pen-case and candlestick: two sources for the development of persian inlaid metalwork

7/27/2019 Pen-Case and Candlestick: Two Sources for the Development of Persian Inlaid Metalwork

1/15

Pen-Case and Candlestick: Two Sources for the Development of Persian Inlaid Metalwork

Author(s): Linda KomaroffReviewed work(s):Source: Metropolitan Museum Journal, Vol. 23 (1988), pp. 89-102Published by: The Metropolitan Museum of ArtStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1512849 .

Accessed: 24/05/2012 12:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new fo

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Metropolitan Museum of Artis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mmahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1512849?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1512849?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mma


2/15

Pen - ca s e a n d Candlestick:T w o S o u r c e s f o r t h e Development o fP e r s i a n I n l a i d Metalwork

LINDA KOMAROFFDepartmentfArt,HamiltonCollege

FROM THE MID-TWELFTH CENTURY, when the tech-nique of inlaying bronze or brass with preciousmetalfirst came into prominencein Iran, and for a periodofseveral hundredyears, Iranianmetalworkersproducedsome of the finest examplesof inlaid metalwareknownto Islamic art.' Sometime between the late fourteenthcenturyand about 1456-57, however,the inlayingtech-nique appears to have undergonea significantchange,as is documented by a series of eleven dated inlaidwares that begins in the mid-fifteenthcentury (five ofthese are illustrated in Figures 8-i6). Although thereare no known dated examplesof inlaid metalwarefromthe first half of the fifteenth century to document theearlierstages of this transformation,2 intend to dem-onstrate that a pen-case in The MetropolitanMuseumof Art and a related candlestick in a private collectionare attributable to this transitionalperiod and as suchprovide importantevidence for the evolution of Iranianinlaid metalwork. will alsobrieflyconsider hesequenceof inlaid wares thatpostdatethe mid-fifteenth entury norder to establishfully the correspondencebetween thepen-case, the candlestick,and subsequentmetalwork.These fifteenth-centurymetalwares were producedduringthe Timuriddynasty (1370-1506), whosefounder,Timur or Tamerlane, he greatcentralAsian conqueror,and his immediate successors, transferred the focalpointof Persian art and artisticpatronageto the easternIranian world, first to Samarkand and later to Herat.The Timurid style of metalwork, ikeTimurid architec-ture and miniaturepainting,owes its originsto develop-ments already underway in the fourteenth century inwestern Iran.3 Yet, as has been demonstrated else-where, the phenomenon of the Timurid invasions ofcentraland westernAsia and simultaneoustransporta-

tion of artists and craftsmen to eastern Iran led to thedevelopment of a distinctive style of metalwork, onethat may be termed Timurid.4The earliest examples of Timurid inlaid metalworkproducedbetween I40I-5, are a series of six oil lampcommissionedby Timur,perhaps or a religious tructursuch as the shrine complexof KhwajahAhmad Yasawin TurkestanCity,which still preservesthreelamps.5These lamps providean importantclueforthe subsequent evolution of Timurid inlaid metalwork.A detaifrom one of theselamps (FigureI) demonstrates development in the inlay technique that was already anticipatedamongcertain ater-fourteenth-century etalwarefrom northwesternIran.6 n this bronzelamp extremelyfine pieces of silverand gold have been appliedto a surface already defined by incised decoration,so that thepreciousmetals merely repeat the surfacedesign, as isvisible in the vegetal ornamentillustratedin Figure i.This new manner of applying decoration in precioumetal indicatesa fundamental hange in the ornamentafunction of inlaid metal, as it is here used purelyfor theeffectof brilliance and perhaps opulence,whereaspreviously,as can be seen in a detail from a mid-fourteentcenturybowl (Figure2), and as is graphically llustrateby the areas that have lost their inlay, such inlays alsocarried their own decoration,forexamplethe facialfeatures or textile patterns, so that they were an integrapart of the overallprogramof design.This change in the applicationand decorative function of inlaid ornament was to have a significant mpacupon the furtherdevelopmentof Iranian inlaid metalwork,in that it seems to herald thedecline of large-scalinlaid decoration and the use of spatial inlays, whichutilize small pieces of sheet metal. With few exception

89? The Metropolitan Museum of Art I988METROPOLITANMUSEUMJOURNAL 3

The notes for this article begin on page 99


3/15

1. Detailoftheupperportion f anoillamp,Timurid, 40I-5. Bronze nlaid with gold and silver.Leningrad,StateHermitage, inv. no. SA 15931 (photo: Komaroff)2. Detail of a bowl, Iran, mid-I4thcentury.Brassinlaidwith gold and silver.Florence,Bargello,inv. no. 361(photo:WalterDenny)

such spatialinlaysare not foundin subsequent ifteenth-and early-sixteenth-centurymetalwork attributable toeasternIran. Rather,these wares most often bearsmall-scale decoration that use linear inlays, which are com-posed of slenderstripsof sheet metal or wire.7Whether it was a new taste forsmall-scaledesignthat

necessitated the use of linear inlays, or a preferenlinear inlays that dictated the type and the scale odecoration, is impossible to determine. Therehowever,seem to have been a general trend towarminiaturizationof inlaid decorationin later-fourtecentury metalwork from the western Iranian wwhich is most apparentin the figural decorationgradual disappearance of nearly all figural imawhich appears to have been initiated in the laterteenth century,likewiseallowedfor an increased the smaller-scale, inearinlays, as these would notbeen suitable forrenderingmost human or animaures.8

For whatever reason, this use of small-scale, linlaid decorationwas initiated(mostlikelywithinern Iran in the later fourteenth entury),and by thefifteenthcentury inlaid metalwork from eastern Iralmost entirelyrestrictedto linear inlays. This isonstrated by the series of eleven dated inlaid obfrom the years 1456-57 through i505.9 The sameof inlaid metalwork,which will presently be defcontinuedbeyondthe periodof Timuridrule,as iscated by the dates and otherinscriptionscarriedberal objects.'0With the evidence providedby this dsequence,which extends from the mid-fifteenthcethrough the first quarterof the sixteenth centurypossibleto postulatean earlierstylisticphase durinfirst half of the fifteenthcenturyand furthermoretribute certain objects to this period,namely the amentionedpen-case (Figures3-5) and candlesticFigure7). On the basisoftheir sharedtechniqueaas their commonstyle, these two pieces, along witdated, as well as several undated, examplesformhesiveclass of inlaid metalwork.

