|
|
The Place of Illustration in History Writing
turkish
Mutlu: Hi! from Turkiye’den. This week our topic is the illustrated history. We will discuss how illustration and history come together. Up until now we have all learned that history is something that is written, or at most, oral. Now we want to ask what meaning illustration assumes when it takes place in history. Now I want you introduce our guests. Mrs. Ýsenbike Togan is the faculty member of the Department of History at the Middle East Technical University. Welcome Mrs. Togan. Our second guest is Assoc. Prof. Serpil Bagci, faculty member at the Department of Art History at Hacettepe University. You, too, welcome, Mrs. Bagci. I want to start by asking a question to Mrs. Bagci. What do we understand from the concept of the illustrated history? It is as if both a strange and familiar concept at the same time. History can be illustrated? But, when we illustrate history don’t we write a new history? Bagci: A good question it is. If we illustrate history later I do have a greater chance in terms of variety and technology applied in the illustrations. But what we are going to talk about here are illustrations that are inserted into a text to further explain that text. In contemporary literature, in contemporary scientific world they are called as ‘miniatures’. But, indeed, the designation ‘miniature’ is a substantive adapted in retrospect. Mutlu: Perhaps because they are small. Bagci: There are both
small and very big ones, especially when we think of the monumental
illustrations. The first illustrated histories, prepared in the 14th century
were quite big. Both the books themselves and their illustrations were very big
in size. Indeed, ‘miniature’ is a loanword that passed from the Western
languages meaning small illustration. They can be made by using various
ingredients. But what we are going to talk about here today are book
illustrations, in older saying, ‘surets’ [copies], ‘tasvirler’ [descriptions].
They are mostly called as ‘tasvirler’ [descriptions]. Because, sometimes there
exists a short title on the heading of these illustrations. For instance, it is
said that Gazan Khan has done that and its description is this. Following such
an expression there takes place an illustration done by another artist. When we
were talking with Mrs. Togan, she asked me a question: “Now we are not used to
insert many illustrations into the history books. But why we used to put many
illustrations in the history books then? I replied her, “I don’t know”.
Manuscripts can be divided into two main groups: books that are much more
interesting for their content that are used to learn the knowledge in their
content and to teach it to the future generations; and illustrated books that
are designed as an art work with their illustrations, binding, cover and inner
design that make them expensive, luxurious commodities as it is put in the West.
Bagci: For centuries, since the Middle Ages. Such books should not be seen only as texts to be read, but as aesthetical spectacles, works of art whose artistic peculiarities dominate at the same time. Now, some of them happen to be history books. The earliest of such histories dates the beginning of the 14th century, and they have been written for the Mongols and Ilkhanids up until the 18th century. That is, on the direct orders of the Sultan a big world history was prepared. All of them were not illustrated. Some volumes or copies of this world history would be illustrated, and most probably, prepared specially for the Sultans’ libraries or treasures. Mutlu: They are not distributed, you mean? Bagci: We don’t know how the illustrated histories have been distributed. But as for the non-illustrated history books, we learn from Rashideddin’s deed of trust that they have been copied and their Arabic, Persian and Mongolian copies sent to some centres. Knowledge or ideology is disseminated, but the illustrated books should be seen as a somewhat different group. As I said, they should be seen more as pieces of art. Mutlu: Can we talk about the existence of an artistic practice aiming solely at the art itself at that time? As far as I know, church frescoes and ornamentation in the Middle Ages have served as tools for propagating Christianity. For instance, Leonardo perhaps did not define himself as an artist. I think, the idea of “art for the sake of art” belongs to more recent times. You have just mentioned the Mongolian khans. Were there religious mottos under their illustrations or were they thinking, “the illustration lasts, so that I can see my own image later on”. Bagci: I cannot answer this question. I cannot say yes or no. But, the formulas, “art for the sake of art”, “art for the sake of society” or “art for the sake of religion” are all our own formulations. I mean, all these conceptualisations overlap each other. Actually, the artistic production cannot be separated from everyday life. Mutlu: But they are separated today, aren’t they? Let me turn to Mrs. Togan. It seems as if that in our contemporary world art has been separated from everyday life? Of course if we are not including the popular arts like TV, etc. --I don’t know if it is possible to accept them as art-- What I want to mean is this: with the commodification of the works of art specific branches of art like painting and sculpture