.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This magnificent zinc tankard, with its elegant and restrained decoration is of royal quality. It is a rare survival from the period of Shah Isma'il I. With most of the closest comparables in the Topkapı Palace Museum, this is the only Safavid zinc vessel known to remain in private hands and the only example ever to have appeared on the open market.
ZINC
The element zinc had been used in metallurgy for many centuries in the Islamic world by the time that this remarkable small tankard was made. It is a critical constituent of brass. Al-Biruni, writing in the 11th century says that brass is “copper made yellow by mixing into it [a substance called] tutiya with sweetened things (halawat) etc. as additives until it becomes like gold” (James Allan, Persian Metal Technology, 1300-1700 AD, Oxford, 1979, p.40). Tutiya, from descriptions of its manufacture, can be shown to have been zinc ore which has been refined to zinc oxide. One property of elemental zinc however is that at normal atmospheric pressure its melting point is higher than its sublimation point, which means that, when heated, it turns into gaseous zinc which immediately oxidises in air to form clouds of zinc oxide. In India, before the 14th century, the tiryakpatanam process was devised whereby a mix of Calamine (zinc ore) with organic reducing agents and sodium salts were heated strongly together. The resultant hot gaseous zinc which was emitted could be passed through a sealed long tube and then cooled, which would therefore condense the pure metal (The fourteenth century Indian source Rasaratnasamuccaya quoted by A.P.C. Ray, History of Chemistry in Ancient and Medieval India, Calcutta, 1956, reported in I.C. Freestone et al., “Zinc production in Zawar, Rajasthan,” Furnaces and Smelting Technology in Antiquity, British Museum Occasional Paper No 48, London, 1985, pp.232 and 237).
In Iran there is no evidence of any such technology being used before 1500, so “the existence in Topkapı Palace treasury of a group of zinc objects […..] comes as something of a surprise. The earliest of them are clearly Safavid in style and must have formed part of the booty from the battle of Chaldiran and the Ottoman capture of Tabriz in 1512” (James Allan, “Early Safavid Metalwork”, in Jon Thompson and Sheila R. Canby (eds.), The Hunt for Paradise, exhibition catalogue, New York and Milan, 2003, p.218). It is not known for sure where the zinc for these vessels was refined. The material clearly attracted Shah Isma’il whose treasury contained a number of exquisitely decorated items fashioned in this new material.
STYLISTIC ANALYSIS
The tankard is of a classic form known in various materials. The largest number are of brass very finely overlaid with silver and gold, many which are associated with Timurid Herat but which continued to be made in the early Safavid period (British Museum inv. 1878,1230.732.a; ibid, no.8.6, pp.210-211). Also of this form is a spectacular black jade example made for the founder of the Safavid dynasty, Shah Isma’il, (r.1501-1527) which is inlaid with gold spirals and a large inscription (Topkapı Saray Museum, inv2/1844; Linda Komaroff (ed.), Dining with the Sultan, the Fine Art of Feasting, exhibition catalogue, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 20013, frontispiece). The present tankard also had a handle which is no longer attached, almost certainly of zinc, with upper terminal in the form of a dragon’s head; the holes in the body and the rim show where it was attached.
The tankard has three registers of design, each of which has a slightly different technique. In the lowest medallions the gold is inlaid flush into the ground, and is then itself carved and engraved with delicate further ornamentation. The part-medallions that form the middle row have similarly decorated gold arabesques but against a ground that is cut away and stippled to leave them in relief. In the upper band around the mouth the ground around the similarly decorated gold is mostly cut away but there is also a carved second level of scrolling flowering tendrils that interlace with the arabesques. This double level scrolling design is also a particular feature of Iranian carpet design, appearing first in Tabriz weavings of the later 15th century (for example Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, inv. 22.100.75; M.S. Dimand and Jean Mailey, Oriental Rugs and Carpets in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1973, no.1, p.96 and fig. 59, p.39).
