In Volume 1-1: Qurʾānic Literature, History, and Biography | Section 2, History, Biography, etc.
previous chapter: 6 History of Afg̲h̲ānistān
§ 578. It appears from the Āyā Ṣūfīyah ms. of al-Awāmir al-ʿalānīyah that the author was al-Ḥusain b. M. al-Muns̲h̲iʾ al-Jaʿfarī1 (according to Blochet “el-Hoseïn ibn Mohammed ibn ‘Ali el-Dja‘féri, surnommé Ibn Bibi”). Seemingly, therefore, the epitomator (in Persian) must have been mistaken when he called him Nāṣir al-Millah wa-’l-Dīn Yaḥyā b. M. al-maʿrūf bi-’bn al-Bībī (Houtsma’s text, p. 2; cf. p. 1962,where he is called Amīr Nāṣir al-Dīn Amīr Dīwān al-Ṭug̲h̲rā). This point will no doubt be discussed in the edition announced by the German ¶ Archæological Institute at Istanbul. Meanwhile it may be, supposed that the bracketed account which follows, based on Houtsma’s preface to the Persian epitome and on the unsigned article in the Encyclopædia of Islam, is for the most part correct.
[Nāṣir al-Dīn [?] Yaḥyā [?] b. Majd al-Dīn M. Tarjumān called Ibn i Bībī was the son of distinguished parents but about himself practically nothing is known. His father, a saiyid of Jurjān, was Muns̲h̲iʾ to Sulṭān ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Kai-Qubād i (reigned ah 616/1219–634/1236), was sent on diplomatic missions to Bag̲h̲dād, Damascus, K̲h̲wārazm and to the Mongols, and died in S̲h̲aʿbān 670/1272. His mother, known as Bībī i Munajjimah, a daughter of Kamāl al-Dīn Simnānī, the leading S̲h̲āfiʿī of Nīs̲h̲āpūr, was expert in astrology and famous for the accuracy of her predictions. By the writer of the Persian epitome Ibn i Bībī is described as Mālik [? on p. 196 Amīr] i Dīwān al-Ṭug̲h̲rā.]
According to Houtsma internal evidence shows that his chronicle was written between 681/1282–3 and 684/1285. As the Āyā Ṣūfiyah ms. was written for the library of G̲h̲iyāt̲h̲ al-Dīn Kai-K̲h̲usrau b. Qilij Arslān b. Kai-K̲h̲usrau, the work was probably completed in 681/1282–3, since Kai-K̲h̲usrau’s successor Masʿūd already issued coins in that year and in 682/1283 Kai-K̲h̲usrau was put to death.
- al-Awāmir al-ʿalānīyah2 fī ’l-umūr al-ʿAlāʾīyah, sometimes called Saljūq-nāmah, a history of the Saljūqids of Asia Minor in the 7th/13th century (to ah 679/1280–1) especially of ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Kai-Qubād i (reigned ah 616/1219–634/1236) dedicated to ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Juwainī (for whom see p. 204 supra): Āyā Ṣūfiyah 2985 = Tauer 477 (written for the library of G̲h̲iyāt̲h̲ al-Dīn Kai-K̲h̲usrau iii b. Qilij Arslān b. Kai-K̲h̲usrau (reigned ah 663/1264–5–681/1283), Blochet iv 2310 (ah 1340/1922, transcribed from the preceding ms.).
An edition with an annotated translation is planned by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut at Constantinople (see Der Islam xix (1931) p. 191.
Turkish translation, forming Part iii of an anonymous “Saljūq-nāmah” of unknown title compiled in the reign of the Sulṭān Murād ii (ah 824/1421–855/1451): (Tawārīk̲h̲ i Āl i Saljūq) Leyden iii p. 24 no. 942 (defective. 16th cent.), Paris ms. turc 62 (defective. Perhaps a little older than the Leyden ms.). According to P. Wittek (Der Islam xx, p. 202, n. 4) there are complete mss. of this translation in the Preussische Staatsbibliothek and at Istanbul (“Riẓwān K. Nr. 1390, 1391”).
¶ Edition: Histoire des Seldjoucides d’Asie Mineure d’après Ibn-Bībī. Texte turc publié d’après les MSS. de Leide et de Paris par M. Th. Houtsma, Leyden 1902°* (Recueil de textes relatifs à l’histoire des Seldjoucides par M. Th. Houtsma, vol. iii).
Turkish abridgment: Muntak̲h̲ab i tawārīk̲h̲ i Salājiqah, Schefer p. 201 no. 1182 (defective. 17th cent. See Houtsma Recueil … vol. iii pp. ix–x).
Persian abridgments by unknown authors: (1) (Tārīk̲h̲ i āl i Saljūq dar mamālik i Rūm), Gotha 31 (defective at both ends, beginning with ah 569/1173–4) (see Houtsma Recueil … vol. iv pp. x–xi). (2) Muk̲h̲taṣar i Saljūq-nāmah, Blochet i 439 (latter half of 14th cent.).