have created a special field of existence for themselves and shut themselves up in the museums being unable to participate in the flow of everyday life. For you cannot buy them just to hang them on the wall of your house. I mean, there is a difference, I guess. Lets turn back to the functional side of the art. Togan: Today an artist must earn a living in a definite way, there are those among them who are supported by certain sponsors. The artists of that time who Mrs. Bagci just mentioned were making their living on state allowances. In contrast to this, as examples of those who make a living on their own we can mention those artists in the history of China who conflicting with some regimes preferred to withdraw to their own caves. But I think at the period we are talking right now there have been no such artists. Mrs. Bagci knows better. I think there was nobody who rejected to participate in the writings of illustrated histories whose contexts determined by the patrons. For the artists were summoned from very different places and very different schools were brought together. Perhaps this situation creates a very great excitement in the artists that they cannot refuse the offer. I haven’t seen an artist in the history that said, “I don’t want to work in the great art centres under the Mongol rule in Iran”. Bagci: Indeed, it is
nearly impossible to rise such objections. For their raison d’etre in the
society is exactly this. Actually there is no much difference between the
workings of an artist now and then, maybe only the forms are different. The
employers of an artist are the members of aristocracy, the military elite or the
khans. Artists were producing for the private treasures of the khans. As Mrs.
Togan has pointed out there have also been some periods in history during which
the artists were able to produce and sell their own products. For the
illustrated books this process gained a momentum between the 15th and 16th
centuries. For instance, the period in which the ceramics, metal workings,
valuable metal bath bowls, kildans, vases, ewers, large bowls were marketed by
the artists themselves corresponds to the 13th century. It was in this century,
too, that a definite bourgeoisie was strengthened. But, as for the illustrated
histories, the illustration, historiography, binding of all such illustrated
history books were produced under the leadership of Rashideddin in a big
‘nakkashhane’ [place where such artistic books were produced]. As Mrs. Togan has
pointed out both authors, scripts, illustrators, poets came from China, India
and Byzantium. They also brought some important works of art. For example, the
Chinese artists brought woodprint books, history books. It is also highly
probable that the artists coming from Byzantium brought many books in Greek. All
these mixed up and the books were produced in accordance with the Khan’s or the
people’s wishes that mediated between the artist and Khan.
Bagci: Moreover, it wasn’t necessary. Togan: Indeed, an artist may not think as a scientist would do. That is, he may think that he has nothing to learn from anybody, he can do it all himself. But, being open to numerous stimuli surrounding him was actually a very precious opportunity. For instance, everybody goes to Paris to be able to see many famous paintings there. Similar opportunities for the artist were offered by the workshops of Rashideddin. This was a very valuable opportunity for the artists, for sure. Mutlu: Consequently, in such texts we observe that the illustrations were used as an supportive, explanatory auxiliary for content told by the text. Togan: As in newspapers. The pictures in the contemporary newspapers are also auxiliaries for the text. Mutlu: Yes. But they won’t be considered as works of art in the future. Bagci: But they are still part of history. Togan: Our newspapers have the quality of illustrated daily historical documents. If they include a picture that does not support the text it has not much meaning. It is the same with the illustrated history books. But, of course, the contemporary illustrations are various, including the photography. The historical illustrations were more of paintings with a story. Bagci: We observe that there was a very definite set of criteria applied when illustrations were made. If we ask the question that which themes were picked up in these illustrations we see in all the illustrations pertaining to the Ottoman, Timurid or Ilkhanid books that the major themes were the stories, conquests, wars of the main protagonists of the story told in the illustrated histories. Without a through study of the book the reader can see the victorious return of the Mehmed III from the Egri campaign, construction of the Suleymaniye Mosque by Suleyman the Magnificent or Timur killing the Georgians in the caves outside the city. As I said, illustration is the visualisation of the events, moments that are wanted to be underlined and elevated in the history. Mutlu: Well, are there different styles in such visualisation? I mean, at least from the point of view of composition or the location of the elements. For instance the placement of the main protagonist in the centre of the illustration. Are there such differences regarding composition and style? Bagci: Of course, there are. Generally what we see first is the main protagonist. Even