.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Inscription:
Around the body tas ast pur ab u ‘aks az vay za nikust/ ya tas-i siphr ast kih khurshid dar ust/ ya durj-i javahir ast ya burj-i asad/ ya jam-i jahan numast ba ayna-yi dust, ‘It is a dish full of water, the reflection of which is made of goodness, Or the dish of the firmament containing the sun, Or a casket of gems or the constellation of Leo, Or the world-revealing cup with the reflection of the beloved’
in tas kih hawzi-st pur z ab-i zulal/ amad sabab-i taharat-i ahl-i kamal/ dar majlis-i ‘aysh tishna ra bar kaf-i dast/ jamist za ab-i zindagi malamal, ‘This dish which is a pool filled with pure water, Has come for the sake of the ablutions of those endowed with excellence, At the gathering of pleasure, in the palm of the thirsty one, It is a cup, brimful with the Water of Life’
This bowl has the features of a group that was first identified by Anatol Ivanov in 1972 (A. A. Ivanov, “Bronze mid-fourteenth century basins”, in Central Asia and Iran, Leningrad, 1972). Ivanov concentrated on a bowl in the Hermitage (inv. VC-167) that was of a form that he at the time called Mamluk, but which has Persian inscriptions and was dated AH 751/1350 AD. He tentatively gives the group, which he subdivided, a Jalayrid mid to later fourteenth century attribution.
There are many basins of this form and basic decoration which at first make one think that our example is relatively commonplace. However the decoration is much finer than that on most with far more inlay, while the delightful Persian inscription is specifically for this bowl. It has a number of unusual features when compared to the main group (apart from that of clear legibility), including dense interlace decoration that spans the rim and also the lotus flowers in the alternate triangular lower panels, both of which are very similar indeed to fourteenth century Fars examples. Both can be seen for example on a very good Fars bowl sold at Sotheby’s Paris, 18 November 2013, lot 135. The profile and distribution of the design can also be compared to that of the Turanshah bowl of 752/1351-2 in the Victoria & Albert Museum (inv. 760-1889; A. S. Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, eighth-eighteenth centuries, London, 1982, no.104, pp.223-229).
The Sotheby’s bowl however has the typical decoration fully covering the sloping shoulder rather than just the upper band seen here. The present design proportion is frequently thought to be a later development directly heading in a comfortably linear art-historical fashion to the Timurid version of the fifteenth century. The present bowl, coupled with the dated Hermitage example, show that this format of design was at least partly contemporaneous with the better-known Fars bowls. The fact that ours is very similar in shape, technique and decorative details to the Fars examples indicates it was probably made in the same or closely related workshops.
It is also worth noting the fish in the centre of the bowl which, unusually, are in a wider band but all facing the central roundel. This is possibly the only example in the centre of a bowl showing the stylised water ripples either side of the fish’s tails giving the strong impression of movement, each almost nibbling at the central roundel.
Around the body tas ast pur ab u ‘aks az vay za nikust/ ya tas-i siphr ast kih khurshid dar ust/ ya durj-i javahir ast ya burj-i asad/ ya jam-i jahan numast ba ayna-yi dust, ‘It is a dish full of water, the reflection of which is made of goodness, Or the dish of the firmament containing the sun, Or a casket of gems or the constellation of Leo, Or the world-revealing cup with the reflection of the beloved’
in tas kih hawzi-st pur z ab-i zulal/ amad sabab-i taharat-i ahl-i kamal/ dar majlis-i ‘aysh tishna ra bar kaf-i dast/ jamist za ab-i zindagi malamal, ‘This dish which is a pool filled with pure water, Has come for the sake of the ablutions of those endowed with excellence, At the gathering of pleasure, in the palm of the thirsty one, It is a cup, brimful with the Water of Life’
This bowl has the features of a group that was first identified by Anatol Ivanov in 1972 (A. A. Ivanov, “Bronze mid-fourteenth century basins”, in Central Asia and Iran, Leningrad, 1972). Ivanov concentrated on a bowl in the Hermitage (inv. VC-167) that was of a form that he at the time called Mamluk, but which has Persian inscriptions and was dated AH 751/1350 AD. He tentatively gives the group, which he subdivided, a Jalayrid mid to later fourteenth century attribution.
There are many basins of this form and basic decoration which at first make one think that our example is relatively commonplace. However the decoration is much finer than that on most with far more inlay, while the delightful Persian inscription is specifically for this bowl. It has a number of unusual features when compared to the main group (apart from that of clear legibility), including dense interlace decoration that spans the rim and also the lotus flowers in the alternate triangular lower panels, both of which are very similar indeed to fourteenth century Fars examples. Both can be seen for example on a very good Fars bowl sold at Sotheby’s Paris, 18 November 2013, lot 135. The profile and distribution of the design can also be compared to that of the Turanshah bowl of 752/1351-2 in the Victoria & Albert Museum (inv. 760-1889; A. S. Melikian-Chirvani, Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, eighth-eighteenth centuries, London, 1982, no.104, pp.223-229).
The Sotheby’s bowl however has the typical decoration fully covering the sloping shoulder rather than just the upper band seen here. The present design proportion is frequently thought to be a later development directly heading in a comfortably linear art-historical fashion to the Timurid version of the fifteenth century. The present bowl, coupled with the dated Hermitage example, show that this format of design was at least partly contemporaneous with the better-known Fars bowls. The fact that ours is very similar in shape, technique and decorative details to the Fars examples indicates it was probably made in the same or closely related workshops.
It is also worth noting the fish in the centre of the bowl which, unusually, are in a wider band but all facing the central roundel. This is possibly the only example in the centre of a bowl showing the stylised water ripples either side of the fish’s tails giving the strong impression of movement, each almost nibbling at the central roundel.