Manuscripts
tāriḵ-e ʿālām-ārā-ye šāh esmāʿil
Ḡazāli ʿArab had been appointed governor of Damascus by the Mamluk ruler Sultan Ḡānisāy, and remained on as confidant to Sultan Selim after the Ottomans overran the Mamluk dynasty. Preoccupied with events in Europe, the Ottoman ruler entrusted Ḡazāli and Sultan Soleymān to secure the province of Diār Bakr. Ḡazāli’s first encounter with the qezelbāš was in a battle with Nur ʿAli Ḵalifa Rumlu, who valiantly died fighting with only 100 men, but succeeded in impressing Ḡazāli with the courage of the qezelbāš. Upon hearing of this victory, the Ottoman sultan sent an additional 50,000 troops to Ḡazāli to help secure the province. Meanwhile, Esmāʿil had already dispatched an army under the command of Div Solṭān Rumlu, who later acquired great powers in the Safavid state under Shah Ṭahmāsp. Div Solṭān’s orders, however, were not to engage the Turks until he, Esmāʿil, arrived.
One by one, the Safavid commanders evacuated the garrisons in the province and joined Div Solṭān in Diār Bakr, leaving only the empty fortresses for the Ottomans. In all Ḡazāli took over 42 empty garrisons before reaching the city of Diār Bakr and encountering the qezelbāš under the command of Div Solṭān. The two commanders met: Ghazåli wanted to do battle, but Div Solṭān explained that he was under orders not to fight until Esmāʿil arrived. Ḡazāli graciously postponed their encounter for one week, at the end of which Esmāʿil had arrived, and the confrontation went ahead as planned. In the joust Ḡazāli unhorsed Div Solṭān with his lance. This angered Esmāʿil, who immediately rode forward to meet the Arab. In the ensuing encounter the shah unseated Ḡazāli, and ordered Div Solṭān to bring Ḡazāli prisoner before him. When Div Solṭān proceeded to bind Ḡazāli’s hands behind his back in the traditional manner for a prisoner, Esmāʿil interceded and instructed that his hands be bound in front because this man would become one of his ṣufis. Sultan Soleymān and the Ottomans were allowed to depart at Ḡazāli’s request, and the qezelbāš reoccupied the 42 garrisons held by the Turks. Ḡazāli took the shiʿite vows and was awarded the governorship of four kingdoms in the south encompassing Khuzistan and Fars.
The painting portrays Ḡazāli near the center of the picture, in a purple coat and white turban with feathers, a bow encased at his side, his hands bound with cord, and being forced by Div Solṭān Rumlu to kneel before Esmāʿil. Div Solṭān stands next to Ḡazāli in a beige topcoat and red flat top qezelbāš tāj, quivers on his belt, and rope in hand. To the right is Shah Esmāʿil sitting astride a light gray horse whose forelegs and belly are stained with mud. Esmāʿil stretches his right arm outward in the direction of the captive. As in previous folios, the shah wears a white topcoat with gold trim, red flat top qezelbāš headgear. In addition to Div Solṭān, two other qezelbāš accompany the shah, one in off-white clothing and partly obscured, the other in vermillion on a white horse in the right foreground. A brown horse, apparently belonging to Div Solṭān, is held in the lower right by a groom dressed in dark green. On the left side of the comosition are three personage, each only partially visible, who are apparently part of Ḡazāli’s entourage. Two bearded individuals, each with a forefinger to the lip in a sign of astonishment, peer at the event from over the ridge in the upper left. They are only visible from the waist up, but one is dressed in vermillion, the other light olive. The backdrop is simply done: a pinkish-mauve hillside rises to a craggy rock ridge near the top, on which are sparse suggestions of green and yellow foliage, and at the extreme top a narrow band of variegated blue sky.
Panting: 16.0 x 13.2 cm. Two lines of text above and below. Frame encloses painting and text. A marginal inscription in red, presumably of later date, describes the event depicted. Inscriptions, also in red, appear on two figures, identifying them as Div Solṭān and Ḡazāli. A black inscription appears at the bottom of the painting. The first portion of the inscription, in a handwriting that might well be Moʿin’s, states betāriḵ-e nima(?) rabiʿ al-avval sana 1010 ba etmam rasid...(completed in the middle of Rabiʿ I of the year 1010/September 1601...). Stylistically this date is impossible, and may have been intended for 1100/January 1689. The end of the inscription, which may have include the artist’s signature, is smeared and illegible; above the smear is written, in a different hand, doubtlessly an attribution, amol-e moʿin-e moṣavver.
Painting references:
Mahboubian_1972, #923 folio 332v (not ill.).
Text references:
Muntaẓer-Ṣāḥeb_1970, pp.579-80.
Robert Eng
Last Updated: December 16, 2010
Originally published: April 4, 2002