though we don’t know him we can easily understand that it is he. Mutlu: How can they convey this? Bagci: Sometimes they put the protagonists in an hierarchical order and sometimes they place him in the centre place and yet sometimes if the protagonist is placed at one end of the illustration then they leave the surrounding space empty. If, for instance, Olceytu is placed on the right end of the illustration together with his armies, the immediate vicinity surrounding Olceytu is left empty. At the opposite end the artist places the opposing forces. But, by just taking a short look at the illustration we can easily understand who the protagonist in that particular illustration is. Naturally, sometimes it is not always that easy to recognise the protagonist. Togan: There are some symbols, too, attributed to the protagonist, aren’t there? His particular sitting position, his dressing, etc. We can also make some sense out of such symbols. Bagci: Of course. There are lots of illustrations depicting kurultais in the Mongol history. When we look at them we can immediately recognise the sovereign, for he is depicted as sitting on a throne. He has his assistants taking some notes and sitting beside him. I mean, throne or crown can point to the sovereign. Even though the Ottomans were not used to depict the sovereign with his crown on his head, in the Mongolian illustrations we see him with a crown. Togan: When I asked my question what I had in my mind was this: I have been in Mongolia recently. In the monuments there the central personage in a cluster of sculptures was depicted as sitting cross-legged while the others who serve him were depicted as sitting on their knees. These are small sculptures but it is still possible to recognise the personages by their sitting position and not only with the help of the objects like crown or throne. As far as I remember, the sitting position in the miniatures was a relaxed position with one knee is bent and the other is stretched free. Bagci: The sovereigns, let them be sultans or khans, were depicted sometimes sitting cross-legged, or on their knees or sometimes with a bent knee. But, there are also some details in the illustrations that tell us things that are not told in the text. For example, in the pre-Middle Ages illustrations there was nobody who was sitting or standing on the carpet where the sovereign was sitting. Such severe rules of protocol were broken a little bit during the time of Timur. Timur’s grandson Baysungur --but he was not a sultan--, or his son Shahrukh was depicted while sitting on a carpet together with a friend or a favourite. Such details were not written in the text, but the artist’s own observations were reflected in the illustration. Indeed, the illustrations in the illustrated histories tell much to the contemporary reader. We cannot decipher some of them. For example, in funeral ceremonies we see people dressed in blue, purple or dark blue, but we cannot make sense of these colours. The text does not tell us that everybody was wearing cloths in blue. But when you look at the illustration you begin to think the reason why everybody dressed in blue, you cannot sense that blue was the colour of mourning. Mutlu: It is black by us, isn’t it? Bagci: But, for anybody who lived in the same century, in the 14th century, the blue colour does not rise any questions because in accordance with the common expectation everybody should wear blue clothes, it was normal. Mutlu: Here we see the benefits of the visual history or the visual part of the history. Togan: The are copies of Cami-ut Tevarih that were illustrated in India. During the time of Baburids. All the personages in these books were depicted as Indians. I want to add to what you have said that the clothes in the illustrated books, too, can tell us many things. In the example I have just mentioned the clothing tells us how the people dressed at the time when the illustrations were made if not at the time of Chingiz Khan. We can learn many things from these illustrations that reach far beyond the written text, the narrative. On the other hand, there are stories that are well known. When I show the miniatures of ‘Ferhad-u Sirin’ to Mrs. Serpil, she can narrate many stories about some details of these miniatures. In some miniatures some information regarding the genealogy of the personages have been reflected in the picture. Bagci: It is just like
illustrating the history. You can find the traces of the visual and cultural
trajectory of the artist in the relationship between text and illustration. When
we are looking for such traces the illustration becomes more problematic. For it
sometimes does not reflect the content of the neighbouring text. As Mrs. Togan
has pointed out, Gazan Khan can be depicted as a Baburid khan. Anushirvan was
known with his justice. He was depicted in Iranian mythology, in the
illustrations painted in India with the bells of justice by his side. But such a
figure, that is, the bells of justice, the bells of justice rang by someone
below to warn the sovereign, doesn’t exist in the Ottoman, Ilkhanid or Timurid
traditions. It was for this reason that there were no bells of justice in the
illustrations depicting Anushirvan painted in these traditions. We have to know
more than what the text says to be able to establish such relationships.
