq under al-Ḥajjāj (A. Melikian-Chirvani, “The White Bronzes of Early Islamic Iran,” Metropolitan Museum Journal 9, 1974, pp. 123-26).

The misgivings of the religiously inclined, however, did not eliminate the creation of vessels from precious materials. Although relatively few objects made from gold or silver have survived, a surprising number of such vessels probably date from the tenth or eleventh centuries. Among them is the gold pitcher in the Freer Gallery, Washington (F. G. A., 43.1), bearing an inscription in the name of the Buyid ʿEzz-al-dawla Baḵtīār b. Moʿezz-al-dawla Aḥmad (r. 356-367/967-978). Aside from the inscription around the vessel’s rim, the lower part of the body has linked roundels of single figures of animals or birds. In general design this object has clear affinities with the Sogdian tradition (Allan in Kunst des Orients 11, 1976, pp. 13-21 ).

Sogdian metalworkers also seem to have forged connections between the Sasanian and Islamic traditions of royal iconography. The studies of B. V. Marshak have demonstrated that certain objects containing royal depictions clearly derived from Sasanian models, are of Central Asian manufacture and date from the eighth or ninth centuries. These pieces can, in turn, be linked to later representations of rulers from the Buyid and Ghaznavid eras demonstrating how Central Asia served to link the pre-Islamic and Islamic traditions of the region (B. I. Marshak, op. cit., pp. 146-48).

Despite the considerable share Sogdian craftsmen had in the development of Islamic metalwork, some evidence remains concerning the survival of Sasanian traditions as well. Islamic authors mention that portraits of Sasanian rulers were used not only on coins but also on various types of textiles and even in manuscript illumination. Royal portraiture was not extensively used by the ʿAbbasids, but medals were struck bearing the likenesses of some ʿAbbasid caliphs. In some cases these images clearly follow Sasanian models. A similar pattern exists for the Buyids. Particularly noteworthy is a medal struck for ʿAżodaldawla where the analogies to Sasanian portraiture are striking in both image and titles (J. Sourdel-Thomine et al., Die Kunst des Islam, Berlin, 1973, no. 203, pp. 226-27).

A medal in the Freer Gallery has also been associated with the Buyids by M. Bahrami (“A Gold Medal in the Freer Gallery,” in Archaeologia Orientalia in Memoriam Ernst Herzfeld, New York, 1952, pp. 520). The proof of this connection has yet to be established.

C. Iranian Art: 12th-13th centuries.

During this period the art of medieval Iran reached a climax in both the quality and diversity of the objects produced. In contrast to the earlier Islamic period, the twelfth and thirteenth centuries witnessed artistic activity in most regions of Iran, and many of the innovations appear to be of local rather than foreign origin. There was some regional specialization: eastern Iran continued its dominance in metalworking, whereas ceramic production flourished in central and western Iran.

1. Islamic Iranian metalwork in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The region of Khorasan, particularly the city of Herat, was the creative center for metalworking, and this period brought new tendencies. They include a shift in body type as well as in decorative technique and repertoire. A number of new shapes appeared: ewers with fluted bodies, candlesticks with protruding bosses, and inkwells with domed lids. A preference for more complex shapes may have stimulated a shift from creating vessels in molds to their production by beating (Allan in Kunst des Orients 11, pp. 6-13). Chief among the decorative innovations was the wide use of inlaying in silver, copper, and gold. Grooves were cut into the vessel’s surface and thin sheets of metal were placed within the resulting depressions. Normally, silver was used both to provide the key elements of the decoration, whereas copper and occasionally gold were used to create highlights (J. Allan, Islamic Metalwork: The Nuhad Es-Said Collection, London, 1982, pp. 13-16, 32-53; A. Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, London, 1982, pp. 54-135).

New decorative themes also came into prominence. These include bands with groups of revelers or animal files and medallions containing symbols of the planets and zodiacal constellations. Some objects combine these various elements (Baer, Metalwork in Islamic Art, pp. 291-93). An example of the inlaid decoration used on Khorasani metalwork can be seen on a cast brass bowl inlaid with silver known as the “Wade Cup” (now in the Cleveland Museum of Art). Studies by D. S. Rice and R. Ettinghausen have explored the significance of the decorative scheme that covers most of the vessel’s surface. On the exterior, the vessel’s rim and foot are demarcated by inscriptions. The upper one in animated script has human figures projecting from its letter shafts, figures that interact in a manner quite independent of the inscription’s content. The lower inscription is “human-headed:” it has vertically elongated letter shafts with human faces. Between these inscriptions is a zone crisscrossed by bands of running animals. In between those bands are cartouches containing symbols of the planets and of the zodiacal constellations with which they are associated. One could say that the placing of zodiacal and constellation images on the vessel’s exterior draws an analogy between the object and a heavenly sphere. That theme is also alluded to by various concentric patterns on the interior including intertwined sphinxes, fish, and radial motifs (D. S. Rice, The Wade Cup in the Cleveland Museum of Art, Paris, 1955; R. Ettinghausen, “The Wade Cup,” Ars Orientalis 2, 1957, pp. 329-66, figs. 1, 2). Sometimes the theme of zodiacal and planetary imagery is used on vessels of twelvelobed shape where each lobe can be equated with one segment of the zodiacal belt. This scheme is especially popular on a group of ewers of beaten brass. On a well-preserved example in the Nuhad al-Said collection the decoration also includes human-headed inscriptions at the top and bottom of the vessel’s sides and figures of lions in sculptural relief on the neck and spout. (Allan, Islamic Metalwork, pp. 46-53). The comparison of a vessel to celestial phenomena is made explicit in the verses inscribed on a ewer made in Herat in 577/1181 (now in the Georgian State Museum, Tiflis). In these verses the planetary decoration of the vessel is invoked as a protection for the vessel’s maker as well as for its future owners and users (Allan, op. cit., pp. 49-53).

The seminal influence of the Khorasani tradition on the subsequent development of metalwork is evident in objects attributed to both western Iran and northern Iraq. A series of ewers and candlesticks attributed to western Iran in the late thirteenth century mimic the shapes and decorative themes of those produced in Khorasan some decades earlier. Among them are candlesticks with projecting bosses on their bodies and ewers having felines in relief on their necks and spouts. On such ewers astrological imagery is also popular. Another continuity with objects from Khorasan is in the use of animated inscriptions and of human-headed letters. These similarities may derive from the influence of Khorasanian objects or from the migration of metalworking artisans displaced by the Mongol invasions of the early thirteenth century (Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork, pp. 136-147).

Another significant factor in the development of metalwork in western Iran during the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries was the style of objects produced in northern Iraq at Mosul (Mawṣel). Objects from Mosul, in turn, often show affinities with the Khorasani tradition. Artisans working in Mosul often used shapes of local origin in combination with decorative themes and techniques previously used by Khorasani craftsmen. The practice of inlaying beaten or molded brass with silver, copper, or gold popular in Khorasan since the twelfth century appears to have been used in Mosul only during the thirteenth century. Decorative themes used both in Mosul and Khorasan include animal files, scenes of hunting and court entertainment as well as depictions of the planets and the zodiacal constellations (Baer, Metalwork in Medieval Islamic Art, pp. 293-95).

Mosul metalwork is, however, unusual for its extensive pictorial repertoire. New emphasis is given to activities of the ruler and his close associates. Royal audiences and processions, court entertainments, and hunting expeditions are all depicted. Also used are some scenes of agriculture and other images of everyday life. This expanded repertoire of Mosul metalworkers may indicate that the craftsmen were familiar with the themes used by book illustrators. Certainly many of the themes and compositions found on Mosul metalwork have close parallels in the illustration of both contemporary and later manuscripts. Similar themes appear on the frontispieces of a copy of a Ketāb alaḡānī manuscript inscribed with the name and titles of Badraldīn Loʾloʾ, the ruler of Mosul between 1231 and 1259 (D. S. Rice, “The Aghani Miniatures and Religious Painting in Islam,” Burlington Magazine 95, 1953, pp. 128-34).

2. Ceramics: twelfth to thirteenth centuries. During this period a dramatic shift occurred in ceramic production. Whereas previously artistic activity was centered in eastern Iran, during this period the western and central regions were the most vigorous. The city of Kāšān, in particular, produced a large volume of ceramics in a wide range of techniques. Furthermore, whereas in earlier centuries the influence of Iraq was of paramount importance, the changes of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries may have been largely of local inspiration. The most significant innovation for ceramics was the widespread use of a body composed largely of finely ground quartz fritted with borax. These materials made the ceramic body less malleable and stimulated the development of molds both to give the basic contours of the vessels and to provide decorative embellishments. Molds discovered at Nīšāpūr created figural relief decoration on the vessel’s body. Similar molded vessels have been found in various Central Asian centers (Wilkinson, Nishapur, pp. 259-87). The motives behind this technological shift have been debated. Its use has been linked with a desire to emulate the appearance of Chinese porcelain, and some objects made from it do imitate the shapes of Chinese vessels (Lane, Early Islamic Pottery, pp. 29-32). For the most part, however, Islamic potters used this material to create objects not reflective of Chinese taste. When properly prepared, this type of body is nearly white, and, therefore, a good surface for painted decoration. Underglaze painting was widely employed by Iranian potters, especially in Kāšān. Alkaline fluxed glazes are most appropriate to this body, and with them Iranian ceramics acquired a new palette: turquoise, dark blue and purple. Although this body type was not employed everywhere to the exclusion of the clay bodies previously used, it did become the chief medium for ceramic innovation and experimentation (Lane, Early Islamic Pottery, pp. 33-36).