The type of object in this group that survives igreatestnumbers is a pot-bellied ug with dragondle (Figure I4); such vessels also include the grnumber of dated inscriptions,as well as signaturestypes of pen-case, eitherrectangularwith roundeners (Figure3) or wedge-shaped,are also in thisgas well as the candlestick."

With one exception,all of theseobjectsseem to ulinear inlays exclusively; the inlays are invariabagainst a cross-hatchedbackground,which in mostancesappearsto have been filled with an unidenblack substance.'2As I have already indicated, linlaysbecame the sole meansofinlayingin easternsometimeafterthe middleof the fifteenthcentury.furthermoresuggested that spatial inlays had alr

90


4/15

3. Pen-case,Timurid,beforemid-i5th century (exteriordecoration).Brass, exterior nlaid with silver,interiorinlaid with gold and silver, 23/8 X I 1'/2 n. (6 X 26 cm.).The MetropolitanMuseum of Art, EdwardC. MooreCollection, Bequest ofE. C. Moore, 1891, 91.1.5364. Pen-case,viewof thetop

undergonea significant ransformation y the beginningof the fifteenthcentury,which may have contributed tothe eventual disappearanceof this technique and thenew ascendancyof linearinlays. Finally,it can be notedthat the linear inlays found in the Timurid wares areused in two distinct manners: in the first methodthe in-laid wires or strips of sheet metal are used to define agiven motif,while in the secondinstance theselinearin-lays only indicatethe outline of the motif.The sequence of dated inlaid objects indicates thatthe latter method ofinlay,in which the inlayservesonly

5. Viewof thepen-case howing he nterior, robablyran,orSyria, ate i4th century9'


5/15

6. Pen-case,Iran or Syria, ate I4thcentury.Brass, nlaidwith gold and silver, 25/8 X I /8 in. (6.6 x 28 cm.). TheMetropolitanMuseumof Art,Gift,J. P. Morgan,I917,17.190.822to denote the outline of the motif, predominates n thethirdquarterof the fifteenthcenturybut becomesrarerand is eventually totallyabsentfromprogressivelyaterwares.Conversely, he method n which the inlaysdefinethe decoration increasesin importancethroughoutthelast quarter of the fifteenthcentury and is used exclu-sively by the beginning of the sixteenth century. Onlyone object from this group, the pen-case in the Metro-politan Museum, also utilizes some spatialinlaysin ad-dition to its linearinlays,whichareof the outlining ype.This object furthermore ncludes some areas of inciseddecorationas does the aforementionedcandlestick.13

Both the specificdecorativevocabularyand the scaleof the designelementsfurther erve to unite thisgroupofinlaid wares. Their decorationis dominatedby stylizedfloraland vegetal motifs that includearabesquesof lan-cet or trilobed eaves,and simplerosettesand palmettes.Flowers and leaves are invariably nterlaced,paired,orarranged n clusters hat aregenerallycircumscribed yaquatrefoil r a polyfoil.These largerunitsare most oftenlinked and repeated, and are furthermoresurroundedby arabesques, so that the end result is a complex pat-tern or network of design. This network of designevolvedgraduallyduringthe secondhalf of the fifteenthcentury, becoming progressivelydenser,and less variedin termsof the individualelementsofdesign. Eventuallythe main emphasis of the pattern was providedby the

contrastingcolorationof the silver and/ or gold inlaysand the black-filledbackground.The decorativeuse of inscriptions lso showsa paralledevelopment. Initially, from about the mid-fifteenthcentury,the inscriptions,which are alwayswritten in acursivescript (generallynaskh r thulth), re maintainedwithin their own clearly demarcated space, eitherthrough their larger scale or through their enclosurewithin cartouches that are set apart from the overalldecorativepattern. By the close of the Timurid period,however,such inscriptionsare reducedin scale and areset within bands or cartouchesthat are morefully inte-gratedwithin the overall networkofdesign.For the specific reasons explained above, the pen-case in the MetropolitanMuseummaybe consideredasthe earliest survivingobject belonging to this group ofTimurid inlaid metalware. The exterior decorationofthe pen-case is divided into three zones of inlaid and in-cised silver ornament: the top of the cover, the sides ofthe cover,and the sides of the lowerportionof the case.Around he outeredgeof thetopof the cover(Figure4)is a narrow borderoutlinedin inlayand composedof al-ternating cartouches and medallions. The cartouchesbear either an incisedguilloche band or a linear inlaidnaskh nscription, while the medallions are decoratedwith an incised inverted Y pattern or an incised lotusblossom.In the center of the topof the cover s an exten-sive linear inlaiddesign. It is a symmetricallyarrangedinterlaced pattern composed of floral and leaf motifsthat are only outlined by the inlays, while the interiorspace, as well as the interstitial areas show the cross-

92


6/15

hatchedbackground,whichpreserves ometype of blacksubstance.'4The original effect was perhaps that of aslender silver pattern set against a blackened back-ground.

Along the sides of the cover, the decoration is com-posed of a series of interlockingmedallions and car-touches (Figure4). The latterbear either a linearinlaidnaskhinscriptionor a scrollingfloral and leaf motifthatseems to utilize both spatialand linearinlays. In eachofthe medallions,which are not inlaid, is a concentricro-sette motif or an invertedY pattern.The decorationon the sidesof the lowerportionof thepen-case is organizedin a somewhatmorecomplicatedversion of the traditional scheme found on thirteenth-and fourteenth-centuryIslamic metalworkin which acentral band is bordered above and below by narrowerbands, all of which are intersected by medallions.Small-scale scrolling or interlaced floral motifs ren-deredby incisingor indicated with spatialinlays,or elseincised trilobedblossoms, providethe primarydecora-tion of this area of the pen-case.Beforeconsideringthe inscriptionscarriedby this ob-ject, brief note shouldbe made of the interiorornament.Although badly abraded, the interior decoration (Fig-ure 5) of both the upper and the lower portions wasoriginally composedof a small-scale pattern, inlaid ingold and silver,that includedroundels filled with flyingbirds, as well as trefoil and latticeworkdevices, inter-lockingroundelswith starpatterns,and a runningswas-tika motif.The decoration s virtually dentical o that ofasecondpen-casein the MetropolitanMuseum(Figure6)and to anotherin the MuseeJacquemart-Andre,Paris,whichhave been attributed o Syriaorwestern Iranandaredatable to the late fourteenthcentury.'5