The form of the arabesques and particularly the carved and engraved lines within the gold work relate particularly closely to those of other works of art created at the early Safavid court such as a dagger hilt in the Al-Sabah Collection, Kuwait, which relates closely to the Shah Isma’il jade tankard (inv. LNS 618 HS; sold in these Rooms 29 April 2003, lot 85 illustrated left). Similar work can also be seen on a dagger blade in the Furusiyya Collection (inv. R-1024).
CONTEXT
By far the largest number of comparable pieces are today in the Topkapı Palace Museum, having formed part of the booty captured after the battle of Chaldiran by the Ottoman forces under Sultan Selim. The treasury contains just over one hundred vessels made of zinc and of these the vast majority date from the first half of the 16th century, before zinc in its metallic form became more readily available (Emine Bilirgen, Osmanlı saray hazinesinden sıra dışı tutya eserler, www.antikalar.com). While some are plain, most are decorated, usually in gold and frequently with the addition of inset gemstones. The earliest were clearly made in Iran, almost certainly in Tabriz, and show clearly the hallmarks of the early Safavid style already referred to. (Bilirgen op.cit., suggests that zinc was refined and worked slightly earlier in late Timurid Herat, but there is little firm evidence of this. However the Herat link could help explain how an Indian technology arrived in Tabriz). After the occupation of Tabriz many workmen were rounded up and brought back to Istanbul by the Ottomans. Separating early Safavid metalwork from Ottoman metalwork of 1515-1530 or so is sometimes therefore very difficult, and it is possible that this tankard was made by Iranian craftsmen in Istanbul shortly after the battle of Chaldiran. However the Ottoman designs quickly adopted the more floral forms that typified decoration in the second half of the 16th century (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2856 and 2⁄2873; J.M. Rogers and R.M. Ward, Süleyman the Magnificent, exhibition catalogue, London, 1988, nos.65 and 66, pp.132-3).
It is among these other vessels in the Topkapı Palace that the closest similarities are to be found. There are twenty-nine tankards (maşrapa) listed of similar form to this example. Some of the earlier examples with shorter squatter bodies are covered with an overall arabesque design (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2859 and 2⁄2863) while others, as here, have medallions set against a plain ground (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/2858). Many show the design in relief, as here, against a stippled ground (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2859, 2⁄2863 and 2⁄2871). The feature of the secondary slightly lower carved but not gilded flowering tendril offering a counterpoint to the gold arabesques is seen on some of the most magnificent of all examples such as the bottle (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/2875; Arthur Upham Pope, A Survey of Persian Art, Oxford, 1938, pl.1380), the pencase, and the belt of Shah Isma’il himself dated 913⁄1507-8. Many sources at the time refer directly to Shah Isma’il’s love of opulence, both when describing his encampment and also from the list of gifts for example that he sent to the Mamluk Sultan Qansuh al-Ghuri in AH 918⁄1512-13 AD (James Allan in The Hunt for Paradise, p.205). Items that were sent to Qansuh al-Ghuri may also now be part of the Topkapı treasury after the Ottoman defeat of the Mamluk sultan four years later.
The question of why zinc was quite so popular under Shah Isma’il is an interesting one. Clearly the rarity and novelty of this material was a major factor. Another is that this was a metal which, once formed, was very corrosion resistant. It is also one whose surface could relatively easily be treated to make it black, as it clearly was on many of the vessels now in Istanbul, for example a spectacular small silver-lined bowl (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/1869; The Hunt for Paradise no.8.2, pp.204-5). This tankard still retains a very dark patina which is probably original, allowing the gold to stand out particularly strongly.
RARITY
No other example of a royal quality Safavid zinc vessel is known outside major public collections. Almost every other example is in Istanbul. One large circular deep dish is in the Hermitage; the added openwork gold medallions on the interior walls indicate that that, too, was at one stage at the Ottoman court. A late 17th century silver mounted Ottoman zinc bottle now in Doha came from an Iranian family collection, but that was made long after zinc had lost its rarity as a material (Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, inv. MW.560.2004; sold in these Rooms 12 October 2004, lot 126). This gold decorated zinc tankard is the only example of such a royal vessel ever to have appeared on the open market.