Excavations at Sīrāf, Laškarī Bāzār, and Nīšāpūr suggest that this new body type came into use gradually during the late eleventh or twelfth century. At those sites it replaced the polychrome lead-glazed earthenware previously used. Although elaborate molds found at Nīšāpūr demonstrate that this alkaline-glazed ware was produced there, vessels excavated at the site suggest that its introduction coincided with a general decline in ceramic quality (Wilkinson, Nishapur, pp. 262-63). A similar diminution in quality has been noted in alkaline-glazed ceramics from Laškarī Bāzār and Sīrāf (Whitehouse, “Islamic Glazed Pottery,” pp. 12, 14; Gardin,Céramique et monnaies de Lashkari Bazar, pp. 105-10, 138). At Kāšān, however, this material was used to create both architectural revetments and tableware, and these objects were decorated with underglaze, overglaze, and luster painting (R. Ettinghausen, “Evidence for the Identification of Kashan Pottery,” Ars Islamica 3, 1936, pp. 44-70).

The potters of Kāšān were exceptionally skillful in exploiting the technical and decorative possibilities of this new ceramic technique. That city was wellendowed with the raw materials needed for its fabrication. Indeed, Kāšān merchants exercised a virtual monopoly on the sale of cobalt ore, a popular colorant in alkaline glaze. It is uncertain when Kāšān first began to produce ceramics, but signed and dated objects demonstrate that this center was active from the late twelfth to midfourteenth century and production probably continued on a reduced level until the fifteenth century (O. Watson, “Persian Lustre Ware from the 14th to the 19th Century,” Le monde iranien et l’Islam 3, pp. 65-80). It was particularly during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, however, that Kāšān appears to have dominated ceramic production in Iran. During this period Kāšān potters produced a great variety of ceramics simultaneously. We know this both from a large number of objects that have directly or indirectly been connected with that site, and from the treatise on ceramic production written by a member of the major ceramic-producing family in that region—Abuʾl-Qāsem Kāšī. His treatise written in the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century refers both to contemporary and past practices of the atelier (J. Allan, “Abu’l Qasim’s Treatise on Ceramics,” Iran 11, 1973, pp. 111-20).

The Kāšān workshop was most famous for its ceramic revetments—meḥrābs and wall tiles with luster and underglaze-painted decoration. These objects were widely used for architectural embellishment in both sacred and secular structures. Many examples of luster-painted tableware were also produced there, as well as an even larger volume of underglaze-painted wares. Both the architectural revetments and many of these objects were formed in molds, so that standard sizes existed. There is also considerable repetition in the patterns used to decorate both the tiles and the vessels. Inscriptions, arabesque festoons, and other foliage patterns are ubiquitous. Many objects and tiles also have depictions of human or animal figures (Ettinghausen, “Kashan Pottery,” pp. 44-70).

The most elaborate form of ceramic decoration used in twelfth and thirteenth-century Iran combined under and overglaze painting. Often described in modern publications as mīnāī, this ware’s original name was probably haftrangī or “sevencolor.” It was used primarily for tableware and often for relatively small vessels, particularly bowls and drinking cups. Some of the best known pieces of this type are signed by a craftsman known to have worked in Kāšān, and indeed that city was probably the main production center for such vessels (O. Watson, “Persian Lustre-painted Pottery: the Rayy and Kashan Styles,” Transactions of the Oriental Ceramic Society 40, 1973-75, pp. 1-20). A few of these vessels have decoration that reflects themes popular in Iranian literature: the heroism of Ferīdūn, the hunts of Bahrām Gūr, or the story of Bīžan and Manīža. One large plate in the Freer Gallery probably commemorates the exploits of a contemporary military leader (Lane, Early Islamic Pottery, pp. 41-43).

Dated pieces demonstrate that the Kāšān workshop continued to flourish even after the Mongol period (Ettinghausen, “Kashan Pottery,” figs. 12-21). Some adjustments were made in the decorative repertoire in order to include new motifs reflecting the themes of particular significance to Iran’s new rulers, such as Chinese dragons and floral motifs.

D. Iranian art after the Mongol conquest

1. The effects of the Mongol invasion. The Mongol invasion had a dramatic and significant impact on the course of Iranian artistic development. Some of the changes resulted from the dislocation and destruction that accompanied the conquest proper and others are connected with the cultural legacy of the Mongols themselves. The invasion came in two stages. The first began in Transoxiana and Khorasan ca. 616/1219 at a time when crafts and architecture were flourishing, and lasted until 619/1222. In the course of this phase the principal cities of eastern Iran and Central Asia were devastated and their populations decimated. This devastation effectively stifled artistic developments in that region for about 150 years—until its revival under the Timurids. The first stage also stimulated the migration of craftsmen from eastern Iran to western Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Anatolia. These new arrivals who were absorbed by the local populations had an impact on the artistic development of western Iran and Iraq during the 1230s (ca. 628-38), and of Anatolia and Syria later in the same century.

During the second stage of the Mongol conquest, led by Hülegü (Hūlāgū), control over Iran was consolidated and Baghdad captured. For Iran, this conquest was less devastating than the earlier one, and some cities were spared any serious damage. As a result, the artistic and architectural development of western Iran and Iraq flourished, at least from the late thirteenth century onward.

The Mongol conquest initiated a new phase of artistic development in Iran. Several factors affected its nature. At that time, Iraq appears to have been culturally more active than Iran, and the artistic traditions of Baghdad and Mosul were particularly influential during the later half of the thirteenth century on the development of Iranian metalwork and calligraphy. In the course of the conquest proper the Mongols often removed the artisans from conquered cities and sent them to their encampments, thereby creating court workshops. The use of such workshops forged closer ties between artistic evolution and political developments. Thus, in the Mongol period a new dual system of artistic production began. Some craftsmen were attached to the Mongol encampments, while others continued to work in the bazaars of various cities, which the Mongols may also have patronized. Mongol links to Central Asia and China also widened the cultural horizons of Iran and fostered the creation of a new hybrid culture fusing Near and Far Eastern taste. The Mongol cultural and political legacy was a major influence also on several dynasties that ruled Iran during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. From an artistic point of view the most important are the Injuids (702-55/1303-54) and Muzaffarids (714-96/1314-93) of Fārs, the Jalayerids of Iraq and Azerbaijan (737-836/1336-1432), and the Timurids (772-911/1370-1506); the latter sought to recreate the Mongol empire by uniting Iran with Iraq and Central Asia.

2. Cultural links between Iraq and Iran. The Mongols followed the lead of the previous nomadic invaders, the Saljuq Turks, in their appreciation of Azerbaijan. The earliest traces of their activity are found in areas adjacent to their encampments such as Marāḡa, Taḵt-e Solaymān, Tabrīz, and Solṭānīya. During the winters the Mongols often resided in the warmer region of Iraq. For this and other reasons new cultural bonds were forged between Iraq and western Iran. This connection was particularly important after Ghazan (Ḡāzān) Khan’s conversion to Islam in 695/1295.

Calligraphy gives the strongest evidence of continuity between the ʿAbbasid and Mongol periods. Surviving manuscripts show that the style of calligraphy associated with Yāqūt Mostaʿṣemī continued to flourish in both Iraq and Iran during the fourteenth century. A good example of this Iraqi taste is a Koran now in the British Library copied for Sultan Öljeitü (Ūljāytū) in Mosul during 713/1313 by ʿAlī b. Moḥammad Ḥosaynī (M. Lings, The Quranic Art of Calligraphy and Illumination, London, 1976, nos. 52-53, p. 119). Written in moḥaqqaq script, the manuscript has elaborate geometric frontispieces to its several volumes. Several other Korans are known that were copied in Iran or Iraq using the canon of Yāqūt during the late fourteenth or early fifteenth centuries. Textual sources also stress the debt of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century Iranian calligraphers to the canon of Yāqūt. Iraqi-trained calligraphers working in both Tabrīz and Shiraz helped to spread the popularity of Iraqi traditions. Among them was Yaḥyā Jamālī Ṣufī, who copied a Koran in Shiraz during 745/1344-45. Written in gold moḥaqqaq script, it exemplifies the disciplined Iraqi style (Lings, op. cit., no. 50, p. 102).

Another area of continuity between Iran and Iraq is in the production of inlaid metalwork. Relatively few pieces are known bearing the names and titles of the Mongol rulers themselves, but examples such as the “Nisan Tasi” now in Konya suggest that their creators were of Iraqi origin (E. Baer, “The Nisan Tasi. A Study in Persian-Mongol Metalware,” Kunst des Orients 9, 1973-74, pp. 39-46). Metalwork produced in Shiraz during the first half of the fourteenth century also shows close affinities in both shape and decoration with objects produced in Mosul (L. Komaroff, “The Timurid Phase in Iranian Metalwork: Formulation and Realization of a Style,” Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1984, pp. 31-32, 36-38). It is unclear, however, whether this link between the metalworking traditions of Mosul and Shiraz was created by the movement of craftsmen or simply through an imitation of the objects themselves.