Microscopicexamination of the two pen-cases in theMetropolitan Museum'6has revealed that the secondSyrian or Persianpen-case (Figure6) utilized an inlaytechnique denticalto that of the interiorof the Timuridexample (Figure 5) and, furthermore, hat the exteriorof the Timuridpen-case (Figures3 and 4) was original-ly decoratedin the same manner as its interior but wascarefullyburnished to remove all traces of the originaldecoration.The interiordecoration s so badlycorrodedas to suggest prolongedburial,which mightexplain theapparent time gap between its original manufactureand decoration in the late fourteenth century and itspresentdecoration,whichclearlybelongsto the fifteenthcentury.It is possible that the pen-case may have beenbroughtto eastern Iran in the early fifteenthcenturyas

part of the booty fromTimur'sconquestof Syriaor elsewestern Iran." The Metropolitan Museum's Timuridpen-case was then probably redecorated around themiddle of the fifteenth century. Its silver-inlaidinsertfor the ink receptaclewith ring-punchedbackgroundappearsto be a still lateraddition.There are two sets of inscriptionson the exteriorofthe Metropolitan Museum's Timurid pen-case. TheArabic inscriptionon the top of the cover indicates acontinuitywith the epigraphyof earlier Iranianmetal-work,while the Persianand mixed Persianand Arabicverses inscribedon the sides of the cover are especiallytypicalof Timuridmetalwork. n each instancethe slen-dernaskhinscriptionsare written in such a manner thatthe letters appearto be stackedin twoor threelevels.

Inscriptions:

/4.La>cl>u LUj.*ll Jt/ 4ZY.l aUJ IL>I3I/-Au1L.YIJy * l (l1 /li4ll [e] JI IWo 1J( IMj e UJj i aU.y4AAiI iiiLL La

To tsowner,happiness ndwell-beingnd ifeaslongasapigeon coos, eternally, endlessly, until Judgment Day;and may glory, good fortune and triumph be yours al-ways, so long as the sun and the moon rise, and may youremaina shadow for us as long as thereare tears18

//>oAl lJ^ ^ 1Al^jl i/ cLJ jp J^L^>jl/! 1fJ j..l iQ ^. ,1^-

Withmyheart'sblood wrotea letter othebelovedVerily,since your departureI have beheld endless time [asthough] tillJudgment DayI shall not raise my head from this coursejust as [I raise]the penThough you lift my head fromyour breastjust as [you liftthe coverof] the inkwellMay the outcome be good (good luck!)May theopening [of thepen-case] alwaysbringa good out-come (good luck)'9

The first inscriptionprovidesa variationon a poemthat is commonly inscribed on fourteenth-century Ira-nian metalwork, but which is also occasionally found on93


7/15

Timurid wares, includingtwo slightly laterjugs datingto the thirdquarterof the fifteenthcentury (see Figures8-13).20 Such Arabic well-wishing verses (which aresomewhatcomparableto the duCa', r an invocationforGod's favor) are among the most common types of in-scriptionon Persian metalworkup to the fifteenthcen-tury.Beginning in the fifteenthcentury,however,boththe frequencywith which Persianpoetryis inscribedonmetalworkand the repertoireof the verses used show a

7. Base of a candlestick,Timurid,beforemid-I5thcentury.Brass inlaid with silver, 93/4X63/4 in. (24X 17 cm.).Privatecollection(photo: Pope, ed., A Survey fPersianArt [London, I939] pl. 1375)dramatic increase.2'For example, the inscriptions onthe sides of the cover of the pen-case include a distichfrom a mulammac mixed Persianand Arabicghazal) byHafiz (d. I389 or 1390), the most famous of the Persianghazal lyricists,22rom the Diwan-iHafiz.23 his repre-sents, thus far, the earliestexampleof Iranianmetalworkbearinginscribedverse by Hafiz, who was already re-nowned throughoutthe Persian-speakingworld in hisown lifetime.24Other ghazals abridged from his Diwanare inscribedon numerousexamplesof Timuridmetal-work, including the contemporarycandlestick, to bediscussedbelow,while the earliest datedexampleof Ti-

muridmetalworkwith inscribedversesby Hafiz is the year 866 / 461-62 (see Figures Io and I ) 25The Persian verses on the pen-case, as well acandlestick,representthe type of verse most frequinscribed on subsequentTimurid wares in which sreference s made to theobjectitselfand/or its funcClassical Persianpoetryvery oftenprojectsa multity of images byjuxtaposingwords that have an amuous meaning. When verses of the type quoted abwhich allude to the function of the object,or make al reference o it, are inscribedon the actualobject,would presumablyevoke a further mage.Tosummarize thusfar,the useofspatialinlaysoTimurid pen-case in the Metropolitan Museumgests that the objectwas decorated about or priortmid-fifteenthcentury,while the linear inlays, sucthose in the center of the top of the coverthat are ooutlining type only, indicate a date not after the quarterof thecentury.The combineduseofspatial nwhich are more closely related to fourteenth-cemetalwork,and linearinlays that outlinethe decoronly,a techniqueforwhich the earliest dated instanfromtheyear 1456-57 (Figure8), connotesan intediate stage in the evolution of inlaying with premetal. Certain aspects of the decoration, such atraditionalmannerin which the ornamenton the of the pen-case is organizedand is invariablycenwithina carefullydefinedspace,aremosttypical ofTimurid inlaid metalwork.The small-scale pattenetwork of designon the topof the coverof thepenbelongs to the decorative repertoireof Timurid imetalwork that began about the middle of the fiftecentury. Finally, the manner in which the inscripare divided into two or three lines, so that the lettethe wordsappearto be stacked, s likewisecharactof Timurid metalwork,26 s is the inclusion in thscriptionof verses by the poet Hafiz.The juxtaposition of technical, decorative, andgraphic features that are either more closely allifourteenth-centurymetalwork,or are unknownprthe middle of thefifteenthcentury,allows fordatinobject to the first half of the fifteenthcenturyor, avery latest, to the middle of the century.Furtherthe use of linear inlays that outline the decorationinclusionof an inlaid patternor networkof designthe style and content of the inscriptions, all serunite this object with otherexamplesof Timurid imetalwork, and make it the earliest such exaknown to me.