Bagci: The text does not contain such details, you know that? I mean, you cannot find them in the book. You have to look at other sources to be able to make sense of them. But, as you said, specific literary narratives have definite visual cliches that are embedded in everybody’s memory. Togan: Take the death of Alexander, for instance. I have learned to see them immediately from Mrs. Bagci. In the illustration there is a man lying down. But later on you see that it is painted at a later time. Are there such figures in the miniatures of the Great Iskendernamah? Mrs. Bagci has been working on the miniatures of ‘Iskendernamah’ for a long time. Mutlu: There is a tradition of illustrated histories in the West, too, isn’t there? The art of miniature painting can be found there, too. Bagci: Naturally. If there is illustrated manuscripts, it will have its illustrations connected with the text. These could be books of biological medicine, herbal medicine, or erotic books. Mutlu: But, miniature seemed to my mind as if it is particular to the Orient. Bagci: No, this is wrong. Think that priests, monks were continuously copying books, ornamenting the manuscripts and painting illustrations in the monasteries. This was one of the most important tasks. Mutlu: Well, if we look at the matter from the perspective of continuity, can we say that the art of miniature painting continued for a long time in the Ottomans? Bagci: Because the Ottomans lasted longer? Did you mean that? Mutlu: I was thinking the penetration of press and with it the change in the art of painting towards the introduction of perspective. In contrast to this, we can say that in miniatures there was no notion of perspective. Bagci: This is a different topic. Mutlu: There are other questions, too, that come to my mind here. How the Turks and Iranians could resolve the problem of painting and Islamic prohibitions? In the Arabian Peninsula there was no such tradition, I guess? Was there a miniature tradition there? Bagci: There wasn’t, as far as I know. Mutlu: Even though the beliefs were common there were still some changes in practice in different places. But, still the traditions of painting with perspective and sculpture were not spread here. Bagci: The notion of perspective in the Western sense of the term that we call as optical perspective or aerial perspective was emerged during the Renaissance in the West. It is also called as scientific or positive perspective. Mutlu: That is, realist perspective. Bagci: It is true that in the Islamic illustrations, in the illustrations painted in the Ottoman, Central Asia or Iran traditions the composition of the elements doesn’t follow the rules of the optical perspective. But the concept of depth was conveyed in a different way in such illustrations. While the third dimension goes towards the background in a Renaissance painting, it goes upwards in the Islamic painting. Yet, there is a lot space in such paintings in which the figures can take place. Mutlu: But, the reality of the space perceived by the eye is rather different. Bagci: But reality itself is a very relative concept. Today we have a very photographic memory. We see photos in every place. They reflect the world in a visual way as we see it. But modern painting claims that it is possible to perceive the world from different angles. Mutlu: This could be useful for the TV personnel. Is it possible to create such a perspective that you have mentioned? Is it possible that our way of seeing, which you claimed as determined by our contemporary conceptualisation of the reality, can change into another way of seeing? Bagci: You said well when you said ‘way of seeing’. Who know what can be done in PhotoShop? Togan: We focus our attention in accordance with our way of seeing, and see other places flue. In contrast to this, when we reflect our way of seeing in the photographs every place in the photograph has the same clearness. An American photographer has depicted a room as the eye sees it by taking many pictures. Now, the question is this, is the miniature painting egalitarian as the photograph or is it selective as the eye? Bagci: It includes both, actually. It is egalitarian for that it depicts a tree in great detail that should take place in the far background. For it is detail painting in the first instance. But at the same time, it has a tendency to focus on Gazan Khan, for instance, by aggrandising it. Mutlu: Such personages were depicted and underlined in the Egyptian engravings even though they were placed in the background. Bagci: This peculiarity can also be found in the paintings of the Middle Ages. Mutlu: Important personages or figures should be drawn big. Togan: I was thinking when Mrs. Bagci was talking. I couldn’t make my mind regarding the question of egalitarianism and selectivity. In the historical texts there is a change over time regarding this question. Sometimes the focus of the painting could be on the sovereign himself, but sometimes this may shift to the environment surrounding the sovereign. Can this change of focus be observed in the field of painting? In some of the historical texts like, say ‘Menakibnamah’ the society occupies the