ZINC
The element zinc had been used in metallurgy for many centuries in the Islamic world by the time that this remarkable small tankard was made. It is a critical constituent of brass. Al-Biruni, writing in the 11th century says that brass is “copper made yellow by mixing into it [a substance called] tutiya with sweetened things (halawat) etc. as additives until it becomes like gold” (James Allan, Persian Metal Technology, 1300-1700 AD, Oxford, 1979, p.40). Tutiya, from descriptions of its manufacture, can be shown to have been zinc ore which has been refined to zinc oxide. One property of elemental zinc however is that at normal atmospheric pressure its melting point is higher than its sublimation point, which means that, when heated, it turns into gaseous zinc which immediately oxidises in air to form clouds of zinc oxide. In India, before the 14th century, the tiryakpatanam process was devised whereby a mix of Calamine (zinc ore) with organic reducing agents and sodium salts were heated strongly together. The resultant hot gaseous zinc which was emitted could be passed through a sealed long tube and then cooled, which would therefore condense the pure metal (The fourteenth century Indian source Rasaratnasamuccaya quoted by A.P.C. Ray, History of Chemistry in Ancient and Medieval India, Calcutta, 1956, reported in I.C. Freestone et al., “Zinc production in Zawar, Rajasthan,” Furnaces and Smelting Technology in Antiquity, British Museum Occasional Paper No 48, London, 1985, pp.232 and 237).
In Iran there is no evidence of any such technology being used before 1500, so “the existence in Topkapı Palace treasury of a group of zinc objects […..] comes as something of a surprise. The earliest of them are clearly Safavid in style and must have formed part of the booty from the battle of Chaldiran and the Ottoman capture of Tabriz in 1512” (James Allan, “Early Safavid Metalwork”, in Jon Thompson and Sheila R. Canby (eds.), The Hunt for Paradise, exhibition catalogue, New York and Milan, 2003, p.218). It is not known for sure where the zinc for these vessels was refined. The material clearly attracted Shah Isma’il whose treasury contained a number of exquisitely decorated items fashioned in this new material.
STYLISTIC ANALYSIS
The tankard is of a classic form known in various materials. The largest number are of brass very finely overlaid with silver and gold, many which are associated with Timurid Herat but which continued to be made in the early Safavid period (British Museum inv. 1878,1230.732.a; ibid, no.8.6, pp.210-211). Also of this form is a spectacular black jade example made for the founder of the Safavid dynasty, Shah Isma’il, (r.1501-1527) which is inlaid with gold spirals and a large inscription (Topkapı Saray Museum, inv2/1844; Linda Komaroff (ed.), Dining with the Sultan, the Fine Art of Feasting, exhibition catalogue, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 20013, frontispiece). The present tankard also had a handle which is no longer attached, almost certainly of zinc, with upper terminal in the form of a dragon’s head; the holes in the body and the rim show where it was attached.
The tankard has three registers of design, each of which has a slightly different technique. In the lowest medallions the gold is inlaid flush into the ground, and is then itself carved and engraved with delicate further ornamentation. The part-medallions that form the middle row have similarly decorated gold arabesques but against a ground that is cut away and stippled to leave them in relief. In the upper band around the mouth the ground around the similarly decorated gold is mostly cut away but there is also a carved second level of scrolling flowering tendrils that interlace with the arabesques. This double level scrolling design is also a particular feature of Iranian carpet design, appearing first in Tabriz weavings of the later 15th century (for example Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, inv. 22.100.75; M.S. Dimand and Jean Mailey, Oriental Rugs and Carpets in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1973, no.1, p.96 and fig. 59, p.39).
The form of the arabesques and particularly the carved and engraved lines within the gold work relate particularly closely to those of other works of art created at the early Safavid court such as a dagger hilt in the Al-Sabah Collection, Kuwait, which relates closely to the Shah Isma’il jade tankard (inv. LNS 618 HS; sold in these Rooms 29 April 2003, lot 85 illustrated left). Similar work can also be seen on a dagger blade in the Furusiyya Collection (inv. R-1024).