3. The artistic legacy of the Mongols. The Mongol period was notable for stimulating links between the artistic traditions of Iran and those of China. A new Far Eastern decorative repertoire can be seen in much of the ceramics, painting, and metalwork produced in fourteenth century Iran. The dynasties that followed the Mongols in Iran also sought connections with China, and Chinese taste continued to be influential with Jalayerids and Timurids. The earliest results of Mongol artistic patronage are difficult to reconstruct. One exception is the summer residence of Abaqa Khan (q.v.; r. 664-80/1265-1281) at Taḵt-e Solaymān where important ceramic finds were made. The architectural tiles excavated at Taḵt-e Solaymān are notable both for their technical variety and their use of Far Eastern decorative motifs such as the dragon and sīmorḡ or phoenix. These designs are executed in several different techniques. Some are luster-painted, others combine glazed and unglazed portions, and still others have gilded portions (R. Naumann, Die Ruinen von Tacht-e Suleiman und Zendan-e Suleiman, Berlin, 1977, pp. 80-103). A kiln excavated at the site indicates that some of the ceramics were made there perhaps by artisans from Kāšān. Several of the decorative themes prominent at Taḵt-e Solaymān were later used extensively by the Kāšān workshop, which produced both architectural revetments and tableware in quantity during the Il-khanid period (Survey of Persian Art, pls. 727a, b, 723d).

The new cultural climate of Il-khanid Iran is also evident in their patronage of manuscripts and painting. Mongol interest in scientific questions stimulated the production of books on medicine and astronomy. Some of these manuscripts may have been produced at Marāḡa, the site of an astronomical observatory established by Hülegü, others probably were produced in Tabrīz, the Il-khanid capital under Ghazan Khan. A desire to put the Mongol achievement in a wider historical context led them to commission historical texts such as Rašīd-al-dīn’s monumental compilation, the Jāmeʿ al-tawārīḵ. Illustrated copies of that work were probably made under the direct supervision of Rašīd-al-dīn in workshops located near Tabrīz (N. Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, Austin, 1983, pp. 17-19). The Mongol period also witnessed a popularization of earlier texts such as Ferdowsī’s Šāh-nāma. Some lavishly illustrated versions such as the one formerly owned by a dealer named Demotte suggest that this epic was viewed as much as an historical as a literary work. Thus, its illustrations could be used to emphasize incidents that presented a parallel to the experience of contemporary rulers (O. Grabar and S. Blair, Epic Images and Contemporary History, Chicago, 1980, p. 13-27).

The Il-khanid period appears to establish the importance of artistic patronage as one of the attributes of a ruler. This precedent is particularly influential for the Mongols’ successor dynasties such as the Injuids, Muzaffarids, Jalayerids, and Timurids, who appear to have used the patronage of art—especially metalwork, manuscripts, and architecture—as a vehicle to enhance their own prestige.

4. Shiraz as an artistic center. It is in the Mongol period that Shiraz first became prominent as a center of artistic patronage. Amīr Šaraf al-dīn Maḥmūd Ènjū, the local Mongol governor, his descendants, and high officials were active as patrons of metalwork, illustrated manuscripts, and possibly calligraphy. The style of these objects has links to Iraqi traditions, but a distinctive local idiom is also discernible. Illustrated manuscripts were produced in Shiraz from at least 707/1307-08 onward. The earliest known text is a copy of Kalīla wa Demna executed in a distinctive style better known from a group of manuscripts dated between 731/1330 and 741/1341. These manuscripts are characterized by their strongly colored paintings and relatively crude execution. One of the latest of these manuscripts, a copy of Ferdowsī’s Šāh-nāma contains a dedication to Qawām-al-dīn Ḥasan, the vizier of Abū Esḥāq Īnjū (N. Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 35-39). It is because of this dedication that the entire series of manuscripts has been attributed to Shiraz and linked with the Injuid dynasty. It is unclear, however, to what extent these manuscripts represent the patronage of the dynasty proper and to what extent they were produced by a commercial atelier located in Shiraz. A more definitive link between the dynasty and artistic patronage occurs in metalwork. Pieces produced as early as 705/1305 are signed by Shirazi craftsmen, but the first firmly documented metalwork object is dated to 733/1332. It is a bucket (now in the Hermitage Museum) made for a certain Amīr Sīāvoš and signed by one Maḥmūd Šāh al-Šīrāzī who describes himself as the “servant of Amīr Šaraf al-dīn Īnjū” (Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, pp. 148, 155). Although this object was not made for a member of the dynasty proper it does suggest that the ruler of Shiraz maintained a metalwork atelier.

Typical of the vessels that can be associated with Shiraz during the period of Injuid rule are bowls of convex profile in which inscription panels alternated with figural medallions. The inscription panels normally contain a doʿā invoking God’s blessings on an anonymous ruler often identified as the “inheritor of Solomon’s kingdom,” a traditional title assumed by the rulers of Shiraz because of its proximity to the Achaemenid ruins of Persepolis and Pasargadae, both of which were understood to be connected with Solomon. Between the text cartouches are medallions depicting a ruler enthroned, or a rider on horseback (Melikian-Chirvani, op. cit., pp. 147, 152). It is probable that both the inscriptions and the figural medallions were intended to attest the power of the Injuid rulers. Shiraz continued to be an important artistic center under the Muzaffarid rulers during the second half of the fourteenth century. Continuity appears to be greatest in metalwork and calligraphy. Objects made in the early years of Muzaffarid rule such as the lid of the “Nisan Tasi” (now in Konya) bearing the name of Abuʾl-Mojāhed Shah Solṭān have strong links in figural and epigraphic style with objects produced under the Injuids (Melikian-Chirvani, op. cit., pp. 148-155). By the third quarter of the fourteenth century, however, a new taste is discernible. Emphasis is placed on an ornamental repertoire of geometric designs, arabesque patterns, and floral elements, whereas inscription cartouches or figural decoration decline in importance. When figural medallions are used the scale of the figures becomes smaller, and greater emphasis is given to a richly patterned floral background (Melikian-Chirvani, op. cit., nos. 95-98, pp. 209-214). Particularly characteristic is a loose, flowing design of plant motifs used on metalwork as well as manuscript illumination, even for copies of the Koran. In manuscripts, ornamental features such as chapter headings and frontispieces are elaborated. The style of the calligraphy proper, however, retains its close connection with the canon favored by Yāqūt and his followers (Lings, The Quranic Art of Calligraphy, no. 60, p. 119).

A further stylistic transformation is also evident in manuscript illustration of the Muzaffarid period, where a new canon of proportion is used in which the figures become attenuated and the background against which they are placed is more prominent than it was in earlier Shiraz paintings. A flat tapestry-like landscape setting is a popular background in Muzaffarid painting (Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 39-42).

5. The Jalayerid dynasty. Among the successor dynasties, the Jalayerids were particularly concerned to perpetuate Mongol traditions. Their areas of political control—Iraq and northwest Iran—strengthened the ties between these regions and led to the revival of Baghdad as an artistic and cultural center. Artists associated with the Jalayerid created distinctive styles in calligraphy, manuscript illumination, and illustration. Some metalwork objects are also inscribed with Jalayerid titles. Most influential of the Jalayerid contributions was the development of nastaʿlīq script. Originally it may have developed from a cursive chancery hand, but it became the favored medium for the copying of poetic texts. Fifteenth- and sixteenth-century authors normally attribute its creation to Mīr ʿAlī Tabrīzī (q.v.), a calligrapher active in Tabrīz during the last decades of the fourteenth century (M. Bayānī, Aḥwāl wa āṯār-e ḵoš-nevīsān. Nastaʿliq-nevīsān, pt. 2, Tehran, 1346 Š./1967, pp. 441-46). One manuscript by his hand (now in the Freer Gallery, Washington) shows a fluid yet precise hand (P. Soucek, “The Arts of Calligraphy,” in The Arts of the Book in Central Asia, Boulder, 1979, pl. I). Other calligraphers of the period used related hand, but that of Mīr ʿAlī gained greater recognition in part because it was perpetuated by his students, particularly Jaʿfar Tabrīzī, one of the leading calligraphers of Timurid Herat (Soucek, op. cit., figs. 10-11 ).

In Jalayerid manuscript illumination a preference was shown for elaborately divided cartouches with floral and arabesque grounds and delicately executed calligraphic headings (Soucek, op cit., pls. I, V). A similar style of ornament can be found on metalwork objects of this period. Despite its finely executed decoration, Jalayerid metalwork is somewhat cruder of execution than are contemporary Muzaffarid vessels. Silver inlays are less prominent and some pieces are actually of tinned copper (Komaroff, “The Timurid Phase in Iranian Metalwork,” pp. 95-115). In manuscript illumination Jalayerid painters also favored attenuated figures executed in a diminutive scale. Most unusual, however, is the interweaving of courtly settings and narrative illustration. This feature is particularly marked in the most famous Jalayerid manuscript, a Ḵamsa of Ḵʷājū Kermānī made in Baghdad during 799/1396 for Sultan Aḥmad Jalāyer (Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 26-30). Its painter, Jonayd, is mentioned in fifteenth-century sources as the teacher of artists active in Timurid employ. Some of the compositions used in this manuscript of Ḵʷājū Kermānī’s poetry have very close parallels in illustrations made for the Timurid princes Eskandar Solṭān and Bāysonḡor b. Šāhroḵ (Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 31-32).

