Piri Reis' World Map of 1513 & Its Islamic Iconographic

History Faculty Publications History

2012 Searchin’ His Eyes, Lookin’ for Traces: Piri Reis’ World Map of 1513 & its Islamic Iconographic Connections (A Reading Through Bagdat 334 and Proust) Karen C. Pinto Gettysburg College

Follow this and additional works at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/histfac Part of the Islamic World and Near East History Commons Share feedback about the accessibility of this item.

Pinto, Karen C. “Searchin’ His Eyes, Lookin’ for Traces: Piri Reis’ World Map of 1513 & its Islamic Iconographic Connections (A Reading Through Bagdat 334 and Proust).” Journal of Ottoman Studies 39.1 (2012): 63-94.

This is the publisher's version of the work. This publication appears in Gettysburg College's institutional repository by permission of the copyright owner for personal use, not for redistribution. Cupola permanent link: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/histfac/11 This open access article is brought to you by The uC pola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of The uC pola. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Searchin’ His Eyes, Lookin’ for Traces: Piri Reis’ World Map of 1513 & its Islamic Iconographic Connections (A Reading Through Bagdat 334 and Proust)

Abstract The er mnant of the 1513 world map of the Ottoman corsair (and later admiral) Muhiddin Piri, a.k.a. Piri Reis, with its focus on the Atlantic and the New World can be ranked as one of the most famous and controversial maps in the annals of the history of cartography. Following its discovery at Topkapi Palace in 1929, this early modern Ottoman map has raised baffling questions regarding its fons et origo. Some scholars posited ancient sea kings or aliens from outer space as the original creators; while the influence of Columbus’ own map and early Renaissance cartographers tantalized others. One question that remains unanswered is how Islamic cartography influenced Piri Reis’ work. This paper presents hitherto unnoticed iconographical connections between the classical Islamic mapping tradition and the Piri Reis map.

Keywords Piri Reis, Marcel Proust, iconography, Islam

Disciplines History | Islamic World and Near East History

This article is available at The uC pola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/histfac/11 Searchin’ his eyes, lookin’ for traces: Piri Reis’ World Map of üĀüþ & its Islamic Iconographic Connections (A Reading Through Ba Čdat þþÿ and Proust)*

Karen Pinto**

Gözlerine Bakmak, ơzler Aramak: Piri Reis’in 1513 Tarihli Dünya Haritas õ ve Onun Œslâm Œkonografisi ile Œli ůkileri (Ba Şdat 334 ve Proust Üzerinden Bir Okuma) Özet H Osmanl õ korsan õ (sonradan amirali) Muhiddin Piri, yani Piri Reis’in 151 3 tarihli dünya haritas õndan geriye kalan ve Atlantik Okyanusu ile Yeni Dünya’y õ betimleyen k õ- sõm, haritac õlõk tarihinin en ünlü ve tart õƾmal õ haritalar õndan biri say õlõr. 1929’da Topka- põ Saray õ’nda bulunmas õndan beri, bu erken modern Osmanl õ haritas õ, kaynak ve kökeni hakk õnda ƾaƾõrt õcõ sorular õn ortaya at õlmas õna sebep olmu ƾtur. Baz õ ara ƾtõrmac õlar, kadim deniz krallar õ ya da uzaydan gelen yabanc õlar õn haritan õn asli yarat õcõlar õ oldu ƭunu söylerken, di ƭerleri Kolomb’un kendi haritas õ ve erken Rönesans haritac õlar õna ba ƭlad õlar bo ƾa ç õkan ümitlerini. Cevap verilmeden kalan bir soru da, ơslâm haritac õlõƭõnõn Piri Reis’in çal õƾma- lar õnõ nas õl etkiledi ƭi. Bu makale, klasik ơslâm haritac õlõk gelene ƭi ile Piri Reis’in haritas õ aras õndaki bugüne kadar fark edilmemi ƾ ikonografik ili ƾkileri gözler önüne seriyor. Anahtar kelimeler: Piri Reis, Piri Reis’in 151 3 tarihli dünya haritas õ, Osmanl õ hari- tacõlõƭõ, ơslâm dünyasõnda haritacõlõk, ‘Acâ’ibü’l-mahlukat gelene ƭi, ơslâm dünyasõnda elyazmasõ süslemeciliƭi.