Edition of Persian abridgment no. (2): Histoire des Seldjoucides d’Asie Mineure d’après l’abrégé du Seldjouknāmeh d’Ibn-Bībī. Texte persan publié … par M. Th. Houtsma, Leyden 1902°* (Recueil de textes relatifs à l’histoire des Seldjoucides par M. Th. Houtsma, vol. iv).
Incomplete edition with French translation: Quelques chapitres de l’abrégé du Seldjouq Namèh composé par l’Émir Nassir Eddin Yahia, Ibn el-Biby [the reigns of G̲h̲iyāt̲h̲ al-Dīn Kai-K̲h̲usrau and Rukn al-Dīn Sulaimān S̲h̲āh, ah 588–600, edited and translated by] C. Schefer (in Recueil de textes et de traductions publié … à l’occasion du VIIIe Congrès International des Orientalistes tenu à Stockholm en 1889 = Publications de l’École des Langues Orientales Vivantes, iii série, vols. 5–6, Paris 1889°*).
§ 579. Tārīk̲h̲ i āl i Saljūq, a very brief history (47 foll.) of the Saljūqids of Rūm dedicated to the last of the dynasty ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn Kai-Qubād ii (reigned ah 696/1296–700/1300): Blochet i 440 (14th cent.).
§ 580. Maḥmūd b. M. known as (al-mus̲h̲tahir bi-) al-Karīm al-Aqsarāʾī wrote in 723/1323
- A history of the Saljūqids of Asia Minor and of the Īl-K̲h̲āns Abāqā, Uljāytū and Abū Saʿīd, preceded by a brief account of Muḥammad and the Calips: Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3143 = Tauer 478 (ah 734/1334), Yeñī 827 = Tauer 479 (ah 745/1345).
§ 581. ʿAzīz b. Ardas̲h̲īr al-Astarābādī (maulidan w) al-Bag̲h̲dādī (muqāman), as he calls himself (Bazm u razm p. 113), or ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Bag̲h̲dādī, as Ḥājjī K̲h̲alīfah calls him (apparently following Ibn ʿArab-S̲h̲āh), had been living at Bag̲h̲dād for some time before the reign of Sulṭān Aḥmad Jalāʾir (ah 784/1382–813/1410), whose associate (nadīm) he became (according to Ibn ʿArab-S̲h̲āh, quoted by Ḥ.K̲h̲.). After the capture of Bag̲h̲dād by Tīmūr in 795/1393 Sulṭān Aḥmad fled to Egypt and ʿAzīz sought refuge in Karbalāʾ, where, however, he ¶ was taken prisoner and carried before Mīrān-S̲h̲āh at Ḥillah. Mīrān-S̲h̲āh treated him kindly, but, when the army reached a point between Mārdīn and Āmid, ʿAzīz made his escape by night and travelling via Āmid and Arqanīn he reached Sīwās and presented himself before its ruler, Qāḍī Burhān al-Dīn Aḥmad (for whom see Ency. Isl. under Burhān al-Dīn), on 11 S̲h̲aʿbān 796/11 June 1394. His history of Burhān al-Dīn’s reign was completed in 800/1397–8. After Burhān al-Dīn’s death (in 800/1398 or 801/1398–9 ?) he went to Egypt and, according to Ibn ʿArab-S̲h̲āh, died there through falling from a high roof. Ibn ʿArab-S̲h̲āh (quoted by Ḥ.K̲h̲.) describes him as “the wonder of the age both in prose and poetry, Arabic and Persian”. In some verses at the end of the Bazm u razm he uses the tak̲h̲alluṣ “ʿAzīz”.
- Bazm U razm, a history of Qāḍī Burhān al-Dīn Aḥmad, Sulṭān of Sīwās, completed in 800/1397–8: Ḥ.K̲h̲. ii p. 139 no. 2273 (Taʾrīk̲h̲ al-Qāḍī Burhān al-Dīn al-Sīwāsī. Ḥ.K̲h̲. does not quote the opening words and does not seem to have seen the work), Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3465 = Tauer 480 (ah 800/1398, copied at Sīwās from an autograph. For description see Prof. Fuʾād’s introduction to the printed edition, pp. 14–19), Aḥmad T̲h̲ālit̲h̲ 2822 = Tauer 481 (ah 1127/1715, said to be copied from an autograph. See Fuʾād, loc. cit. pp. 19–20), Blochet i 638 (early 18th cent.), Asʿad 2079 = Tauer 482 (ah 1241/1825–6. See Fuʾād, loc. cit. p. 20), Rāg̲h̲ib Pās̲h̲ā 982 = Tauer 483 (see Fuʾād, loc. cit. pp. 20–1).
Edition: Istānbūl 1928* (with Turkish introduction by Köprülü-Zādah M. Fuʾād). According to Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen, some extracts have been published by Aḥmad Tauḥīd Bey in Pts. 26–32 of the Tārīk̲h̲ i ʿUt̲h̲mānī Anjumanī Majmūʿah-sī (1914–15).