6. Art under the Timurids. The conquests of Tīmūr during the last years of the fourteenth century and first years of the fifteenth century created a new political and artistic climate in Iran and Central Asia. Following his conquests, artisans moved voluntarily or involuntarily to his capital Samarkand. This produced a new artistic synthesis in which trends previously characteristic of different regions of Iran were merged. A similar fusion is also evident in objects connected with Tīmūr’s sons and grandsons. The movement of rulers from one region to another as well as rivalry and even warfare among them contributed to this process of inter-regional borrowings. In various places and at various times a synthesis of different regional trends is evident in calligraphy, manuscript illustration, and metal work. It is also evident in the design and embellishment of architecture built under Timurid patronage.

For the reign of Tīmūr himself this process is most evident in metalwork such as lampstands from the shrine of Ḵoja Aḥmad Yasawī, a structure erected between 799/1396-97 and 800/1397-98. Whereas Shirazi architects appear to have been responsible for the structure itself, the lampstands are more closely linked to metalworking traditions of northwest Iran. The titles used on the candleholders follow a formula much used in the Mamluk empire (Komaroff, “The Timurid Phase in Iranian Metalwork,” pp. 213-15). The calligraphers who served Tīmūr were also gathered from various regions under his control.

Several of Tīmūr’s descendants were also important as patrons of the arts. Some, such as his son Šāhroḵ, were particularly active in patronage of architecture, others, such as his grandsons Eskandar Solṭān, Ebrāhīm Solṭān and Bāysonḡor, are mainly remembered for their interest in calligraphy and manuscripts. The use of Timurid princes as governors of various territories created a new pattern of artistic development.

a. Timurid Patronage in Shiraz. The first among Tīmūr’s descendants to develop his own circle of artists appears to have been Eskandar Solṭān b. ʿOmar Šayḵ who shared the control of Isfahan, Shiraz, and Yazd with his brothers Rostam and Bāyqarā. A manuscript atelier may have accompanied Eskandar Solṭān on his peregrinations but the principal locus of his patronage seems to have been Shiraz. Several surviving manuscripts testify to Eskandar Solṭān’s wide-ranging interests in literature, history, mathematics, astronomy, astrology, medicine, and theology. A distinctive feature of manuscripts prepared for him is his preference for anthologies containing texts on a wide variety of topics. These manuscripts are also noted for their illumination and use of designs similar to those found on Muzaffarid metalwork. The calligraphy of these volumes also appears to develop directly from the traditions of Muzaffarid Shiraz but their illustrations have close parallels in manuscripts executed for Sultan Aḥmad Jalāyer, suggesting that a painter previously employed in that earlier ruler’s workshop may have moved to Shiraz from Baghdad (Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 43-48).

A rebellion by Eskandar Solṭān led to his defeat by Šāhroḵ in 817/1414 and presumably to the disruption of his manuscript workshop. Some of its occupants probably continued to live and work in Shiraz for Eskandar’s successor, Ebrāhīm Solṭān b. Šāhroḵ. Others may have moved to Herat and worked there for other members of the Timurid dynasty. A manuscript prepared for Šāhroḵ appears to have been painted by an artist who had earlier worked in Shiraz for Eskandar Solṭān (Titley, op. cit., fig. 25). Manuscripts produced in Herat for Šāhroḵ’s son Bāysonḡor also contain illustrations similar to those found in manuscripts from both Shiraz and Baghdad (Titley, op. cit., pp. 50-53).

Shiraz was a major manuscript-producing center still during the decades following Eskandar Solṭān’s death. His successor as governor of Shiraz, Ebrāhīm Solṭān b. Šāhroḵ, was himself an accomplished calligrapher and patron of poets and scholars. It is not, however, clear whether the manuscripts produced for Ebrāhīm Solṭān were created in his private workshop or whether they were merely commissioned in a local commercial one (Titley, op. cit., pp. 49-50).

b. Timurid patronage in Herat. After Tīmūr’s death in 808/1405, Samarkand declined in importance and Herat became more prominent. Tīmūr’s son Šāhroḵ ruled there until his death in 851/1447. Historical sources such as Dawlatšāh stress the importance of Šāhroḵ’s son Bāysonḡor as a patron of the arts. He resided in Herat serving his father in various capacities. Bāysonḡor was a noted calligrapher and leaves from an oversized Koran manuscript are commonly attributed to him. He is also remembered for his manuscript atelier where a number of handsome, illustrated manuscripts were produced. The noted calligrapher Jaʿfar Tabrīzī, a student of Mīr ʿAlī Tabrīzī is said to have served as director of Bāysonḡor’s workshop. Historical accounts give the names of calligraphers and painters who worked for Bāysonḡor but unfortunately this information is insufficient to identify the works of specific artists among the surviving manuscripts. The roots of the style used by Bāysonḡor’s painters appear to lie in the Jalayerid period, as does the type of nastaʿlīq script used in these examples (Titley, op. cit., pp. 54-57).

The preparation of a copy of the Šāh-nāma with a new preface said to have been written by Bāysonḡor himself was one of the principal accomplishments of this workshop (Gray and Godard, Iran: Persian Miniatures—Imperial Library, pls. 1-18).

The fate of Bāysonḡor’s workshop after his death in 837/1433 is uncertain. Some evidence suggests that it was kept as a unit, passing first to his son Bābor and then to his brother Uluḡ beg under whose auspices it was transferred to Samarkand. Whatever the mechanism of its continuity, various paintings suggest that the artistic traditions of the Bāysunḡori atelier survived at least until the third quarter of the fifteenth century.

Despite this evidence of continuity, however, the death of Šāhroḵ in 851/ 1447 signaled the beginning of a period of transition in the Timurid realm. Battles for succession occupied his heirs for the next fifteen years during which time artistic development seems to have been suspended. It is only with the rise to power of first Abū Saʿīd and then Ḥosayn Bāyqarā that a new artistic phase began. This second period of Timurid patronage was marked by outstanding achievements in calligraphy and painting. A new phase of metalwork production also occurred. Best known among the calligraphers was Solṭān ʿAlī Mašhadī. He is especially remembered as the perfector of a particular canon of nastaʿlīq that was widely admired and imitated. His career was linked with the patronage of both Sultan Ḥosayn Bāyqarā and ʿAlī-Šīr Navāʾī (Soucek, “The Arts of Calligraphy,” fig. 16).

Most famous among the painters of this period was Behzād (q.v.), who also worked for the same patrons. Despite his historical fame, the exact nature of Behzād’s personal contribution is unclear. The sole manuscript universally accepted as his work is a copy of Saʿdī’s Būstān, now in Cairo. Judging by its contents, Behzād’s art differs in degree rather than in kind from that of his contemporaries. Characteristic of his work are carefully planned compositions in which color, mass, and movement are all closely controlled. Despite these conventions, his use of poses and gestures in the portrayal of individual figures can be quite telling from a psychological point of view (A Survey of Persian Art, pls. 886, 887).

c. Metalwork under the Timurids. In metalwork two distinct trends appear during the late fifteenth century. One is the exclusion of figural themes from its decoration and the other is the complexity of the remaining decorative elements, whether vegetal or geometric. Most characteristic of this system are a number of drinking vessels of cast brass inlaid with gold and silver. Prominent on them are inscriptions, some of which describe the vessel’s function or give literary allusions about its significance. For example, on a jug (now in the Nuhad al-Said collection) made in Herat during 889/1484, the verses relate to the theme of Ḵeżr and the waters of life. In this group of inscriptions, an interest in poetry and mystical themes seems to be most significant (Allan, Islamic Metalwork, no. 23, pp. 110-13).