94


8/15

A candlestick (Figure 7) in a privatecollection is ex-tremelyclose in terms of both style and techniqueto theMetropolitanMuseum's Timurid pen-case, and it alsobelongs at the beginningof this groupof Timuridinlaidwares. The decoration on the base of the candlestickcombines incised and linear decoration; the socket,though decoratedin a similarmanner,appears to be alaterreplacement.27Around the taperingmid-sectionof the base are alter-nating and interlockingmedallions and cartouches. Ineach of the former s an inlaid interlacedfloral-and-leafpatternin which the motifs are outlinedby the silverin-lays.This pattern s extremelyclose to the moreextensivedesign on the topof the coverof thepen-case (Figure 3).The inlaid "stacked"naskhinscriptionsenclosedby thecartouches are again very similarto the inscriptionsonthe pen-case. Furthermore,he incised rosettes and peo-nies that surround the medallions and cartouches, aswell as those that are interwoven with an inlaid leafscroll at the bottom of the candlestick, or below itsshoulder, are likewise comparableto the incised floralmotifs on the pen-case. Finally,bothobjectsbearsmall,incisedscrollingleaves as a filler motif between certainof the inlaid lines.

Because of its numerous and close affinities to thepen-case, the candlestick can be similarlydated priorto, or about, the middle of the fifteenthcentury.Onceagain, the combination of linear inlays outlining thedecoration,"stacked"cursiveinscriptions,and inscrip-tions that presentversesby Hafiz, which arealso foundon the candlestick,28 ll link this object with Timuridmetalwork,and in particularthepresentgroupofinlaidwares. The Persianverses on the candlestickagain al-lude to the function of the object:

/ _Y > gL >Aj c jj )

Inconstancy f love oryou,I am the amous fthe air, ikethecandle,I amthenight-sittern the streetof thefoolhardy nd thevagrants,ike hecandleDayandnight leepcomesnot tomygrief-worshippingyeSince nsickness fseparationromyou,I amweepingikethe candle

If we now turn to the earliest examplesfrom the sequence of dated inlaid wares, it will be furtherdemonstrated that these objects are, first of all, stylisticallyand technically allied with the two preceding objectand, second, that the pen-case and candlestick baseclearlyrepresent slightlyearlierphaseofdevelopment.The two earliestdated objects are bothjugs; one ex-ample, in the Museum fur IslamischeKunst, Berlin, isfromtheyear861/1456-57 (Figure 8), while the other isin the Victoria and Albert Museum, and is dated 866/1461-62 (Figure IO).According to the signatures inscribed on the underside of each of these vessels (Figures9 and I2), theyare the workofthe same ndividual-HabibAllahibn CAliBaharjani.Bothjugs areinlaidwithsilver,and the cross-hatchedbackground s filled with ablack substance which is especially well-preservedonthe earlierexample.

Epigraphy plays a dominant role in the decorativscheme of the twovessels. On bothjugs a comparativellarge-scale thulthinscription circumscribes the neckThe style and texts of these Arabic inscriptions arenearlyidentical: both include a version of thepoem thawas also inscribed on the top of the cover of the pen-case. Aroundthe centerof the bodyof thejug dated 86 /I456-57 is a second,large-scalethulthinscription,againin Arabic,which supplies a royalprotocol.29 bove andbelow this central epigraphicband is a continuouspat-tern of interlacedpalmettes, leaves, and small knotlikdevices. The largestelements of thepattern-the palm-ettes-are outlined rather than defined by the inlays(Figures8-9).On Habib Allah's second, slightly later,vessel (Figure io), the center of the body again bearsinscriptionsbut in this instancetheyare written n a small,"stackednaskh,and are contained within four consecutive narrow bands of cartouches. These inscriptionsare verysimilar in style to those of the candlestick;the Persianverses are again by the poet Hafiz.30Above and belowthe epigraphicbands of the London vessel is a broadregister filled with a pattern composed of interlacedarches with palmettes and clusters of interlacedleaveand flowers.The palmettesareagainoutlinedby the sil-ver inlays (Figure I3). This patternis closelyrelated tothat of the earlier ug in Berlin,while the floral-and-leapatternson both vessels are comparableto those of thepreviouslydescribedpen-case and candlestick;certainvegetalmotifssharedby the twojugs are alsocomparabto the large, inlaid palmettelikeleaves on the candle-stick (Figure7).

95


9/15

8. Jug, Timurid, dated 86I/I456-57, by Habib Allah ibnCAli Baharjani. Brass, inlaid with silver, 5X51/4 in.(I2.5 X 13 cm.). Berlin (West), Museum fiir IslamischeKunst, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz,inv. no. 1.3606 (photo: Museum fur Islamische Kunst/J. Liepe)

9. Detail of Figure 8 showing the signature and date on thebottom (photo: Museum fur Islamische Kunst/J. Liepe)

One further dated vessel makes extensive use olaid decorationof the outliningvarietyand that is ain the Turk ve Islam Eserleri Miizesi, Istanbul, fthe year 871/1466, which is signed by Husayn Sh[al-Din] Shihab [al-Din] al-Birjandi (Figure I4).3"the floraland vegetal decorationon the body is chaterizedby inlaysthatoutlinethe motifs.Such decoris organizedin a systemof intersectingand overlapcartouchesand quatrefoilsof a type that is also founthe designs of roughly contemporary bookbinfrom Herat.As on the precedingobjects, the Persiascriptions,set withincartouches,arewrittenin a mlevel, or "stacked,"naskh.On the neck and cover ovessel the alternatingcartouchesare filledwith, orroundedby, interlacesof trilobate leaves or lancetarabesquesthat are defined ratherthan outlinedbinlay.The decorationon the neckis, furthermore,what compressed nsofar as less of the backgroundposed, while the inlaid pattern covers a greater aThe ornament on the upper portion of the jug d87 / 1466 alreadypoints towarda subsequent phathe developmentof Timurid inlaid metalwork.32three dated jugs, therefore,demonstratethe conttion and furtherdevelopmentof the technicaland drative featuresof the pen-case and candlestick.