[Autobiographical information at the beginning of the Bazm u razm (summarised by Prof. Fuʾād in his Turkish introduction pp. 7–13); Ibn ʿArab-S̲h̲āh ʿAjāʾib al-maqdūr (in Arabic), ed. Manger, i p. 548–57; Ḥ.K̲h̲. ii p. 139 no. 2273.]
§ 582. (Bāyazīd-nāmah), an anonymous metrical history of Sulṭān Bāyazīd i (reigned ah 792/1389–805/1402): Browne Suppt. 14503 (ah 891/1486. Pictures).
§ 583. It was by order of Abū ’l-Faḍl Aḥmad b. Walī al-Dīn Pās̲h̲ā that “Kās̲h̲ifī” wrote his
- G̲h̲azā-nāmah i Rūm, a metrical account of the campaign of Sulṭān Murād ii (reigned ah 824/1421–855/1451) against the crusade of 1444 (Battle of Varna): Yildiz Kös̲h̲kü, k̲h̲uṣūṣī 936 = Tauer 484 (9th/15th cent.).
¶ § 584. It was for Sulṭān Muḥammad ii (reigned ah 855/1451–886/1481) that M. Amīn4 b. Ḥājjī K̲h̲alīl al-Qūnawī wrote his
(Summary of Ottoman history): Blochet i 528 (late 15th cent.).
§ 585. Ẓafar-nāmah (fī bayān futūḥāt al-Sulṭān Muḥammad [ii] Bahādur K̲h̲ān b. Murād K̲h̲ān), by ʿAlī b. Mulūk al-Muns̲h̲ī: Cairo p. 505 (n.d.).
§ 586. History of the campaigns of Sulṭān Muḥammad ii (al-Fātiḥ, reigned ah 855/1451–886/1481) divided into 26 dāstāns:5 Berlin 455 (ah 1268/1852).
§ 587. Ḥakīm al-Dīn Idrīs b. Ḥusām al-Dīn ʿAlī al-Bidlīsī was at one time in the correspondence department of the Āq-Quyūnlū Sulṭān Yaʿqūb Bēg, for whom he wrote in 890/1485 a letter of congratulation to Sulṭān Bāyazīd ii. In consequence of S̲h̲āh Ismāʿīl’s advance he fled to Turkey in 907/1501 and enjoyed the favour successively of Sulṭān Bāyazīd (reigned ah 886/1481–918/1512) and of Sulṭān Salīm i (ah 918/1512–926/1520). He accompanied the latter on his campaign in Persia, won over many Kurdish chiefs to the Turkish side, and commanded Kurdish troops in successful engagements against the Persians. In 921/1515 he ably reorganised the administration of the conquered Kurdish provinces and, reversing S̲h̲āh Ismāʿīl’s policy of appointing Persian governors, “aimed at giving Kurdistān a feudal organisation securing the predominance of the Kurd nobility” (Minorsky in Ency. Isl. ii 1142b). He is thus an important figure in the history of Kurdistān. In the Egyptian campaign also he was with Sulṭān Salīm. According to his son’s statement in his preface to the Salīm-nāmah he died in D̲h̲ū ’l-Ḥijjah 926/Nov.–Dec. 1520, only a few months after Salīm. His grave is at Eyyūb beside the Idrīs-Kös̲h̲kü in the mosque founded by his wife, Zainab K̲h̲ātūn.
He was the author of a tafsīr dedicated to Bāyazīd and, according to Ṭās̲h̲köprüzādah, of qaṣīdahs in Arabic and Persian and of innumerable tracts (rasāʾil) on various subjects.