A second group of metalwork objects, executed in tinned copper, display another facet of fifteenth-century taste, the fascination with Far-Eastern objects and motifs. Both shape and decoration of these vessels often mimic Chinese ceramics. Prominent shapes include a shallow bowl, as well as drinking vessels and covered containers (Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork, pp. 240-41, 250-54). Although few examples survive, textual sources indicate that Chinese porcelains were also imitated in the ceramic medium during the fifteenth century in Iran. One piece now in the Royal Scottish Museum bears an inscription stating that it was produced in Mašhad during 849/1445 (M. Whitman, Persian Blue and White Ceramics: Cycles of Chinoiserie, Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1978, pp. 26-27, figs. 23a-c).

d. The artistic development of western Iran. Aside from the existence of an active workshop in Shiraz, little is known about the artistic climate of western Iran during the first half of the fifteenth century. During the second quarter of that century Timurid control over the region waned and Turkoman rulers gained control first of Tabrīz and northwest Iran and then of the central Iranian cities of Isfahan, Shiraz, and Yazd. It does not appear that this change in political control had an immediate impact on artistic development. A change did take place, however, after the death of Šāhroḵ in 850/1447 when quarrels among the various Timurid princes gave the Turkoman leaders an opportunity to consolidate their territorial gains. The brief Turkoman invasion of eastern Iran led by the Qara Qoyunlū ruler Jahānšāh, during which he briefly controlled Herat, also had important artistic results. It is probable that some calligraphers and painters accompanied the Turkomans on their return to western Iran. Manuscripts produced shortly after this time for Jahānšāh’s son Pīr Būdak, then ruler of Shiraz, show close affinities with those produced earlier in Herat (Titley, Persian Miniature Painting, pp. 67-68). This similarity was probably the result of a transfer of calligraphers and painters from Herat to the Qara Qoyunlū domains. During the course of his short but tumultuous career, Pīr Būdak was forced to evacuate his capital, Isfahan, and to move to Baghdad where he was eventually besieged by his own father and killed. Manuscripts produced in Baghdad demonstrate that his atelier moved with him. During this same period it is evident that workshops in Shiraz, probably organized on a commercial basis, continued to produce manuscripts in some quantity.

After the demise of Pīr Būdak and other internecine quarrels had weakened the political power of the Qara Qoyunlū dynasty, all of western Iran came under the control of the Āq Qoyunlū Turkomans who made Tabrīz their capital. During the last quarter of the fifteenth century Tabrīz became a cultural and artistic center that rivaled Herat. Manuscripts were produced for the Āq Qoyunlū rulers, particularly Yaʿqūb Beg (r. 883-96/1478-90). Most famous among his manuscripts is a Ḵamsa of Neżāmī illustrated by very original painters. This manuscript provides insight into the question of workshops and how they were created. It has a postscript which mentions that the book was begun for one of the Timurid princes, Bābor b. Bāysonḡor, and then continued under the patronage of the Qara Qoyunlū prince Pīr Būdak. After his death the still unfinished manuscript and presumably the workshop responsible for its creation passed to the Āq Qoyunlū prince Ḵalīl b. Uzun Ḥasan, and finally to Yaʿqūb Beg. This lineage gives an outline of artistic development of western Iran during the second half of the fifteenth century. It indicates the manner in which royal workshops and the manuscripts they produced had come to symbolize royal taste and prestige. Appropriately enough, this same volume was to receive a final embellishment at the hands of an early supporter of Shah Esmaʿīl Ṣafawī to whom it may have been given. Indeed, the court artists of Sultan Yaʿqūb played an important role in the formation of manuscript illustration under the Safavids (Titley, op. cit., p. 71).

This special evolution of royal ateliers existed apart from the commercial workshops of book production still centered, it seems, in Shiraz. Manuscripts continued to be produced there in considerable numbers throughout the fifteenth century and indeed beyond it into the Safavid period. Painting in Shiraz during the second half of the fifteenth century also had a wider importance because artists from that center traveled to many distant places carrying with them their traditions of book production as well as their personal style. Manuscripts executed in the style of fifteenth-century Shiraz are known to have been produced in Egypt, Turkey, and India.



General. Art et société dans le monde Iranien, ed. C. Adle. Paris, 1982.

M. S. Dimand, A Handbook of Muhammadan Art, 2nd ed., New York, 1944.

H. Gluck and E. Diez, Die Kunsl des Islam, Berlin, 1925.

A. Godard, L'art de l'Iran, Paris, 1962.

E. Kühnel, Islamic Arts, London, 1963.

The Arts of Islam, Hayward Gallery, London, 1976.

L'Islam dans les collections nationales, réunion des musées nationaux, Paris, 1977.

J. Sourdel-Thomine and B. Spuler, Die Kunsl des Islam, Berlin, 1973.

H. E. Wulff, The Traditional Crafts of Persia, Cambridge, Mass., 1966.

Painting. General. Qāżī Ahmad, tr. V. Minorsky, Calligraphers and Painters, Washington, D.C., 1959.

T. W. Arnold, Painting in Islam, Oxford, 1928.

Idem and A. Grohmann, The Islamic Book, Paris, 1929.

L. Binyon et al., Persian Miniature Painting, Oxford, 1933.

E. Blochet, Les Peintures des manuscrits orientaux de la Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, 1914-20.

Idem, Musulman Painting, Xllth-XVlIlh Century, London, 1929.

L. Bronstein, "Space Forms in Persian Miniature Composition," Bulletin of the American Institute for Persian Art and Archaeology (Bul. AIPAA) 4, 1935, pp. 15-28.

M. A. Chaghtai. A Treatise on Calligraphists and Miniaturists by Dost Muhammad, Lahore. 1936. A Catalogue of the Persian Manuscripts and Miniatures, 3 vols., The Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, 1959-62.

F. Edhem and I. Stchoukine, Les manuscrits orientaux illustrés de la Bibliothèque de l'Université de Stamboul, Paris, 1933.

R. Ettinghausen, "Die bildliche Darstellung der Ka'ba im islamischen Kulturkreis," ZDMG 88, 1934, pp. 111-37.

Idem, Studies in Muslim Iconography. I. The Unicorn, Washington, D.C., 1950.

Idem, Persian Miniatures in the Bernard Berenson Collection, Milan, 1961.

B. Gray and A. Godard, Iran: Persian Miniatures—Imperial Library, UNESCO, New York, 1956.

B. Gray, Persian Painting, Geneva, 1961.

K. Holter, "Die islamischen Miniaturhandschriften vor 1350," Zentralblatt für Bibliothekwesen 54, 1937, pp. 1-34.

Cl. Huart, Les calligraphes et les miniaturistes de l'Orient musulman, Paris, 1908.

M. S. Ipsiroğlu, Das Bild im Islam, Vienna and Munich, 1971.

A. V. W. Jackson and A. Yohannan, A  Catalogue of the Collection of Persian Manuscripts  Including  also  some   Turkish   and  Arabie Presented  to   the  Metropolitan   Museum   of Art, New     York,     By    Alexander    Smith     Cochran,  New   York,    1914.  

E.   Kühnel,   Miniaturmalerei im  islamischen  Orient,   Berlin,   1922. 

Idem,   Persische Miniaturmalerei. 13. Jahrhundert bis 17. Jahrhundert, Berlin,  1959.

A. P. Laurie, "Materials in Persian Miniatures," Technical Studies in the Fietd of the Fine Arts 3, 1934, pp. 146-56.

W. Lillys et al., Oriental Miniatures: Persian, Indian, Turkish, Toronto, 1965.

W. Lillys, Persian Miniatures: The Story of Rustam, Rutland, Vt. and Tokyo, 1958.

E. de Lorey, "De Wasiti à Behzad," Bibliothèque Nationale: Les arts de l'Iran, l'ancienne Perse et Bagdad. Catalogue, Paris, 1938, pp. 99-169, 211-13.

Idem, "Peinture musulmaneou peinture iranienne," RAA 12, 1938, pp. 20-31.

G. Marteau and H. Vever, Miniatures persanes exposées au Musée des Arts Décoratifs juin-octobre 1912,  Paris,   1913.  

F. R.  Martin,  The  Miniature Painting and Pointers of Persia, India and Turkey from the 8th to the 18th century, 2 vols., London, 1912.

G. M.  Meredith-Owens,   Persian Illustrated Manuscripts, London, 1965.

L. Morgenstern, "La peinture murale dans l'art Iranien," Congrès internat d'art et d'archéologie Iran., 1935, pp. 140-45.

K. Otto-Dorn, "Figurendarstellung im Islam," Archäologischcr Anzeiger,   1950-51, cols.  323-57. 

E.  Pauty. "L'architecture dans   les   miniatures   islamiques," Bull. Inst. Egypte 17,  1935, pp. 23-68.

R. Pinder-Wilson, Paintings from Islamic Lands, Oxford, 1969.

B. W. Robinson, Catalogue of a Loan Exhibition of Persian Miniature Paintings from British Collections, Victoria and Albert Museum, 1951.

Idem, "Persian Painting," The Connoisseur 128,  1951, pp. 176-81.

Idem, Victoria and Albert Museum: Persian Paintings,   London,   1952.   Idem,   Persian   Miniatures, Oxford, 1957.

Idem, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Persian Paintings in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1958.

Idem, Drawings of the Maslers: Persian Drawings from the 14th through the 19th Century, New York, 1965.

Idem, Persian Miniature Painting from Collections in the British Isles, London, 1967.

Idem, Persian Paintings in the India Office Library, London, 1976.

Idem, ed., Islamic Painting and the Arts of the Book.  The Keir Collection, London, 1976.  Idem, Persian Paintings in the John Rylands Library, London, 1980.

A. Sakisian, La miniature persane du Xlle au XVIIe siècle, Paris and Brussels,  1929.

Idem, "Persian Drawings," Burlington Magazine 69, 1936, pp. 14-20, 59-69.

Idem, "Le paysage dans la miniature persane," Syria 19, 1938.

E. Schroeder, "Persian Painting," Parnassus 11, Nov. 1939, pp. 28-32; 12, Feb. 1940, pp. 31-33.

Idem, Persian Miniatures in the Fogg Museum of Art, Cambridge, Mass., 1942.