When a man is asleep, he has in a c ircle round h im the cha in of the hours, the sequence of the years, the order of the heavenly host. Inst inctively when he awakes, he looks

* Ded icated to a wonderful scholar, mentor, and fr iend: Thomas Goodr ich. What could be more appropr iate than to dedicate an art icle on Piri Re is to the doyen of Kitab-i H ind-i Garb i and one of Piri Re is’ b iggest fans. W ithout Tom’s encouragement and support I would not have dared to tackle P iri. He suppl ied me with materials from h is own pr ivate collect ion and promptly responded to every query. Shukran ya Tom for be ing such a generous sharer of schol- arly knowledge, books, maps, and kindness! Sonsuz minnetle. Thanks also to my readers Devon Richards, Lisa Portmess, and the students of my Spr ing ų0Ųų Ottoman H istory class, espec ially John Sov ich and Samuel Gilvarg, who prov ided feedback on this article. ** Gettysburg College.

Osmanl õ Ara ůtõrmalar õ / The Journal of Ottoman Studies , XXXIX ( 2012 ), 6ǭ-94 63 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

to these, and in an instant reads off h is own pos ition on the earth’s surface and the amount of time that has elapsed during his slumbers; but th is ordered process ion is apt to grow confused, and to break its ranks. Marcel Proust , Remembrance of Th ings Past.Ų

As when we sleep so when we wr ite, we have in our m inds a galaxy of th ings seen—those remembered and those not. Documented in our prescr ibed modern way through detailed and copious footnotes, some of these sources sp ill out onto paper for all to see. Other influences rema in unacknowledged, e ither because we forgot to mention them or because we had so many references that our ed itors requ ired us to chop a few. 2 In subl iminal levels of thought, influencing our work, a myriad unacknowledged images lurk. Mapmakers are wr iters too. Instead of words they use l ines and keys and topo- nyms and symbolic codes. Somet imes to copyright their work they w ill incor- porate a non-ex istent place or road into their map and use th is as a safeguard against plagiar ism. For the most part, maps leave no room for footnotes nor the acknowledgement of sources, and yet the mapmaker must have called upon a host of sources—hidden and acknowledged—for h is map. How can we identify sources of influence when the mapmaker in quest ion lived in the late f ifteenth and early sixteenth-century and left behind only a vague hint of his sources? One opt ion is to look for iconographic traces on the maps of influences sw irl- ing around the cartographer. To do th is we need to search the extant record from the period to see if we can spot what the cartographer saw. We need to look at the reflect ions in the cartographer’s eyes of books, manuscr ipts, maps, and other objects of material culture that s/he may have seen or owned. Never is the repl i- cation exact. There is no such th ing as an exact, essential copy.3 Maps are based on refract ions of external sources whose influences can be discerned through the examination of shapes, forms, and embellishments. In decorat ion we can g ive free fl ight to our art ist ic imagination. We are at l iberty to harness images from the galleries sw irl ing around us: a b ird here and a monkey there, a mounta in and

Ų Marcel Proust, Remembrance of Th ings Past, trans. C. K. Scott Moncr ieff (New York: Random House, Ųź 34), 4. ų There are some authors who seem to have avers ion to unpublished material, such as, doctoral dissertations even though it is clear from the ir texts that they have consulted them. And, then there are those, such as F. Bab inger, the famous b iographer of Mehmed the Conqueror who dispensed with the citation requ irements altogether and publ ished a mass ive 6 00 -page tome Mehmed de Eroberer und se ine Zeit (Mun ich: F. Bruckmann, Ųź 53) without a single footnote. 3 Norman Bryson, Vision and Pa int ing: The Logic of the Gaze (New Haven: Yale Un ivers ity Press, Ųź 83),Ų3-35.