- Has̲h̲t-bihis̲h̲t, a florid history of the first eight Ottoman Sulṭāns undertaken in 908/1502 by desire of Bāyazīd ii and divided into a ṭalīʿah (on the science of history and the pre-eminence of the Ottomans), eight katībahs ¶ or daftars, each with a prologue in verse and various subdivisions,6 ((1) origin of the Ottomans and reign of ʿUt̲h̲mān, (2) Ōrk̲h̲ān, (3) Murād i, (4) Bāyazīd Yildirim, (5) Muḥammad i, (6) Murād ii, (7) Muḥammad ii, (8) Bāyazīd ii to the appointment of Fīrūz Bey as governor of Bosnia in 912/1506) and a k̲h̲ātimah, in verse, on the deposition of Bāyazīd and the accession of Salīm: Ḥ.K̲h̲. ii p. 110 no. 2152, vi p. 500 no. 14406, Asʿad 2197 = Tauer 508 (assigned by Tauer to the 11th/17th cent., but M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931), pp. 132–3, suggests that it is possibly an autograph), 2199 = Tauer 495 (Katībahs i–vi. 10th/16th cent.), 2198 = Tauer 496 (Katībahs vii–viii, defective at end. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), Nūr i ʿUt̲h̲mānīyah 3209 = Tauer 504 (assigned by Tauer to the 11th/17th cent., but M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931), pp. 132–3, argues that it is partly autograph), 3210 = Tauer 497 (end of Katībah i and Katībahs ii–v, defective at end. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam (1931), p. 137), 3082 = Tauer 503 (Muqaddimah and Katībahs i–iv. 11th/17th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit.), 3212 = Tauer 519 (Katībahs vii–viii. 12th/18th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit.), 3211 (see M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix, pp. 132 and 135), Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3541 = Tauer 507 (Muqaddimah and Katībahs i–vi, defective. Assigned by Tauer to the 11th/17th cent., but see M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931), p. 133, where it is stated that according to a note on the inside of the cover the Muqaddimah is autograph, and p. 137, where ah 918 is given as the date of transcription), 3450 = Tauer 487 (Katībahs i–iii. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit., p. 137), 3543 = Tauer 488 (Katībahs iv–vi. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit.), 3542 = Tauer 489 (Katībahs i–v. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit.), 3539 = Tauer 490 (Katībah i. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit., pp. 136–7), 3538 = Tauer 491 (Katībah viii. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü loc. cit., p. 136), Bānkīpūr vi 532–4 (autograph ? Full analysis), Blochet i 523 (Katībahs iii–iv. ah 952/1545), 524 (Katībahs vii–viii. 16th cent.), 522 (Katībahs i–vi. 17th cent.), 525 (Katībah viii. ah 1106/1694), 526 (Katībah viii. 17th cent.), Ivanow 211 (Katībahs vii–viii and K̲h̲ātimah. ah 963–4/1555–7, transcribed from an autograph), Rawān Kös̲h̲kü 1515 (1) = Tauer 485 (Muqaddimah and Katībahs i–vi. ah 964/1557), 1516 = Tauer 498 (Katībahs i–vii. Circ. ah 1000/1591–2), 1514 = Tauer 499 (Muqaddimah and Katībahs i–vi. Circ. ah 1000/1591–2) 1515 (2) = Tauer 509 (Katībah viii. 11th/17th cent.), K̲h̲āliş Efendī 3364 = Tauer 486 (ah 967–8/1560–1), ¶ 2785 = Tauer 510 (Katībah vii. ah 1104/1692), Berlin ms. orient. Folio No. 3179 (not in Pertsch. Complete, ah 968/1560–1. See M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) pp. 132 and 135), Berlin Pertsch 440 (Katībahs vi–viii. Modern), Rieu i 216a (ah 988 1580), 218b (Katībahs iii–v, defective. ah 1069/1659), Riḍā Pās̲h̲ā 888 = Tauer 492 (Katībahs i–v. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), 208 = Tauer 493 (Katībah vii. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), 637 = Tauer 494 (Katībah viii and K̲h̲ātimah. 10th/16th cent. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), Lindesiana p. 155 nos. 395–6 (ah 1063/1653), ‘Umūmī 5161 = Tauer 500 (Katībah vii. ah 1065/1655. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), Cairo p. 509 (Katībahs iii–iv. ah 1071/1660–1), p. 509 (ah 1092/1681), Bodleian 311 (ah 1074/1663 and (Katībah viii) ah 1110/1698), Lālā Ismāʿīl 379 = Tauer 501 (Katībah vii. ah 1079/1668–9. See also M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 137), Majlis 276 (ah 1080–8/1669–77), Flügel ii (Katībahs vii–viii. ah 1096/1685), ʿĀṭif Efendī 1946 = Tauer 502 (Muqaddimah and Katībahs i–viii. ah 1098/1687), 1947 = Tauer 505 (Katībahs vi–vii. 11th/17th cent.), 1948 = Tauer 506 (Katībah vii. 11th/17th cent.), Browne Coll. H. 9 (11) (Katībah vii. ah 1099/1687), Chanykov 85 (ah 1108/1696), Amīrī Efendī Persian 800–7 = Tauer 511–18 (ah 1114/1702), Aḥmad T̲h̲ālit̲h̲ 2914 = Tauer 520 (not examined by Tauer), Ethé 571 (Katībah vii, defective at end), Leningrad Mus. Asiat. (see Mélanges asiatiques vi (St. Petersburg 1873), p. 124), Pub. Lib. (2 copies. See Mélanges asiatiques iii (1859), p. 731), Mas̲h̲had iii p. 105 (defective at both ends), r.a.s. P. 156 = Morley 157 (Katībahs vi–vii), Salemann-Rosen p. 50 no. 951 (“jild i āk̲h̲ir”), Upsala 274 (Katībahs i–viii. Calligraphic. See M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) p. 136).
A translation by D.S. Margoliouth was formerly announced as in preparation for the Royal Asiatic Society’s Oriental Translation Fund series, but it appears from Babinger’s Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen, p. 48, that Professor Margoliouth has abandoned his intention of publishing a translation of this work.