P. W. Schulz,  Die persisch-islamische  Miniaturmalerei.   2 vols., Leipzig, 1914.

O. Sköld, Oriental Miniatures and Manuscripts in Scandinavian Collections, Stockholm. 1957. G. M.  Meredith-Owens,    Persian Illustrated Manuscripts, London, 1965. L. Morgenstern, "La peinture murale dans l'art Iranien," in Congrès internat. d'art et d'archéologie Iran., 1935, pp. 140-45.

K. Otto-Dorn, "Figurendarstellung im Islam," Archäologischcr Anzeiger,   1950-51, cols.  323-57. 

E.  Pauty. "L'architecture dans   les   miniatures   islamiques," Bull. Inst. Egypte 17,  1935, pp. 23-68.

R. Pinder-Wilson, Paintings from Islamic Lands, Oxford, 1969.

B. W. Robinson, Catalogue of a Loan Exhibition of Persian Miniature Paintings from British Collections, Victoria and Albert Museum, 1951.

Idem, "Persian Painting," The Connoisseur 128,  1951, pp. 176-81.

Idem, Victoria and Albert Museum: Persian Paintings,   London,   1952.   Idem,   Persian   Miniatures, Oxford, 1957.

Idem, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Persian Paintings in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 1958.

Idem, Drawings of the Maslers: Persian Drawings from the 14th through the 19th Century, New York, 1965.

Idem, Persian Miniature Painting from Collections in the British Isles, London, 1967.

Idem, Persian Paintings in the India Office Library, London, 1976.

Idem, ed., Islamic Painting and the Arts of the Book.  The Keir Collection, London, 1976. 

Idem, Persian Paintings in the John Rylands Library, London, 1980.

A. Sakisian, La miniature persane du Xlle au XVIIe siècle, Paris and Brussels,  1929.

Idem, "Persian Drawings," Burlington Magazine 69, 1936, pp. 14-20, 59-69.

Idem, "Le paysage dans la miniature persane," Syria 19, 1938.

E. Schroeder, "Persian Painting," Parnassus 11, Nov. 1939, pp. 28-32; 12, Feb. 1940, pp. 31-33.

Idem, Persian Miniatures in the Fogg Museum of Art, Cambridge, Mass., 1942.

P. W. Schulz,  Die persisch-islamische  Miniaturmalerei, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1914.

O. Sköld, Oriental Miniatures and Manuscripts in Scandinavian Collections, Stockholm, 1957.

I. Stchoukine. Les miniatures persanes, Paris, 1932.

Idem, "Notes sur des peintures persanes du Sérail de Stamboul," JA 226, 1935, pp. 117-40.

Idem, "Un Gulistan de Sa'dī illustré par des artistes tīmūrides," RAA 10, 1936, pp. 92-96.

Idem, "Les peintures du Shāh-Nāmeh Demotte," Arts Asiatiques (AA) 5, 1958, pp. 83-96.

A. Welch, Arts of the Islamic Book: The Collection of Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan, Ithaca, 1982.

G. Wiet, Miniatures persanes, turques et indiennes: Collection de son excellence Chérif Sabry Pacha, Cairo, 1943.

J. V. S. Wilkinson, The Shah-Namah of Firdausi, Oxford, 1931.

Survey of Persian Art III, pp. 1829-97, pls. 812-925.

Painting. Saljuq period. A. Aies, "Un vieux poème romanesque persan: Récit de Waraqah et Gulshāh," Ars Orientalis (AO) 4, 1961, pp. 143-52.

A. Melikian-Chirvani, "Le roman de Varque et Golšāh," AA 12, 1970.

G. D. Guest, "Notes on the Miniatures on a Thirteenth-Century Beaker," Ars Islamica (AI) 10, 1943, pp. 148-52.

Painting. Mongol period. D. Brian, "A Reconstruction of the Miniature Cycle in the Demotte Shah Namah," AI 6, 1939, pp. 96-112.

A. K. Coomaraswamy, "Persian Miniatures of the Fourteenth Century," Bulletin ofThe Metropolitan Museum ofArt (BMMA) 19,1934, pp. 58-60.

R. Ettinghausen, "Persian Ascension Miniatures of the Fourteenth Century,” in Convegno di scienze moralistoriche e filologiche, Rome, 1957, pp. 360-83.

Idem, "On some Mongol Miniatures," Kunst des Orients (KO) 3, 1959, pp. 44-65.

O. Grabar. "Notes on the Iconography of the 'Demotte' Shāh-Nāma," in Oriental Studies 4, ed. R. Pinder-Wilson, 1969, pp. 32-47.

Idem and S. Blair, Epic Images and Contemporary History: The Illustrations of the Great Mongol Shahnama, Chicago, 1980.

B. Gray, "Fourteenth-Century Illustrations of the Kalilah and Dimnah," AI 7, 1940, pp. 134-40.

Idem, The World History of Rashīd al-Dīn: Study of the Royal Asiatic Society Manuscript, London, 1978.

D. T. Rice, The Illustrations to the 'World History' of Rashid al-Din, ed. B. Gray, Edinburgh, 1976.

E. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century: A Research Report, Naples. 1978. A. Sakisian, "L'école mongole de miniature en Perse aux XlVe et XVe siècles," Jahrb. der asiatischen Kunst 2. 1925, pp. 136-42.

E. Schroeder, "Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dīn: A review of Fourteenth-Century Painting," AI 6, 1939, pp. 113-42.

M. S. Simpson, The Illustration of an Epic: The Earliest Shahnama Manuscripts, New York, 1979.

Idem, "The Role of Baghdād in the Formation of Persian Painting,"  in Art et société dans le monde iranien, ed. C. Adle, Paris, 1982, pp. 91-116.

I. Stchoukine, La peinture iranienne sous les derniers 'Abbâsides et les ll-Khâns, Bruges, 1936.

N. Titley, "A Fourteenth-Century Khamseh of Nizami," The British Museum Quarterly 36, 1971, pp. 8-11.

J. B. Travis, "The Battle of Ardawan and Ardashir from the Demotte Shah-Nameh," The Art Quarterly 31, Detroit, 1968, pp. 63-75.

Painting. Timurid period. K. Adahl, A Khamsa of Nizami of 1439: Origin ofthe Miniatures, Stockhom, 1981.

M. Aga-Oglu, "The Landscape Miniatures of an Anthology Manuscript ofthe Year A.D. 1398," AI 3, 1936, pp. 77-98.

T. W. Arnold, Bihzād and his Paintings in the Ẓafar-Nāmah MS., London, 1930.

Idem, "Mīrzā Muḥammad Ḥaydar Dughlat on the Harāt   School   of  Painters,"   BSO(A)S  5,   1930, pp. 671-74.

V. Enderlein, Die Miniaturen der Berliner Baisonqur-Handschrift, Frankfurt on the Main, 1970.

R. Ettinghausen, "An Illuminated Manuscript of Hāfiz-i Abrū in Istanbul," KO 2, 1955, pp. 30-44.

Idem in El ² I, pp. 1211-14, pls. XXXIII-XXXVI.

B. Gray, "Painting under the Timurids," Journal of the Iran Society 1, 1950, pp. 23-29.

Idem, "The So-Called Turkmen School of Persian Miniature Painting," in Akten   des     vierundzwanzigsten   internationalen Orientalisten-Kongresses, Munich, 1957, pp. 374-76.

Idem, "A Newly-Discovered Niẓāmī of the Timurid School," East and West 14, 1963. pp. 220-23.

Idem, ed., The Arts of the Book in Central Asia, Paris, 1979.

E. J. Grube, The Classical Style in Islamic Painting, Edizioni Oriens, 1968.

Idem, "Herat, Tabriz, Istan­bul: The Development of a Pictorial Style," in Paintings front    Islamic    Lands,    ed.     R.    Pinder-Wilson. 1969, pp. 85-109.

Idem, "Studien zur Malerei der Timuriden I: Zur Frühstufe von Herāt. I," KO 5/1, pp. 1-23.

E. Kühnel, "Die Baysonghur-Handschrift der Islamischen Kunstabteilung," Jahrb. d. Kön. Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 52,  1931, pp. 133-52.

Idem, "Das Qazwini-Fragment der Islamischen Abteilung," ibid., 64, 1943, pp. 59-72.

Idem, "Bihzad," Mémoires, Ille congrès  internat,   d'art  et  d'archéologie  Iran., Moscow and Leningrad, 1939, pp. 114-18.

E. de Lorey, "L'école de Tabriz. L'Islam aux prises avec la Chine," RAA 9, 1935, pp. 27-39. Idem, "Behzād. Le Gulistān Rothschild," AI 4, 1937, pp. 122-43.

M. G. Lukens, "The Historical Background and Illustrative Character of The Metropolitan Museum's Manṭiq al-Ṭayr of 1483," in Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, ed. R. Ettinghausen, New York, 1972, pp. 39-72.