64 KAREN PINTO a headless Blemmye, a sh ip, its flag and sa il. All these must be seen as traces of subliminal influences on the cartographer—what he saw and expressed in var iant yet subtly related forms upon the surface of the map that he was creat ing.

I mean the l ife of the m ind. Doubtless it makes in us an impercept ible progress, and the truths wh ich have changed for us its mean ing and its aspect, wh ich have opened new paths before our feet, we had for long been prepar ing for the ir d iscovery; from the date, from the minute when they became apparent. The flowers wh ich played then among the grass, the water wh ich r ippled past in the sunsh ine, the whole landscape wh ich served as env iron- ment to the ir appar ition l ingers around the memory of them st ill w ith its unconsc ious or unheed ing a ir; and, certa inly, when they were slowly scrut inised by th is humble passer- by, by th is dream ing ch ild—as the face of a k ing is scrut inised by a pet itioner lost in the crowd—that scrap of nature, that corner of a garden could never suppose that it would be thanks to h im that they would be elected to surv ive in all the ir most ephemeral deta ils .5

“Search in’ h is eyes, look in’ for traces” attempts to do just that w ith the Otto- man naval Adm iral Piri Re is’ World Map of 151 3. Th is map, wh ich shows us parts of South Amer ica, West Afr ica, and Europe—Antart ica too if you agree with the theory about extraterrestr ial technology, is incomplete (estimated at one-half or one-third of the or iginal work). Follow ing its discovery at Topkap õ Palace in 1929 by Adolf De issmann and Paul Kahle, 7 it generated w idespread debate regard ing its or igins.8 Some authors have pos ited ancient sea kings and al iens

4 F ict ional race of headless monsters sa id by Pl iny the Elder to l ive in East Afr ica. They are a regu- lar feature on large European mappamund i from the twelfth century onwards. P iri Re is dep icts a Blemmye on h is world map along w ith a monkey am idst mountains against a backdrop of the Atlant ic Ocean dotted with flagged ships. 5 Proust, Remembrance, Ų4Ų. 6 Svat Soucek, Piri Re is and Turk ish Mapmak ing After Columbus, Stud ies in the Khal ili Collect ion, Vol. II, (London: Nour Foundat ion, Az imuth Ed itions, and Oxford Un ivers ity Press, Ųźź6), ųų ; later in the book (6 0), Soucek clearly asserts that two-th irds of the map show ing the so-called pre-Columb ian “old world” is lost. 7 Reportedly the d iscovery cost the staff at Topkap õ Palace the ir favor ite tablecloth! Th is sounds like hyperbole to make the story of its discovery interesting. Soucek reports that Afet inan sa id th is dur ing her Ųź 83 speech at the Piri Re is sympos ium in Gal ipolli, June Ųź 83: Soucek, Turk- ish Mapmak ing , Ų05 . See also, A. Afet inan,Life and Works of the Turk ish Adm iral: P iri Re is. The Oldest Map of Amer ica, Drawn by P iri Re is, tr. Leman Yolaç (Ankara: Türk Tar ih Kurumu, Ųź 54 ), 3. Celal Ɨengör disputes Afetinan’s work as low-grade and argues pursuasively against the claim that Halil Eldem discovered the map. See, Ɨengör, “Piri Reis’in Ų5Ų3 Tarihli Haritasini Kim Bul- du?” International Piri Reis Symposium (Istanbul: H idrograf i ve O ƾinografi Da ires i Ba ƾkanlõƭõ, ų004), 50 -75 . 8 A Google search on P iri Re is, for instance, turns up more than one m ill ion hits! Th is is surpr ising in the context of Middle Eastern cartography, which usually receives l imited attention.