foreground. Are there periods and genres in our history of painting? Is it possible to talk about the same question regarding the art of miniature? Bagci: Of course, it is. One who paint the illustration, one who wrote the text, one who ordered the illustration, one who ordered the history book, all were the people of the same milieu. For this reason, --I never look at the matter from the perspective of your question--, but without further thinking I can say that this should be so. Togan: Is it possible to illustrate certain history books in such an environment in, let’s say, the 17th century? Can we say that certain history books with certain contents have been illustrated? Bagci: I don’t know if this will be an answer to your question but I can say this: the socio-political place in which the sovereign who ordered saw himself at that time, the place of religion in the history as he sees it from his own perspective, all were effective in the selection of the content of such books. The Timurid Shahrukh was not having illustrated his own father, rather he was having written and illustrated the world history. He gave importance to the history of Islam. But, Timur’s grandson had Hafiz Ebru come to Shiraz and made him rewrite the history of his grandfather and prolong it up to his own time. Because he was very much fond of his grandfather. He was reared by Mongolian mothers, and it was for this reason that the wanted to demonstrate the Chingizid connection of his family. But Shahrukh was not like him. They had made histories written and illustrated in accordance with the place in which they saw themselves. Mutlu: Are the implications of the texts more important than their overt narratives? Togan: The texts were already implicating something. Mutlu: In our history courses they do not teach much about such implications taking place in-between the lines as different from the plain phrases like ‘that happened in 1396’. Togan: Generally speaking, today we begin our history books with the Khuns. But in the history books that I am interested in they have not start with the Khuns. They did not know the Khuns then. They were adopted an Islamic approach to history that started with Adam. But we also see the figure of Chingiz Khan side by side Adam. How Chingiz Khan was incorporated into such an history? How Timur was connected to this? Visuality was also used as a very important factor in the matters of legitimacy. We see this only in the Ilkhanids. When they were editing the world history they were not painting the pictures of the Chinese emperors in the Chinese history in the Ilkhanid style. They were rather presenting these illustrations as the examples of the works of the Chinese artists. They even may have made use of cliches. Some emperors were depicted as if they were sitting on a throne, but the throne was not depicted. But there is a realism there. They were not attempted to depict the Chinese emperors in the Ilkhanid style. For the personages with whom they readily identified themselves they preferred to use a different style. In the same vein the Timurids, too, told the stories of Chingiz Khan. The first thing the Manchus did, who had no connection with them and who were not Muslim, when they conquered China in 1644 was to have an illustrated history book written and narrate their own past in the Chinese style. There one can find in the history certain stories narrated in connection with the matters of legitimacy. These stories were based on the oral tradition. For me, oral tradition represents the onset of all such activities. The historical tradition starts with the reflection of the oral tradition onto writing and illustration. I guess, in the period we are talking about no distinction was made in reflecting the oral tradition onto writing and illustration. This has changed now; we give much importance to writing today. Mutlu: We have been taught “history starts with writing”. Togan: You should not think so. I guess it is proper to say that it starts with the [uttered] word. Mutlu: Yet visuality precedes writing. There were lines, drawings in a sense. In such a case, isn’t writing more important in the narration of history? Togan: It depends on your viewpoint. I don’t think so. For writing cannot express the things that are expressed by picture and the things expressed by the word cannot always be expressed by writing. Mutlu: True, but the uttered word can be distorted, crooked when it is transferred from generation to generation. Togan: This is also true for writing. It, too, can easily be distorted and transformed. In Rabbguzi’s book entitled ‘Evliyalar’ [‘Saints’] it is told how well Yafes as the ancestor of the Turks have served Noah, following this we are told in the book that the same story can be found in another book, too. When we take a look at the referred book we see the same story with the same major lines there, but with a slight difference. There the book mentions Sab instead of Yafes. Mutlu: But we use the
phrase ‘illustrated history’. Thus we make a distinction between illustration
and history. When we use that phrase we also try to convey the idea of the
existence of unillustrated histories.