M. Mahfuz-ul-Haq, "The Earliest Illustrated Copy of Omar's Quatrains," Asia 31, 1931, pp. 246-47,  272.

H. E. McAllister, "A 'Shah-Nama' of 1482," BMMA 2, 1943, pp. 126-32.

F. R. Martin. Les miniatures de Behzad dans un manuscrit persan daté 1485, Munich. 1912, Idem, Miniatures front the Period of Timur in a MS. of the Poems of Sultan Ahmad Jalair, Vienna, 1926.

F. R. Martin and T. W. Arnold. The Nizami MS. Illuminated by Bihzad, Mirak and Qasim Ali ... in the British Museum (Or. 6810), Vienna, 1926.

G. M. Meredith-Owens, Persian Miniatures of Behzad and his School in Cairo Collections, London, 1960.

R. Pinder-Wilson,  Persian  Painting of the Fifteenth century, London, 1958. 

B. W. Robinson, "The John Ryland's Laylā wa Majnūn and theBodleian Nawāʾī of 1485," Bulletin J. R. Library 37, 1954, pp. 263-70.

Idem, "Prince Baysonghor's Niẓāmī: A Speculation," AO 2, 1957, pp. 383-91.

Idem, "The Tehran Manu­script of Kalīla wa Dimna," Oriental Art 4, 1958, pp. 108-15.

Idem, "The Dunimarle Shahnama," in Festschrift E. Kühnel, Berlin. 1959, pp. 207-18.

Idem, "An Unpublished Manuscript of the Gulistān of Saʿdī," in Beitr. zur Kunstgeschichte Asiens. In Memoriam E. Die, Istanbul, 1963, pp. 223-36.

Idem, "Prince Baysunghur and the Fables of Bidpai," Oriental Art 16, 1970, pp. 145-54.

A. Sakisian, "Les miniaturistes persans Behzad et Rassim Alī," Gazette des beaux-arts, 5me pér., 2, 1920, pp. 215-33.

Idem, "A propos de trois miniatures inedites de Behzad," Revue de l’art ancien et modern 51, 1927, pp. 15-20.

M.-R. Seguy, The Miraculous Journey of Mahomet, Paris, 1977.

E. G. Sims, "The Timurid Imperial Style," Art and Archeology Research Paper 6, De­cember, 1974, pp. 56-67.

I. V. Stchoukine, "Les peintures de la Khamseh de Nizami du British Museum, Or. 6810," Syria 27, 1950, pp. 301-13.

Idem, Les peintures des manuscrits timurides. Paris, 1954.

Idem, "Un manuscrit de Mehr et Moshtari illustre a Herat vers 1430," AA 8, 1961, pp. 83-92.

Idem, Les peintures des manuscrits de la "Khamsah" de Niẓāmī au Topkapi Sarayi Müzesi d'Istanbul, Paris, 1977.

Bookbinding. M. Aga-Oglu, Persian Bookbindings of the Fifteenth Century, Ann Arbor, 1935.

R. Ettinghausen, "The Covers of the Morgan Manāfiʿ Manuscript and Other Early Persian Bookbindings," in Studies in Art and Literature for Belle da Costa Greene, Princeton, 1954, pp. 459-74.

B. van Regemorter, Some Oriental Bindings in the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, 1961.

F. Sarre, Islamische Bucheinbande, Berlin, 1923.

C. Steinbrucker, "Islamische Bucheinbände," ZDMG 84,1930, pp. 69-73.

M. Weisweiler, Der islamische Bucheinband des Miltelallers ..., Wiesbaden, 1962.

Calligraphy and epigraphy. M. Bahrāmī and M. Bayānī, Rāhnamā-ye ganjīna-ye Qorʾān, Tehran, 1328 Š./1949.

M. Bayānī. Nomūna-ye koṭūṭ-e ḵoš. Ketāb-ḵāna-ye Šāhanšāhī-e Irān, Tehran, 1329 5./1950.

S. Flury, "Une formule épigraphique de la céramique archaïque de I’Islam," Syria 5, 1924, pp. 53-66.

Idem, "Le décor épigraphique des monuments de Ghazna," Syria 6, 1925, pp. 61-90.

A. Grohmann, "The Origin and Early Development of Floriated Kufic," Bull. Inst. Egypte 37, 1956, pp. 273-304.

Idem, "The Origin and Early Development of Floriated Kufic," AO 2, 1957, pp. 183-213.

M. Heravi, Loḡāt wa eṣṭelaḥāt-e fann-e ketābsāzī, Teh­ran, 1353 Š./1974, A. Khatibi and M. Sijelmassi, The Splendour of Islamic Calligraphy, London, 1976.

E. Kühnel, Islamische Schriftkunst, Berlin and Leipzig, 1942.

M. Lings, The Quranic Art of Calligraphy and Illumination, World of Islam Festival Trust, 1976.

A. Schimmel, Islamic Calligraphy, Leiden, 1970.

Idem, Calligraphy and Islamic Culture, New York, 1984.

E. Schroeder, "The So-called Badiʿ Script," in Bull. AIPAA 5, 1937.

M. Ziauddin, A Monograph on Moslem Calligraphy, Calcutta, 1936.

N. Zayn-al-dīn,  Atlas of Arabic Calligraphy (in Arabic), Baghdad, 1968.

Survey of Persian Art II, pp. 1707-42, figs. 580-98.

Calligraphy and the Decorative Arts of Islam, London, 1976.

Ceramics. W. Allan, "Abu'l-Qasim's Treatiseon Ceramics," Iran 11. 1973, pp. 111-20.

M. Bahrami, "Le problème des ateliers d'étoiles de faïence lustrée," RAA 10, 1936, pp. 180-91.

Idem, Recherches sur les carreaux de révetement lustré dans la céramique persans du XIII au XV siècle, Paris, 1937.

Idem, "Further   Dated   Examples   of  Persian   Ceramic Wares," Bull, of the Iran. Inst. 6, 1946, pp. 110-19.

Idem, "Contribution a 1'étude de la céramique musulmanede 1'Iran," Athār~e Īrān 3, 1947, pp. 209-29.

Idem, Gurgān Faiences, Cairo, 1949.

M. Centlivres-Demont, Une communauté de potiers en Iran—le centre de Meybod (Yazd), Wiesbaden, 1971. 

K. Erdmann, "Die Keramik von Afrasiab," Amthiche Berichte  aus  den  Kön.  preussischen   Kunstsammlungen 63, 1942. pp. 18-28.   

Idem,    "Afrasiab Ceramic Wares," Bull. of the Iran. Inst. 6, 1946, pp. 102-10.

R. Ettinghausen, "Early Shadow Figures," Bull. AIPAA 6, 1934, pp. 10-15.

Idem, "Evidence for the Identification of Kāshān Pottery," AI 3, 1936, pp. 44-70.

Idem, Medieval Near Eastern Ceramics in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, I960.

G. Fehervari, Islamic Pottery: A Comprehensive Study Based on the Barlow Collection, London, 1973.

J. C. Gardin, "Poteriesde Bamiyan," .402.1957, pp. 227-45.

Idem, Lashkari Bazar: Une résidence royale ghaznévide,  Paris, 1963. 

E. J.  Grube.  "Some  Lustre Painted Tiles from Kashan of the 13th and Early 14th Centuries," Oriental Art 8, 1962, pp. 167-74.

Idem, Islamic Pottery of the 8th  to  the I5th Century in   the   Keir   Collection,   London,    1976.  

G. D. Guest and R. Ettinghausen,  "The Iconography of a Kashan Luster  Plate," AO 4, 1961,   pp. 25-64.  

D.   Kelekian,    The   Potteries   of  Persia, Being a Brief History of the Art of Ceramics in the Near East, Paris,  1909.

H. Kevorkian, "The Recently Discovered PersianCeramics," The Con­noisseur 30, 1911, pp. 183-87.

Idem, Catalogue of the Kevorkian Collection of Persian Ceramics from the Caliphate Epoch (A.D. 700) to XIIHh Century, London, 1911.

R. Koe chlin, Les céramiques musulmanes de Suse au Musée du Louvre, Paris, 1928.

A. Lane, "The So-called 'Kubachi' Wares of Persia," Burlington Magazine 75,  1939, pp. 156-62. 

Idem, Early Islamic Pottery, London, 1957.

Idem, Islamic Pottery from the Ninth to the Fourteenth Century A.D.  in  the  Collection  of Sir Eldred Hitchcock, London, 1956.

Idem, Later Islamic Pottery, London, 1957.

A. U. Pope, "New Findings in PersianCeramics of the Islamic Period," Bull. AIPAA 5, 1937, pp. 149-69.

G. Reitlinger, "The Interim Period in PersianPottery," AI 5, 1938, pp. 155-78.

Idem, "Islamic Glazed Pottery from Kish," Memoires, IIIe congrès internat. d'art el d'archéologie Iran., pp. 197-202.

Idem, "Sultanbad: Classification and Chronology," Trans. of the Oriental Ceramic Society,  1944-45, pp. 25-34.

M. Rosen-Ayalon, La poterie islamique,  Paris, 1974.

F, Sarre, "Persisch-islamische Keramik des XII. und XIII. Jahrhunderts," Amtliche Berichte aus den Kön. preussischen Kunstsammlungen 30, 1908, cols. 67-74.