Descriptions: (1) Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen pp. 46–7, (2) [with full analysis of the first two katībahs] Das Hešt Bihišt des Idrīs Bitlīsī. 1. Teil: Von den Anfängen bis zum Tode Orḫans. Von Meḥmed Şükrü (in Der Islam xix (1931) pp. 131–57).
Turkish translation7 by ʿAbd al-Bāqī “Saʿdī” (for whom see Babinger Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen pp. 280–1) undertaken in 1146/1733 ¶ at the command of Sulṭān Maḥmūd i (reigned ah 1143/1730–1168/1754): Flügel ii 994 etc. (For other mss. see Babinger op. cit. p. 49, where Nūr i ʿUt̲h̲mānīyah 3078 and Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3544 should be deleted, and M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) pp. 138–9.)
Discussion: Das Hešt Bihišt des Idrīs Bitlīsī. Von Mehmed Şükrü (in Der Islam xix (1931) pp. 131–57).
Continuation by the author’s son: Sulaimān-nāmah or D̲h̲ail i Has̲h̲t bihis̲h̲t (beginning Qul Allāhumma Mālik al-mulk … wa-aḥmadu ’llāha ḥamdan kat̲h̲īran ʿalā mā anʿama ʿalā Sulṭāninā mulkan kabīran) completed in 974/1566 and containing the history of Salīm i (reigned ah 918/1512–926/1520): Lālā Ismāʿīl 348/2 = Tauer 5256 (ah 975/1567), Gotha 32 (ah 977/1569), Asʿad 2447 = Tauer 526 (10th/16th cent.), Rawān Kös̲h̲kü 1540a = Tauer 527 (10th/16th cent.), Flügel ii 994.
- Salīm-nāmah (beg. al-Ḥamdu li-llāhi ’llad̲h̲ī ṣadaqanā waʿdahu), a history of Sulṭān Salīm i (reigned ah 918/1512–926/1520) in prose and verse left unfinished at the author’s death and then scattered and partly lost, but reassembled so far as possible by the author’s son, Abū ’l-Faḍl M. b. Idrīs al-Daftarī, at the command of Sulṭān Sulaimān i (reigned ah 926/1520–974 1566) and completed ah 974/1566 in the first year of Salīm ii’s reign: Lindesiana p. 109 no. 47 (“No date, about 1560”), Blochet i 527 (splendid copy written for Muḥammad Pās̲h̲a (Ṣoqollī, d. 987/1579), Rieu i 218b (17th cent.), Lālā Ismāʿīl 348 (1) = Tauer 521 (Preface only).
[Autobiographical information in the author’s prefaces to the Has̲h̲t bihis̲h̲t (cf. Rieu i 217) and the Salīm-nāmah (cf. Rieu i 218 ult., 219a); Preface of the author’s son to the Salīm-nāma (cf. Rieu i 219); al-S̲h̲aqāʾiq al-Nuʿmānīyah i 353–4 = Rescher translation p. 206; Saʿd al-Dīn Tāj al-tawārīk̲h̲ (in Turkish) 506 (reference given by Babinger); Brockelmann ii 233; Ency. Isl. under Bidlīsī (Huart) and (Minorsky) under Kurds: B. History (ii pp. 1142b and 1143a in the English edition); Babinger in Der Islam xi (1921) pp. 42–3; Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen 45–9, where one or two further references will be found.]
§ 588. [ʿAbd al-]Kabīr b. Uwais b. M., called Laṭīfī and also Qāḍī-zādah, was the author of a translation of Ibn K̲h̲allikān’s Wafayāt al-aʿyān which he prepared for Sulṭan Salīm i (reigned ah 918/1512–926/1520) and of which the first part was completed at Constantinople in 926/1520 and the second in 928/1521–2. He may be identical with Aẓhar al-Dīn al-Ardabīlī who is said by Ḥ.K̲h̲. (vi p. 455) to have died at Cairo in 930/1523–4.
- (G̲h̲azawāt al-Sulṭān Salīm), history of Salīm’s conquest of Egypt written by order of the Amīr Ṣadr al-Dīn Muḥammad and based on notes taken during the campaign: Salīm Āg̲h̲ā 825 = Tauer 522 (full analysis).
¶ § 589. Mullā Muḥammad “Adāʾī” S̲h̲īrāzī presumably came to Turkey in the time of Salīm i or Sulaimān. He was a protégé of Prince Muṣṭafā, the son of Sulaimān, and of the grand vizier Meḥmed Ṣoqollī Pās̲h̲ā (for whom see Ency. Isl. under Ṣokollī).
- Salīm-nāmah, a metrical history of Sulṭān Salīm i (reigned ah 918/1512–926/1520): Ḥ.K̲h̲. iii p. 615 no. 7243: K̲h̲āliṣ Efendī 2293 = Tauer 523 (ah 957/1550), Adabīyāt Kutubk̲h̲ānah-sī 1609 = Tauer 524 (ah 1270/1853).