Bagci: Before this I want to touch upon another topic regarding the illustrated histories. You have mentioned a few minutes ago the illustrations of the Chinese emperors. The illustrated history has a very important aspect. Especially for the history of art. That painting the portraits of certain individuals starts with the illustrated histories. Maybe not for the history writing, but for the history of art this constitutes a great turning point. But you rise objections and say again that they are all similar. Mutlu: I don’t know why but all the figures are depicted from the profile, it is impossible to see their front. Bagci: But there is such a thing. If I draw a figure and write Ýsenbike Togan on it that figure becomes Ýsenbike Togan. Putting aside the question of similarity between the drawing and Ýsenbike Togan herself, we have to think of this relationship as a concept[ualisation]. If we look at Rashideddin’s ‘Cami-ut Tevarih’ or any of the 13th century manuscripts and if we see a man’s figure with the writing ‘Bedreddin Lulu’ beneath it, this figure becomes Bedreddin Lulu then. Here we are not only talking about the mythical heroes, but also about well-known personages. Then portrait tradition, the tradition of depicting the portraits of the statesmen and sovereigns starts and in it the Islamic illustrations find a new place of existence and develop there. Again, in connection with the question of legitimacy the genealogies draw our attention as the field in which the portrait tradition and question of legitimacy overlap. Genealogies consist of the pictures of religious, mythological personages on the circular medals. These small pictures in circles are connected with each other. They can start from Adam and reach at Timur. Everybody can connect himself to these personages in accordance with his own interpretation. This is a very nice method in officialising the notion of legitimacy. Actually, these genealogies constitute a world history in a very concise form. There can be a small remark, let’s say, by the side of Adam. This peculiarity can be observed in the West, too. There the genealogies start with Adam and reach at Jesus. This is certain that everybody traces his line back until Adam. In this form of legitimacy, of the desires of legitimacy one can see very nice variations. People could suddenly start to see themselves as the progeny of Muhammad after they conquer Hijaz and Egypt and take over the signs of the Caliphate. They began to believe that it was their right to be elevated so much and that they are the most powerful sovereigns of the Islamic world, and they began to behave accordingly. Togan: Is genealogy descends from the line of Ebu Bakr? Bagci: There are not such genealogies. This form can be traced back in the histories, of course, again in-between the lines. The significant one is Yafes, of course. Togan: The plot has the utmost importance. Is the return of the plot to history in the form of an history book as we understand it, or is it transformed into the forms of ‘menakibnamahs’ [biographies] or love stories? For each could have been illustrated in their own manner. Indeed, the narration, a series of events that had happened constitutes the core of all, doesn’t it? This is the cultural heritage. For example, today we have very few illustrations that we know their stories. I had in my mind the picture of Ataturk when he was walking thoughtfully. I can immediately recognise it even though I see it from a far distance. But, there are very few pictures that we can read their story and recognise them from a far. People lived at that time knew the stories of the illustrations by being participated into a definite cultural environment. The same is reflected in the example of the window glasses in churches. In contrast to this, the photographers take their photographs in some chosen sites and then the editors select some of the photos and only then the texts are written according to these chosen photos. Mutlu: You mean the newspapers? Togan: Yes, the newspapers or magazines. There is a difference between our interpretation of the word ‘illustrated’ and yours. Today, in the overwhelming majority of the ‘illustrated’ magazines the main element is the photograph, the picture. Text is only a secondary element. Mutlu: This has its own sociological grounds. Like contesting with TVs. You know, the most famous illustrated magazine of America, ‘Life’ went bankruptcy. The TV has destroyed the very grounds of cinema and theatre. Now, this phenomenon necessitates a restructuring. It is for this reason that the magazines began to emphasise the picture. You are adapting an approach that emphasises the picture. But I think that we are drowning in a visual culture that makes us indifferent even to the history, too. Bagci: Yet, you shouldn’t trust writing so much. For, as Mrs. Togan has pointed out, the text, too, can change. Mutlu: Then we should close our program by trusting the word. Thank you both for your participation. I have many questions in my mind waiting for answers, I would like to know especially how the people in Iran and in the Turkish world were able to keep painting despite the opposition from the Islamic beliefs? Maybe at another session I would like to get some answers for such questions. Dear audience, we will meet next week in another program of Turkiye’den. Bye now. pc12.soc.metu.edu.tr (30 January 2000, Ankara) |