By comparisonwith the threevesselsdatingto thequarterof the fifteenthcentury,or the somewhateapen-case and candlestick,the decorationof fivedated or datable to the I48os shows a denser, smascale, morerepetitiveand thereforemore unifiedtypatterning in which contrast is provided by the usilver and gold inlays.33 n each instance, as in adated 893/1487-88 and signed by Qutb al-Din Nal-Din Quhistani (Figure i5),34 the elements of thsign are defined rather than outlinedby the inlays.The two latest datedobjectsfrom the Timuridpthat belong to this group demonstrate the furthergression of the decorative style here under consition. These twojugs, producedduringthe finalyeaTimurid rule in eastern Iran, are dated 908/ I5039IO/ 1505 (Figure i6); they are signed by the sameist-CAla' al-Din (ibn)Shamsal-Dinal-Birjandi.Thample dated 90o/1505 is in the Museum fur IslamiKunst, Berlin, while al-Birjandi'searlierwork isknown to me from a Christie's sale catalogue.'are covered by a more compressed,denser netwodesign that is composedof delicate interlacedleafbesques in which, as on the Berlinvessel, the systequatrefoilsand epigraphiccartouchesthat encircl


10/15

10.Jug, Timurid,dated866/ 461-62, byHabib Allah ibn 11. Detail ofFigure o showing he handle n place(photo:CAliBaharjani. Brass inlaid with silver, 5/4 51/8 n. Komaroff)(i3 X 12.8 cm.). London, Victoria and Albert Museum,inv.no. 943-I886 (photo:Komaroff)

body and neck is barelydistinguishable rom the alloverpatterning.These two vessels are inlaidwithsilveralone. ! _STo summarize, the objects in our group of Timuridinlaid metalwork, beginning with the Metropolitan ^Museum's pen-case and concludingwith thejug dated r910/ 505, demonstrate an increasingly unified pro- -ygramof design in which the characteristicrepetitiveflo- Sral-and-leaf motifs and leaf arabesques gradually be- \>come finer, more closely packed, and less varied in ^terms of their individualnuances. Inscriptionsexhibita rfparallel development in that they eventually becomefully integratedwithin the networkofdesign.This clearstylisticprogression,culminating n a dense surfacepat- --terning made up of small-scale decorative and epi-graphicelements that are defined ratherthan outlinedbylinearinlays seems to have takenplace in Khurasan,the last strongholdof Timuridpower.

12.Detailof Figure o1 showingthe signatureand dateon ithe bottom(photo:Komaroff) g13.Detail of Figureio (photo:Komaroff)


11/15

14.Jug, Timurid,dated87 /I466, by HusaynShamsal-Din Shihabal-Dinal-Birjandi.Brass, nlaidwith silverand gold. Istanbul, Tiirk ve Islam EserleriMiizesi,inv. no. 296I (photo: David Alexander)15.Jug, Timurid, dated 893/I487-88, by Qutb al-DinNajmal-Dinal-Quhistani.Brass nlaidwithgoldandsilver,H. 43/ in. (12 cm.). Present ocationunknown

(photo: Christie's sale cat. [London, I972], lot 76)

Of the thirteen ignedexamplesofTimurid nlaid metalworkknown to me,3' eight of theirsignaturesincludthe artist's nisbah,38hich in every instance is formedaftera place namein Khursan;theyare:I. HabibAllah ibn CAliBaharjani(Figures8-13)2. Husayn Shams al-Din Shihab al-Din al-Birjand(Figure 14)

3. Shams al-Din Shihabal-Din al-Birjandial-Quhistani394. Qutb al-Din Najm al-Din Quhistani (Figure 15)5. Muhammad ibn Shams al-Din al-Ghuri4P6. CAla'al-Din (ibn) Shams al-Din Muhammad al

Birjandi (Figure i6)The first nisbah, Baharjani, refers to Baharjanwhich, accordingto the late-fifteenth-century ext pertaining to the history of the city of Herat (RawdatalJamratfi wsafMadinatarat),wasoneof the nine districof Quhistan.4' Quhistan is a mountainous region oKhurasan, as is also noted in the above-mentionedhistorical work.4 The next nisbah,al-Birjandi, is formeafter the place name Birand, which, accordingto thNuzhatal-Qulub,writtenin I340, was a provincialtownin Quhistan.43That the Birjand referred o in this nisbais in fact in Quhistan is indicatedby the thirdnisbah, lBirjandi al-Quhistani. It is possible that the owner othe nisbah l-Birjandi n this instancefelt that his nativ

16.Jug, Timurid,dated 9I0/1505, by CAla' l-Din (ibnShamsal-Dinal-Birjandi.Brass, nlaidwithsilver,5 X5/4 in. (I2.7 X 13.2 cm.). Berlin (West), Museum furIslamische Kunst, Staatliche Museen PreussischKulturbesitz, nv. no. I.6052(photo:Museumfur IslamischeKunst/J. Liepe)


12/15

town was so little knownthathe had to qualifyhis nisbahby adding the furthernisbahal-Quhistani. In the fourthinstance it is perhaps because the owner of this nisbahcame fromsuch an obscuretown or village that Quhis-tani is used alone. The fifth nisbah,al-Ghuri, refers toGhur,a mountainousarea of Khurasan, as is noted forexample in the tenth-century Hududal-cAlam in theNuzhatal-Qulub alled a district)." The sixth and lastnisbah, l-Birjandi,has alreadybeen clarified.The fact that each of these nisbahss associated withKhurasan and furthermoreoccurs among the signa-tures on objects of which every one demonstrates aclosely related decorative style and inlay techniquewould tend to supportthesuppositionthat thestyleandthe technique may both be indigenous to Khurasan.This does not of courseprovethatthe ownersof thesenis-bahsnecessarily worked in Khurasan, but the relativeobscurityof theplacesafterwhich the nisbahsre formedtends to militate against theirhaving been understoodor used outside of the Timurid East.4 One of these ob-jects, ajug signed by al-Ghuri,was made, accordingtoits inscriptions, for the contemporaryruler of Khura-san-Sultan Husayn Bayqara (r. 1470-1506). Thisfurtherties the vessel by al-Ghuriand relatedexamplesto Khurasan, whose capital-Herat-was the pre-eminentartisticcenter of the TimuridEast and, in fact,for all of Iran in the second half of the fifteenthcentu-ry.6 It is thereforemost likely that a vessel made bysomeonefrom Khurasan (al-Ghuri)and for the ruler ofKhurasan would have been made in the political andartisticcapitalof that region,namelyHerat.