[Babinger Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen p. 98, where references are given to ‘Ālī (Kunh al-ak̲h̲bār), apparently the only Turkish biographer who mentions “Adāʾī”, Hammer-Purgstall’s Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches iii 755 and his Geschichte der osmanischen Dichtkunst.]
§ 590. Nāmah i S̲h̲āh Salīm, or Futūḥāt i Salīm S̲h̲āh K̲h̲ān [sic], a poem on the history of Salīm i, by an unknown author: Berlin 456.
§ 591. Of unknown authorship is the
- Kanz al-jawāhir al-sanīyah fī ’l-futūḥāt al-Sulaimānīyah, a history of the campaigns of Sulṭān Sulaimān i against Belgrade in 1521 and against Vienna in 1529: Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3392 = Tauer 528, Ḥakīmog̲h̲lu ʿAlī Pās̲h̲ā 764 = Tauer 529, Salīm Ag̲h̲ā 769 = Tauer 530. Edition: Histoire de la campagne du sultan Suleyman Ier contre Belgrade en 1521. Texte persan publié d’après deux manuscrits de Constantinople avec une traduction abrégée par Felix Tauer Prague 1924 (cf. Babinger p. 101, note 2).
§ 592. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān “G̲h̲ubārī” b. ʿAbd Allāh left Aqs̲h̲ehr for Stambul and in time was appointed tutor to Ork̲h̲ān, the son of Bāyazīd ii (reigned ah 886/1481–918/1512). In the reign of Sulaimān i (ah 926/1520–974/1566) he acted as kātib during the campaign in al-ʿIrāq and on his return became Surrah i humāyūn amīnī. He is said to have died at Mecca in 974/1566–7. He was a skilled calligraphist and the author of (1) Misāḥātnāmah, a Turkish metrical work on the measurements of the Kaʿbah, (2) Kaʿbah-nāmah, a Turkish metrical work on the merit of the Kaʿbah, and
- Sulaimān-nāmah, a Persian history of Sulaimān i Mag̲h̲nīsā (Anatolia), Murādīyah Mosque.
[Babinger Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen p. 93 (q.v. for further references).]
- (Bāyazīd-nāmah), a poem by ‘ʿĀrif” on the hostilities between the princes Bāyazīd and Salīm, the sons of Sulṭān Sulaimān i (reigned ah 926/1520–974/1566): Rawān Kös̲h̲kü 1540b = Tauer 531 (cf. Babinger p. 54) (10th/16th cen.)
- ¶ G̲h̲azā i Sulaimānī, a mat̲h̲nawī on the conquests of Sulṭān Sulaimān i completed in 933/1526–7: Blochet iii 1808 (early 16th cent.).
- History of Sulṭān Sulaimān i in flowery prose intermixed with many verses: Berlin 457 (defective at end).
- Safar i farkhundah-at̲h̲ar i ḥaḍrat i Bāds̲h̲āh i ʿālam … ba-jānib i Bag̲h̲dād i k̲h̲ujastah-bunyād …, a poem on the campaign of Sulaimān i against Bag̲h̲dād in 940/1534–941/1535: Blochet iii 1825 (early 16th cent.).
§ 594. S. Luqmān b. S. Ḥusain al-ʿĀs̲h̲ūrī al-Ḥusainī, originally of Urmiyah, was appointed S̲h̲āh-nāmah-jī8 to Sulṭān Salīm ii (reigned ah 974/1566–982/1574) in S̲h̲awwāl 976/March–April 1569 (according to a statement of his own referred to by Babinger, but another statement of his own, mentioned by Rieu, gives Muḥarram 977/June–July 1569 as the date of appointment). Murād iii (ah 982/1574–1003/1595) retained him in that position, but in 1005/1596–7, that is not long after the accession of Muḥammad iii (ah 1003/1595–1012/1603), he was removed from the office of S̲h̲āh-nāmah-jī and appointed Daftar-dār. According to Rieu his contemporaries did not deem him worthy of a place in the roll of poets.
Among his works were a Hunar-nāmah, of which only the second volume (a prose history of Sulṭān Sulaimān) is known to exist, or at any rate to have existed recently (see Babinger pp. 166–7), Mujmal al-ṭūmār, a prose history of the Ottomans, especially of Sulaimān i, Salīm ii and Murād iii to ah 992/1583 (see Rieu Turkish Cat. p. 54 and Babinger pp. 165–6), Qiyāfat al-insānīyah fī s̲h̲amāʾil al-ʿUt̲h̲mānīyah, or, shortly, S̲h̲amāʾil i ʿUt̲h̲mānīyah, descriptions of the personal appearance of the Ottoman Sulṭāns designed as an accompaniment to a collection of their portraits by various artists (see Rieu Turkish Cat. pp. 53–4 and Babinger pp. 165–6), and a S̲h̲āh-nāmah i āl i ʿUt̲h̲mān completed in 999/1590 (see Rieu Turkish Cat. p. 186b and Babinger p. 166).