CONTEXT
By far the largest number of comparable pieces are today in the Topkapı Palace Museum, having formed part of the booty captured after the battle of Chaldiran by the Ottoman forces under Sultan Selim. The treasury contains just over one hundred vessels made of zinc and of these the vast majority date from the first half of the 16th century, before zinc in its metallic form became more readily available (Emine Bilirgen, Osmanlı saray hazinesinden sıra dışı tutya eserler, www.antikalar.com). While some are plain, most are decorated, usually in gold and frequently with the addition of inset gemstones. The earliest were clearly made in Iran, almost certainly in Tabriz, and show clearly the hallmarks of the early Safavid style already referred to. (Bilirgen op.cit., suggests that zinc was refined and worked slightly earlier in late Timurid Herat, but there is little firm evidence of this. However the Herat link could help explain how an Indian technology arrived in Tabriz). After the occupation of Tabriz many workmen were rounded up and brought back to Istanbul by the Ottomans. Separating early Safavid metalwork from Ottoman metalwork of 1515-1530 or so is sometimes therefore very difficult, and it is possible that this tankard was made by Iranian craftsmen in Istanbul shortly after the battle of Chaldiran. However the Ottoman designs quickly adopted the more floral forms that typified decoration in the second half of the 16th century (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2856 and 2⁄2873; J.M. Rogers and R.M. Ward, Süleyman the Magnificent, exhibition catalogue, London, 1988, nos.65 and 66, pp.132-3).
It is among these other vessels in the Topkapı Palace that the closest similarities are to be found. There are twenty-nine tankards (maşrapa) listed of similar form to this example. Some of the earlier examples with shorter squatter bodies are covered with an overall arabesque design (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2859 and 2⁄2863) while others, as here, have medallions set against a plain ground (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/2858). Many show the design in relief, as here, against a stippled ground (Topkapı Saray Museum invs2/2859, 2⁄2863 and 2⁄2871). The feature of the secondary slightly lower carved but not gilded flowering tendril offering a counterpoint to the gold arabesques is seen on some of the most magnificent of all examples such as the bottle (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/2875; Arthur Upham Pope, A Survey of Persian Art, Oxford, 1938, pl.1380), the pencase, and the belt of Shah Isma’il himself dated 913⁄1507-8. Many sources at the time refer directly to Shah Isma’il’s love of opulence, both when describing his encampment and also from the list of gifts for example that he sent to the Mamluk Sultan Qansuh al-Ghuri in AH 918⁄1512-13 AD (James Allan in The Hunt for Paradise, p.205). Items that were sent to Qansuh al-Ghuri may also now be part of the Topkapı treasury after the Ottoman defeat of the Mamluk sultan four years later.
The question of why zinc was quite so popular under Shah Isma’il is an interesting one. Clearly the rarity and novelty of this material was a major factor. Another is that this was a metal which, once formed, was very corrosion resistant. It is also one whose surface could relatively easily be treated to make it black, as it clearly was on many of the vessels now in Istanbul, for example a spectacular small silver-lined bowl (Topkapı Saray Museum inv2/1869; The Hunt for Paradise no.8.2, pp.204-5). This tankard still retains a very dark patina which is probably original, allowing the gold to stand out particularly strongly.
RARITY
No other example of a royal quality Safavid zinc vessel is known outside major public collections. Almost every other example is in Istanbul. One large circular deep dish is in the Hermitage; the added openwork gold medallions on the interior walls indicate that that, too, was at one stage at the Ottoman court. A late 17th century silver mounted Ottoman zinc bottle now in Doha came from an Iranian family collection, but that was made long after zinc had lost its rarity as a material (Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, inv. MW.560.2004; sold in these Rooms 12 October 2004, lot 126). This gold decorated zinc tankard is the only example of such a royal vessel ever to have appeared on the open market.