With the exceptionof al-Ghuri, all of the nisbahsustnoted are associated with Quhistan, which, as Meli-kian-Chirvaniwas the first to point out on the basis ofinformationsupplied by the aforementioned"historyofHerat,"seems to have been economicallytied to Herat,providing that city with a variety of goods and services.47It is highly likely that Quhistan also supplied Heratwith skilledartists and craftsmen,or perhapssuch indi-viduals emigratedto, and were trained in, Herat. Thesame may perhaps be said of al-Ghuri-the man fromGhur,which is locatedjust to the east of Herat.4In theforegoingdiscussion haveattempted odemon-stratetwo correlativepoints.Namely,that the Metropoli-tan Museumpen-caseand related candlestickrepresentthe earliestextant productsof the Timurid school of in-laid metalware thus far identified, whose later workshelp to tie this school to Khurasan.These two early in-laid waresare of furthersignificance nsofaras theydoc-ument a formativephase in Timurid inlaid metalwork,one that presupposesa transferenceof established nlaytechniques and decorativevocabularyfrom western toeasternIran,wherea final transformationntoa uniquelyTimuridstyleof inlaidmetalworkwas effectedat Herat.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe research or this article was completedwhile the au-thorwas firsta HagopKevorkian ellowand atera MellonFellow, n theDepartmentof IslamicArt,The Metropoli-tanMuseumofArt,support orwhich she is mostgrateful.

NOTES

I. Forfurther nformationn Iranianmetalwork eeAssadullahSouren Melikian-Chirvani,IslamicMetalworkrom the IranianWorld,th-s8thCenturiesLondon,I982). Forgeneral nformationon Islamicmetalwork, ncludingIranian nlaid metalwork, eeJames W. Allan, IslamicMetalwork:heNuhadEs-SaidCollection(London, 1982); Esin Atil, W. T. Chase, and PaulJett, IslamicMetalworkn theFreerGalleryfArt Washington, 985);EvaBaer,Metalworkn MedievalslamicArt (Albany, 1983);and DouglasBarrett, slamicMetalworkn theBritishMuseumLondon,1949).2. GlennLowry, n "IskandarMirza andEarlyTimuridMet-alwork," Orientations (Sept. 1986) pp. 12-20, has recentlyclaimedthat a pen-case n theMuse Jacquemart-Andre,Paris,is dated I412-13 (presumably 15hijra). haveseriousreserva-tions,however,as to whether here s any dateinscribedon thisobject,nor do I concurwiththe authoronhisstylisticassessmentof this and a relatedpen-casein The MetropolitanMuseumof

Art (17.190.822, Figure6), whichhas led him to conclude hatthese twoobjectswereproducedunderTimuridpatronagen theearly i5th century n western ran.3. On the connectionsbetween a western Iranian, Shirazischoolofarchitecturend thesubsequentevelopmentf a Timuridschoolof architecturewhosepractitionerswereresponsibleor anumberofoflicially ponsoredbuildings, ee LisaGolombek,TheTimuridhrine t GazurGah,RoyalOntarioMuseumof Art andArchaeology Occasional Paper 15 (Toronto, 1969) pp. 60-62;71-73, n. i, items D-G; K; M. On miniature painting, see, for in-stance,ErnstGrubeandEleanorSims,"TheSchoolofHerat rom1400-1450," TheArts of theBook in CentralAsia, ed. Basil Gray(London, 1979) pp. 147-178.4. See LindaKomaroff,"Patronage r Pillage:The Evolutionof TimuridMetalwork,"a forthcoming tudy;also KomaroffsPh.D.diss., "The TimuridPhase n IranianMetalwork:Formu

99


13/15

lation and Realization of a Style" (New York University, I984),to be publishedshortly in revised form as The GoldenDiskofHeaven:Metalworkf Timurid ran.5. Two lamps and the base of a third are in the Hermitage, Len-

ingrad, while the upper portions of the third example are in theMusee du Louvre, Paris. One of the three lamps preserved at theshrine complex is incomplete and does not bear any inscribed ref-erence to Timur. The first extensive study of these lamps waspublished by A. A. Ivanov, "O bronzovykh izdelifakhkontsa XIVv. iz mavolela Khodzha Akhmeda Yasevi" [On bronze wares ofthe end of the i4th century from the Khoja Ahmad Yasavi mau-soleum], SrednaiaAziza i ee Sosedi[Central Asia and its Society](Moscow, I98I) pp. 68-84, and more recently by Komaroff,"The Timurid Phase," pp. 207-233; 622-639.

6. For a detailed discussion see Komaroff, "The TimuridPhase," pp. 109-112; 228-230.

7. The differences between spatial and linear inlays are graphi-cally illustrated in James W. Allan, PersianMetal Technology00-I300 AD (Oxford, 1979) figs. 5a-d. Unless otherwise indicated,the observations and comments on the inlay technique includedin the present study are based purely upon visual analysis.

8. On the decline and subsequent disappearance of figural im-agery from Iranian metalwork, see Komaroff, "The TimuridPhase," pp. 78-95.

9. Five of these are illustrated in Figures 8-16; the remainingexamples are: a pen-case, dated 865/ 460-61, present locationunknown; a jug, dated 889/1484, private collection; a jug dated903/1498, in the British Museum; ajug, private collection, dated901 /1495; and ajug dated 908/1502, present location unknown;see Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," nos. 6, 8, 14, 15 i6A, re-spectively. Also an unpublishedjug in the British Museum dated889/1484. This is by no means a finite list; there are numerouspublished references to such dated pieces, while inlaid objects ofthis type, which occasionally bear a date, will most likely continueto appear on the art market.

io. On this topic, see Komaroff, "Timurid to Safavid Iran:Continuity and Change," Marsyas20 (1979-80) pp. i-i6; aswell as Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," pp. 577-589. Also, seebelow, n. 40.1. As well as a type of bowl; see Komaroff, "The TimuridPhase," nos. I-I7, pp. 407-456; for the wedge-shaped pen-casessee nos. 6-7; and for the bowl, no. 17.12. Such a black material seems to be a common featureof mostmedieval Iranian inlaid metalwork. In Nov. 1983 the black sub-stance from the pen-case, 91. 1.536, and a related late-fourteenth-century Syrian or western Iranian pen-case, 17.190.822, wasanalyzed in The Metropolitan Museum of Art's Department ofObjects Conservation. Apart from the fact that the black sub-stance is a "solvent-resistant organic material," which may havebeen applied to the metalwork in liquid form, the results of thevarious tests did not lead to the identification of this substance. I

would like to thank Richard Stone, of the Department of ObjectsConservation, for his time, as well as for the insight of his com-ments. On the general question of this black substance andmedieval inlaid metalwork, see Atil, Chase, andJett, IslamicMet-alwork,p. 40.13. As it is virtually impossible to distinguish between an en-graved and a chased line on medieval Iranian metalwork with

the naked eye alone, I have here, as elsewhere in this article, usedthe general term "incised" to designate any decoration that wasproduced by either an engraving or a chasing tool.