The Persian S̲h̲ahans̲h̲āh-nāmah i Sulṭān Muhammad described in the Bānkīpūr catalogue is by a poet who apparently uses “Ḥusain”9 as his tak̲h̲alluṣ, but it seems at least highly probable that this also is a work of Luqmān’s. The poet eulogises the Sulṭāns Sulaimān i (ah 926/1520–974/1566), Salīm ii and Murād iii and says that he described their exploits in Persian and ¶ Turkish prose and verse and that he composed several S̲h̲āh-nāmahs, numbering ten volumes, as well as a Hunarnāmah and a Sūr-nāmah.
- Salīm-K̲h̲ān-nāmah,10 a metrical history of Sulṭān Salīm ii (reigned ah 974/1566–982/1574) written in 988/1580. Rawān Kös̲h̲kü 1537 = Tauer 532 (undated brouillon).
- S̲h̲ahans̲h̲āh-nāmah i … Sulṭān Murād K̲h̲ān, a metrical history of Sulṭān Murād iii (reigned ah 982/1574–1003/1595) in two volumes ((1) ah 982–8, (2) ah 989–1000) Yildiz Kös̲h̲kü 260 = Tauer 533 (vol. i. ah 989/1581. fine Pictures), Bag̲h̲dād Kös̲h̲kü 200 = Tauer 534 (vol. ii ah 1001/1592–3. 95 fine Pictures).
- S̲h̲ahans̲h̲āh-nāmah i Sulṭān Muḥammad, a metrical history of Sulṭān Muḥammad iii (reigned ah 1003/1595–1012/1603), to whom the work is dedicated: Bānkīpūr iii 265 (Pictures).
[Autobiographical statements in his works (see Rieu Turkish Cat., loc. cit., Babinger, loc. cit., and Bānkīpūr Cat., loc.cit.) several Turkish authorities (for references see Babinger p. 167).
§ 595. Jamālī b. Ḥasan S̲h̲ūs̲h̲tarī composed in 994/1586 and dedicated to Sulṭān Murād iii his
- Futūḥāt al-ʿAjam, a poem on the conquest of Tabrīz in 993/1585 by ʿUt̲h̲mān Pās̲h̲ā: Blochet iii 1837 (lacunæ ah 996/1588).
§ 596. Bihis̲h̲tī Mas̲h̲kūkī wrote
- Shāh-nāmah, a mat̲h̲nawī on the wars of Sulṭān Murād iii against M. K̲h̲udā-bandah of Persia: Blochet iii 1836 (17th cent.).
§ 597. Fatḥ-nāmah i K̲h̲unkār i Rūm, an anonymous account (15 foll.) of the campaign of Sulṭān Muḥammad iii against Hungary in 1005/1596–7, translated from the Turkish Ethé 57211 (ah 1217/1802–3).
§ 598. Ibrāhīm “Mulhamī”, the last of the official s̲h̲āh-nāmah jīs,12 belonged originally to Erzerum. He became professor successively in a number of different madrasahs at Istanbul (for particulars see Babinger) and died in 1061/1650–1, the year in which he became mudarris in the madrasah of Muṣṭafā Pās̲h̲ā.
- ¶ S̲h̲āhans̲h̲āh-nāmah, a poem on the life of Murād iv (reigned ah 1032/1623–1049/1640): Rawān Kös̲h̲kü (see Babinger p. 171, where a reference is given to Tārīk̲h̲-i-ʿUt̲h̲mānī-Anjumanī-Majmūʿah-sī 499).
[Babinger Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen pp. 170–1 (q.v. for further authorities).]
§ 599. Ibrāhīm Efendī, Turkish Military Surgeon at Beirut, wrote in Arabic
- Miṣbāḥ al-sārī wa-nuzhat al-qārī, “Travels in Egypt, Turkey and Europe, with historical accounts of the two former countries, and an appendix on the ancient history of Syria.”
Edition (vol. i only ?): Beirut 1272/1855° (Ellis i 725).
Persian translation by M. ʿAbbās “Rifʿat” S̲h̲īrwānī (see p. 177 supra and § 500 infra) of the part relating to the Ottoman Sulṭāns (with a continuation ?) to the accession of ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ah 1277/1861: Tārīk̲h̲ i Qaiṣar i Rūm. Edition: Cawnpore 1281/1864°.
§ 600. M. ʿAbbas “Rifʿat” S̲h̲īrwānī has already been mentioned (p. 177 supra) as the author of a Tārīk̲h̲ i Āl i amjād and also (§ 599 supra) as the translator of a part of Ibrāhīm Efendī’s Miṣbāḥ al-sārī.
- Sulṭān-nāmah, a short history of the Ottoman Sulṭāns ending with a brief account of the Russo-Turkish War of 1877, written ah 1304/1886–7 for the Bombay publisher Mīrzā M. Malik al-Kuttāb S̲h̲īrāzī.