U. Scerrato, "Islamic Glazed Tiles with Moulded Decoration from Ghazni," East and West 13, 1962, pp. 263-87.

C, K. Wilkinson, Nishapur: Pottery of the Early Islamic Period, New York, 1973.

Survey of Persian Art II, pp. 1446-706, figs. 518-78, pls. 555-811.

Glass. S. Abdul-Hak, "Contribution a 1'étude de la verrerie musulmane du VIIIe au XVe siecle," Annales archéologiques de Syrie 8-9, 1958-59, pp. 3-20.

R. J. Charleston, "A Group of Near Eastern Glasses," Burlington Magazine 81, 1942, pp. 212-18.

C. Clairmont, "Some Islamic Glass in The Metropolitan Museum," in Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, ed. R. Ettinghausen, New York, 1972, pp. 141-52.

R. Ettinghausen, Ancient Glass in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington,  D.C., 1962.

C. J. Lamm, Mittelalterliche Gläser und Steinschnittarbeiten aus dem Nahen Osten, Berlin, 1929-30.

Idem, Glass from Iran in the National Museum, Stockholm, Stockholm, 1935.

Idem, Oriental Glass of Mediaeval Date Found in Sweden and the Early History of Lustre-painting, Stockholm, 1941.

Masterpieces of Glass, British Museum, London, 1968.

M. G. Lukens, "Medieval Islamic Glass," BMMA 23, 1965, pp. 198-208.

P. Oliver, "Islamic Relief Cut Glass: A Sug­gested Chronology," Journal of Glass Studies 3, 1961, pp. 9-29.

R. H. Pinder-Wilson, "Cut-glass Vessels from Persia and Mesopotamia," British Museum Quarterly 27, 1963, pp. 33-39.

R. W. Smith, Glass from the Ancient World, New York, 1957.

C. K. Wilkinson, "Water, Ice and Glass," BMMA 1, 1943, pp. 178-83.

Survey of Persian Art III, pp. 2592-606, fig. 858, pls. 1438-59.

Ivory. C. K. Wilkinson, "Chessmen and Chess," BMAA 1, 1943, pp. 271-79.

Jewelry. P. C. Birch, Jewellery from Persia, Pforz­heim, 1974.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Near Eastern Jewellery, New York, 1944.

M. Jenkins and M. Keene, Islamic Jewelry in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1983.

M. Rosen-Ayalon, "Four Iranian Bracelets Seen in the Light of Early Islamic Art," Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, pp. 169-86.

Survey of Persian Art III, pp. 2664-72.

Metalwork. M. Aga-Oglu, "Some Islamic Bronzes of the Middle Ages," Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts 12,1931, pp. 89-92.

Idem, "The Use of Architectural Forms in Seljuq Metalwork," The Art Quarterly 6, 1943, pp. 92-98.

Idem, "A Brief Note on Islamic Terminology for Bronze and Brass," JAOS 65, 1945, pp. 218-23.

J. W. Allan, Islamic Metalwork: The Nuhad Es-Said Collection, London, 1982.

Idem, Persian Metal Technology 700-1300 AD, London, 1979.

E. Baer, "'Fish-pond' Ornaments of Persian and Mamluk Metal Vessels," BSOAS 31, 1968, pp. 14-27.

Idem, "The Nisan Tasi. A Study in Persian-Mongol Metalware," KO 9, 1973-74, pp. 1-46.

D. Barrett, Islamic Metalwork in the British Museum, London, 1949.

R. Berliner and P. Borchardt, Silberschmiedearbeiten aus Kurdistan, Berlin, 1922.

J. David-Weill, "Orfèvrerie musulmane," Revue des arts 10, I960, pp. 136-39.

S. Digby, "Some Notes towards the Classification of Muslim Copper and Brass Work in the Museum," Bulletin of the Prince of Wales Museum of Western India 5, 1955-57, pp. 16-23.

M. S. Dimand, "Saljuk Bronzes from Khurasan," BMMA 4, 1945, pp. 87-92.

K. Erdmann, "Iranische Silberschalen des Mittelalters," Amtliche Berichte aus den Kön. preussischen Kunslsammlungen 62, 1941, pp. 9-17.

R. Ettinghausen, "The Bobrinski 'Kettle', Patron and Style of an Islamic Bronze," Gazette des beaux-arts, 6me série, 24, 1943, pp. 193-208.

Idem, Metalwork from Islamic Countries, Michigan, 1943.

Idem, "The 'Wade Cup' in the Cleveland Museum of Art, its Origin and Decorations," AO 2, 1957, pp. 327-66.

Idem, "Turkish Elements on Silver Objects of the Seljuk Period of Iran," in Communications of the First Internat. Congress of Turkish Art, Ankara, 1959, Ankara, 1961, pp. 128-33.

Idem, "Sasanian and Islamic Metal-work in Baltimore," Apollo 18, 1966, pp. 465-69.

G. Fehervari, Islamic Metalwork of the Eighth to the Fifteenth Century in the Keir Collection, London, 1976.

S. Lane-Poole, "Saracenic Metal-work," English Illustrated Magazine II, 1894, pp. 905-12.

L. A. Mayer, Islamic Metalworkers and their Works, Geneva, 1959.

A. S. Melikian-Chirvani. "Le griffon iranien de Pisa," KO 5, 1969, pp. 68-86.

Idem, "Bassins iraniens du XlVe siècle au Musée des Beaux-Arts," Bulletin des Musées et Monuments Lyonnais 4, 1969, pp. 189-206.

Idem, Le bronze iranien, Paris, 1973.

Idem, "Essai sur la sociologie de 1'art islamique I: Argenterie et féodalité dans 1'Iran médiéval," in Art et société dans le monde Iranien, Paris, 1982, pp. 143-75.

Idem, Islamic Metal-work from the Iranian World: 8th-l8th Centuries, London, 1982.

D. S. Rice, "Studies in Islamic Metalwork," BSOAS 14/3, 1952, 15/1-3, 1953, 17/2, 1955, 21/2, 1958.

Idem, The Wade Cup in the Cleve­land Museum of Art, Paris, 1955.

F. Sarre, Erzeugnisse islamischer Kunst I: Metall, Berlin and Leipzig, 1906.

U. Scerrato, "Oggetti metallici di età islamica in Afghanistan," AION, N.S. 9, 1959, pp. 95-130; 14, 1964, pp. 673-714.

Idem, Melal/i islamici, Milan, 1966.

Y. I. Smirnov, Argenterie orientale[in Russian], St. Petersbourg, 1909.

Survey of Persian Art VIII, pp. 192-214.

Textiles. General. P. Ackermann, "The Fine Fabrics of Persia," The Open Court 47, Chicago, 1933, pp. 38-43.

Idem, "Some Problems of Seljuq and Safavid Textiles," IIIe Congrès internat. d'art et d'archeologie Iran., pp. 1-5.

Idem, "Persian Textile Art," Graphis 6, 1950, pp. 414-25, 470-71.

C. G. E. Bunt, Persian Fabrics, Leigh-on Sea, 1963, G. Migeon, "Les tissus de la Perse, antique et musulmane," Revue de I'art ancien et moderne 51, 1927, pp. 95-108.

A. C. Weibel, "Seljuk Fabrics," Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts 15, 1935, pp. 41-43.

Idem, "Persian Fabrics," ibid., 16, 1936, pp. 28-31.

Idem, "2000 Years of Silk Weaving," The Art Quarterly 5, 1944, pp. 191-204.

G. Wiet, Soieries persanes, Cairo, 1947 (rev. F. E. Day, AI 15-16, pp. 231-43).

Survey of Persian Art III, pp. 2163-220, figs. 722-38.

Carpets. W. Bode and E. Kühnel, Antique Rugs from the Near East, Braunschweig, 1955.

B. Brend, "A Carpet and Related Pictures—a Legacy of Timur's Samarqand," Oriental Art 30/2, pp. 172-88.

C. G. Ellis, "Some Compartment Designs for Carpets, and Herat," Textile Museum Journal 1/4, 1965, pp. 42-56.

K. Erdmann, Oriental Carpets, London, 1960.

Idem, Seven Hundred Years of Oriental Carpets, London, 1970.

R. Ettinghausen, "The Bos­ton Hunting Carpet in Historical Perspective," Boston Museum Bulletin 69, 1971, nos. 335, 356, pp. 21-34.

A. F. Kendrick and C. E. C. Tattersall, Hand Woven Carpets, Oriental and European, London, 1922.

L. Kybalová, Carpets of the Orient, London, 1970.

J. V. McMullan, Islamic Carpets, New York, 1965.

U. Schurmann, Bilderbuch fiir Teppichsammler, Munich, 1960.

H. Trenkwald and F. Sarre. Old Oriental Carpets, Leipzig, 1926-29.

A. J. P. Wace, Guide to Exhibition of Iranian Carpets, Textiles and Embroideries in the Arab Museum, Cairo, 1943.

Washington, D.C. Textile Museum, Prayer Rugs, 1974.

(P. Soucek)

Originally Published: December 15, 1986

Last Updated: August 15, 2011

This article is available in print.
Vol. II, Fasc. 6, pp. 603-618