14. See above, n. 12.15. The example in The Metropolitan Museum of Art was first

published by Lowry, "Iskandar Mirza," fig. 3; for the pen-case inParis, see Melikian-Chirvani, Le Bronze Iranien(Paris, I973)pp. 84-85. Also see Allan, NuhadEs-Said, pp. 90-92, where incontrast to Melikian- Chirvani, the author considers pen-cases ofthis type to be of Syrian, rather than Iranian, provenance. Alsosee above, n. 2, for reference to Lowry's recent attribution towestern Iran, and to his dating of the New York and Paris pen-cases to the early Timurid period.

I6. See above, n. 12.17. On Timur's various conquests, seeJean Aubin, "CommentTamerlan prenait les villes," Studia slamica19(1963) pp. 83-122.i8. The reading of the last segment of the inscription is stilltentative. Professor George Saliba, of Columbia University, has

suggested in this regard that the last hemistich should probablybe scanned by assuming a definite article, pronounced but notwritten, preceding the last word.19. The reading of the last line is tentative, although, clearly, itconveys a message quite similar to that of the preceding car-touche. These inscriptions have also been read by Melikian-Chirvani, IslamicMetalwork, p. 245-246.20. I discuss this topic in detail in a forthcoming study, "AnEpigraphic History of Iranian Metalwork, Ith- 7th Century";for specific reference to the Timurid wares on which this same in-

scription occurs, see Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," nos. 3, 4,and 47, also see Appendix I, A; n, B; iv; v.21. Some Persian verses occasionally express good wishes (asin the last two lines on the sides of the cover of the pen-case); suchwell-wishing verses most often include a distich by the 13th-cen-tury poet SaCdi,from his Bustan,which is usually found in con-junction with a similar distich by the Ioth-century poet Daqiqiand another distich from Firdawsi's Shah-Namah, ompleted in

IOIO.These specific verses were first identified by Melikian-Chirvani, IslamicMetalwork, . 252.22. Hafiz was primarily active at the Muzaffarid court at Shi-raz during the I4th century. On Hafiz, see Edward G. Browne, A

LiteraryHistoryofPersiam (Cambridge, 1928) pp. 27 iff.23. Diwan-i KhwajahShamsal-Din MuhammadHafizShirazi,eds.S. M. Ridajalali Na'ini and Nazir Ahmad (Tehran, 1974) p. 569.24. Considering Hafiz's fame-legend has it that Timur him-self had an audience with the poet followinghis conquest of Shirazin 1387 (see Browne,A Literary istory fPersia,pp. 188-189, 282)-it does not seem unlikely that copies of Hafiz's Diwan were al-ready available and were well known in the Timurid East prior tothe manufacture of this pen-case, around the middle of the i5thcentury. Two of the oldest extant manuscripts that include gha-

zals by Hafiz-each written in I41o-iI, and one of which is theearliest most comprehensivecollection of his poetry-were copiedfor the Timurid prince Iskandar, the contemporary ruler of Fars.See Robert M. Rehder, "The Text of Hafiz," Journalof theAmeri-canOrientalSociety4, 2 (I974) pp. 145-156, especiallypp. 151-152.25. From two separate ghazals, see Na'ini and Ahmad, Diwan-iHafiz, p. 62 (and n. 4) and p. 249. These verses were first identi-

I00


14/15

fled by Melikian-Chirvani, "Safavid Metalwork: A Study inContinuity," IranianStudies,7, 3-4 (1974) pp. 545 and 572 n. 55.In addition to Hafiz, SaCdi, Daqiqi, and Firdawsi (see n. 21,above) several other poets' verses have thus far been identifiedamong the inscriptions on Timurid metalwork; these include Qa-sim al-Anwar, Salihi, and Jami, all 15th-century poets who wereactive in Khurasan. Their verses were first identified by A. A.Ivanov (see "Khudozhestvennaia bronza blizhnego i SrednegoVostoka" [Artistic bronzes of the Near and Middle East] Soobsh-cheniziGosudardstvennogormitazha Communications of the StateHermitage] 30 (I969) pp. 31-36 for Qasim al-Anwar; for Salihi,see "Osvanie podsvechnika 800 g. kh. (I475-1476 gg.) so stikh-ami poeta Salikhi" [Base of a candlestick of the year 800 H.(1475-I476) with a verse by the poet Salihi] SoobshcheniiaGosu-darstvennogormitazha[Communications of the State Hermitage]27 (I966) pp. 67-70; and forJami, see "Tripredmeta so stikhamidzhami" [Three objects with verses by Jami] EpigrafikaVostoka20 (I97I) pp. 97-103.

26. On the epigraphic style of Timurid metalwork, see Koma-roff, "The Timurid Phase," pp. 313-314.

27. I had the opportunity to examine this piece at The Metro-politan Museum of Art, Oct. I983. While the decoration from thesocket includes very much the same floral motifs as those on thebase of the object, the two differ considerably in technique andquality. The socket appears to be a later replacement intended tomatch the base. There is an interior seam at the juncture of thesocket and base indicating that the two pieces were separatelyfabricated and then attached. The present location of this piece isunknown to me; it was first published in A Survey fPersianArt, ed.Arthur Upham Pope (London, 1939) pl. I375.