Editions: Bombay 1304/1887°* (Edwards col. 435), 1307/1890° (Edwards col. 2).
§ 601. Miscellaneous works on Ottoman history:—
- Muk̲h̲taṣar i tārīk̲h̲ i ʿUt̲h̲mānīyah. Edition: Constantinople 1309/1891–2 (see Āṣafīyah i p. 252).
- Tārīk̲h̲ i Āyā Ṣūfiyah, by Aḥmad b. Aḥmad al-Jīlānī: Āyā Ṣūfiyah 2035 (cf. Babinger p. 30).
- Tārīk̲h̲ i muk̲h̲taṣar dar waqāʾiʿ i fatḥ i Qusṭanṭīnīyah, a translation made by M. Mahdī al-S̲h̲īrwānī al-Anṣārī in 1210/1795 of a Turkish original which he met with at Sūrat in 1209/1794: r.a.s. P. 15713 = Morley 158 (ah 1210/1795).
- Tārīk̲h̲ i salāṭīn i ʿUt̲h̲mānī, from ʿUt̲h̲mān K̲h̲ān i (ah 723) to Sulṭān Muṣṭafā K̲h̲ān iv (ah 1231), translated from French and English (beginning Ḥamdī kih maqbūl i pīs̲h̲gāh i sākinān i malaʾ i aʿlā): Majlis 622 (3).
- ¶ Tārīk̲h̲ i Sulṭān i G̲h̲āzī, an anomymous history of the Crimean War: Amīrī Efendī Persian 911 = Tauer 535 (ah 1277/1860–1).
- Tarjamah i Aḥwālāt i salāṭīn i Rūm, translated from a French original ah 1255/1839–40 in the time of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh Qājār: Mas̲h̲had iii p. 101 ult.
- Kitāb dar d̲h̲ikr i qalʿah i Qusṭanṭinīyah u bināʾ i Āyā Ṣūfiyah: Āyā Ṣūfiyah 3024.
- A sketch (foll. 19b–57a) of Ottoman history to the accession of Salīm ii in 918/1566, by Asad Allāh: Browne Coll. H. 22 (9) (2) = Houtum-Schindler 23 (2).
- Sketch (foll. 15–23) of the political situation of Turkey, Arabia, Berbera and the Somali coast circ. ad 1803 (Nusk̲h̲ah i aḥwālāt i ʿajībah i bilād i Rūm) by an author who had visited al-Madīnah under the Wahhābī rule and who apparently wrote this work at Mocha: Rieu ii 864b (early 19th cent.).
next chapter: 8 History of Caucasia
^ Back to text1. The Turkish epitomator calls the author’s father Saiyid Majd al-Dīn Muḥammad Jaʿfarī. See Houtsma’s Recueil, vol. iii, p. ix.
^ Back to text2. This is the form in which this word is given both by Houtsma and by Tauer. An emendation suggests itself, but further consideration of this point may be postponed until the preface is published.
^ Back to text3. Cf. Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen p. 54.
^ Back to text4. Blochet calls the author Mohammed ibn Hadji Khalil el-Kounévi, but his name is given as above (apparently as a result of personal inspection of the ms.) by Babinger in Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen p. 18.
^ Back to text5. The opening words are Maimanah i katībah dar bayān i futūḥ u waqāʾiʿ i Sulṭān Muḥammad ast. The division into katībahs and dāstāns suggests that this is a part of the Has̲h̲t bihis̲h̲t. The seventh katībah of the Has̲h̲t bihis̲h̲t (on Muḥammad ii) ends with 29 not 26 dāstāns.
^ Back to text6. For more detailed analyses of the whole work than that given here see Rieu i 217–18, Bānkīpūr vi 532–4 and Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen pp. 46–7.A full analysis of Katībahs i and ii is given by M. Şükrü in Der Islam xix (1931) pp. 139–41.
^ Back to text7. A Tarjamah i Has̲h̲t bihis̲h̲t by Ḥusain b. Ḥasan Muns̲h̲ī is mentioned without further particulars in Buk̲h̲ārā Semenov 43.
^ Back to text8. For the official S̲h̲āh-nāmah-jīs, whose duty it was to record in epic verse the events of the Ottoman Sulṭāns’ reigns, see Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen, pp. 163–4.
^ Back to text9. Poets writing in two different languages not infrequently used a different tak̲h̲alluṣ for each language. “Ḥusainī” may have been his tak̲h̲alluṣ in Persian poems and “Luqmān” in Turkish.
^ Back to text10. Presumably identical with the Salīm-nāmah mentioned by Babinger (pp. 166, 167) who refers to an article by Aḥmad Tauḥīd Bey in the Tārīk̲h̲ i ʿUt̲h̲mānī Anjumanī Majmūʿah-sī, 103–11.
^ Back to text11. Cf. Babinger Die Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen p. 135, note 1.
^ Back to text12. See p. 328 supra.
^ Back to text13. Cf. Babinger Geschichtsschreiber der Osmanen, p. 30.