28. Na'ini and Ahmad, Diwan-i Hafiz, pp. 390-39 and n. I2.29. The inscriptions were first published in Klaus Brisch, ed.,IslamischeKunst:Loseblatt-Katalog npublizierterWerke us deutschenMuseen.Bd. 2, StaatlicheMuseenPreussischer ulturbesitz,MuseumirIslamischeKunst,Metall,Stein,Stuck,Holz, Elfenbein,Stoffe Mainz,

i985) no. 338. I will here supply an English translation of theverses: Around the neck: "To its owner happiness and well-beingand life as long as a pigeon coos. Lasting glory, with no humilia-tion in it, and good fortune until Judgment Day"; around thebody: "The most mighty Sultan, the exalted Khaqan, the Mas-ter of the Kings of the Arabs and the non-Arabs, the shadow ofGod in the two lands, the Steward of the water and the soil whospreads the wings of peace and security [in the] year 86I/1456-57"; and in a separate medallion: "Its owner is Iskandaribn Muhammad Mirza"; on the underside of the base: "Made byHabib Allah ibn CAli Baharjani [in the] year 86 / 1456-57"; andsurrounding this: "Glory, auspicious fate, good fortune, happi-ness, well-being, divine favor, O God of the two worlds." Theroyal protocol has not yet been associated with a particular Ti-murid prince, nor has the original owner of the vessel, whosename is given in the medallion, been identified.

30. See above, n. 25; also see Melikian-Chirvani, IslamicMet-alwork,pp. 248-250, where a complete transcription and Englishtranslation of the inscriptions are provided.

31. My reading of the signature is slightly different than that ofL. A. Mayer, IslamicMetalworkers ndTheir WorksGeneva, 1959)p. 47, who first recorded this inscription. I have not as yet beenable to decipher fully the Persian verses on the body, neck, andcover, although these include the word mashrabah, r jug. This

vessel, presently in the Turk ve Islam Eserleri Miizesi, was (ac-cording to Mayer) formerly in the Topkapu Saray. I would like tothank Dr. David Alexander for his photograph of this piece.

32. It has not been possible to determine whether the spout onthis vessel is original. It can be noted, however, that each of thejugs by Habib Allah bears a repair mark in precisely the samearea as where the spout is attached on the example in Figure 14.

33. See Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," nos. 8-i IA, pp.429-439-

34. Known to me only from a Christie's sale cat. (London,Oct. 23, 1972) p. 28, lot 76, pl. 13. Also see Komaroff, "The Ti-murid Phase," no. II.35. For a detailed discussion that includes a number of exam-

ples that are dated or datable to the I49os see Komaroff, "TheTimurid Phase," pp. 342-345.36. London, Oct. 23, I972, p. 28, lot 77, pl. io. The signatureand date, on the underside of the vessel, reads: "made by the hum-blest of servants CAla'al-Din ibn Shams al-Din Muhammad al-

Birjandi in the holy month of Ramadan 908/March 1503." Al-though the signature on the Berlin example is generally read as"'Ala' al-Din and Shams al-Din," the signature on the exampleof 908/ 1503 demonstrates that CAla' al-Din (ibn) Shams al-Dinis in fact one person, as has also been noted by Melikian-Chirvani, "Safavid Metalwork," p. 545 n. 8. On the Berlin vesseldated 9Io/1505, see Brisch, Loseblatt-Katalog, o. 339.

37. Apart from the eight signed examples that include the artist'snisbah,there are five further signed objects, all jugs: two vesselssigned by Husayn ibn Mubarak-Shah; another signed byJawan-bakht ibn Husayn; and a vessel by CAbdal-Khalil Qutb al-Din;see Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," nos. 8, 9, 13, and I5, re-spectively. The fifth example is an unpublished jug in the BritishMuseum byJamal al-Din Shams al-Din. This list is by no meansfinite; further signed examples may very well continue to appearon the art market.

38. A nisbah s a type of surname, usually designating where itsowner originated; a nisbahmay also refer to an individual's clanor tribe, religious sect, and occasionally his trade or profession.39. See Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," no. 7, pp. 338-339,and pp. 427-428. This piece, a pen-case datable ca. 865/1460-61, is in the Iran Bastan Museum, Tehran. I would like to thankDr. Anatole Ivanov for bringing it to my attention.

40. See Komaroff, "The Timurid Phase," no. I4, pp. 343-344,and pp. 446-448. This object, a jug dated 903/ I498, is in theBritish Museum. For a relatedjug that is also the work of a crafts-man using the nisbah l-Ghuri (i.e., CAlib. Muhammad CAliShahabal-Ghuri), and which was made in 918/1512, several years afterthe fall of the Timurid dynasty, see Artfrom heIslamicWorld,LouisianaRevy 27, 3 (Mar. 1987) p. 105.

41. Mucinal-Din Muhammad Zamchi Isfizari,Rawdatal-JannatAwsaf Madinat Harat, ed. S. M. Kazim Imam, pt. I (Tehran1959), t. II (i960); pt. I, p. 327. Similarly, Melikian-Chirvani,IslamicMetalwork, . 238.

42. Isfizari, Rawdatal-Jannat,pt. I, pp. 327-328.43. Nuzhat al-Qulub (composedyHamd-allahMustawfiof Qazwinin 740/1340), trans. G. Le Strange, "E. J. W. Gibb Memorial"Series 23, 2 (London, I919) p. 143.44. And located east of Herat; Hududal-'Alam: "TheRegionso

IOI


15/15

theWorld,"rans. V. Minorsky, "E.J. W. Gibb Memorial" Series,n.s. ii (London, 1937) p. i o. Nuzhatal-Qulub,p. I52. An alter-nate, and possibly more logical, interpretation of this nisbah sthat it is formed after the town of Ghuriyan, a short distance westof Herat, which is mentioned by Qasim ibn YusufAbu Nasri Ha-ravi, in 970 /1515, in his Tariq-iQismat-i -i Qub, ed. M. Haravi(Tehran, I968) p. 89 n. II, where this town is referred to in thecontext of Timur's conquest of Herat. I would like to thank Pro-fessor Robert McChesney of New York University for this sug-gestion and reference.

45. SimilarlyMelikian- Chirvani,IslamicMetalwork,p. 238-239.46. Ernst Grube, "Notes on the Decorative Arts of the TimuridPeriod," Gururdjanjarika,tudi in Onoredi GiuseppeTucci,IstitutoOrientale Universitario (Naples, I974) p. 246, was the first tolink these vessels with Herat, but solely on the basis of the in

scriptions from the British Museum jug signed by al-Ghuri.47. Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork, p. 238. IsfizariRawdatal-Jannatpt. I, pp. 327-328.48. But see above, n. 44.

102

pen-case and candlestick: two sources for the development of persian inlaid metalwork

Documents