65 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

Figure 1 : Istanbul, Topkap õ Saray õ Kütüphanes i [TKS], Revan 1 3m: Piri Re is World Map of 151 3 (919 AH), Parchment, 9 x 3 cm; courtesy of the Topkap õ Saray õ Kütüphanes i.

66 KAREN PINTO from outer space as the or iginal creators; 9 wh ile the influence of Columbus’ own map and early Rena issance cartographers tantalized others. One quest ion that rema ins unanswered is the influence of local Middle Eastern traditions on th is map. In th is paper, I w ill present h itherto unmentioned iconographical connections between the classical Islamic mapping tradition and the Piri Re is map. Read ing the iconography of flora and fauna (human be ings included), th is paper po ints to one possible medieval Islam ic map manuscr ipt that Piri Re is may have consulted wh ile making his map. What we see on the 151 3 map are traces of transformed images that Piri Re is saw elsewhere, subsequently refracted through the lens of his eyes, his mind, and his drawing hand. As the 1,21, Google h its on Piri Re is suggest, th is map-mak ing Otto- man admiral of the early sixteenth century is today even more famous than the Sultan who hanged h im. 1 Such is the revenge of h istory. Countless intrigued

ź Charles Hapgood, Maps of the Anc ient Sea K ings (Ph iladelphia: Ch ilton Company and Toronto: Ambassador Books, Ltd., Ųź 66) picked up and popularized amongst m ill ions of readers by Er ich von Dän iken in Chariots of the Gods (Econ-Verlag GMBH, Ųź 68). Followed up by Allan W. Eckert’s novel The Hab Theory (Boston: L ittle Brown & Co., Ųź 76), in wh ich he claims that mammoths were qu ick frozen l ike orange ju ice! For a very good art icle discussing these and other strange al ien theories involv ing the Piri Re is map see, Paul F. Hoye and Paul Lunde, “P iri Re is and the Hapgood Hypotheses,” in Saud i Aramco 3Ų/Ų (Jan/Feb Ųź 80): Ų8-3Ų. Ų0 Th is is even the case after account ing for all possible var iat ions of spelling Süleyman. Whereas I tr ied no var iant spellings in the case of P iri Re is. Readers should note that I am not referr ing to quality of wr iting here, just assessing numbers and gauging worldwide interest in P iri Re is and his work. In fact, the surpr ising conclusion of a l iterature survey on P iri Re is and h is Ų5Ų3 map is that only a l imited portion of the secondary l iterature on the subject is of h igh quality. Other than the early work of Paul Kahle, Die verschollene Columbus-Karte von 14 98 in e iner türkischen Weltkarte von 1513 (Berl in and Le ipz ig: Walter de Gruyter & Co., Ųź 33) [itself incomplete in places because of its early publication very soon after the or iginal discovery in Ųźųź], A. Afetinan, Life and Works of the Turk ish Adm iral , and A. Afetinan, Pirî Re is’ in Hayat õ ve Eserleri: Amerika’n õn en Eski Haritalar õ (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ųź 74 ) there are no other full length books on the subject of Piri Re is unt il the work of Svat Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing , and Greg McIntosh, The Piri Re is Map of 1513 (Athens and London: Un ivers ity of Georg ia Press, ų000), who does a val iant job of place-name historiography. (It should be ment ioned that the Ųź 54 Engl ish translation of Afetinan’s book should be used w ith care and readers are better served referr ing to the Ųź 74 Turk ish publication.) Other than these, there are part ial but very useful discussions in books, such as, ơbrahim Hakk õ, Topkap õ Saray õnda: Der i Üzer ine Yap õlm õů Esk i Har italar… (Istanbul: Ülkü Bas õmevi, Ųź 36), 5-Ųųź; and A. Ad õvar, Osmanl õ Türkler inde Œlim (Istanbul: Remz i K itabevi, Ųź 70 ), 65-8 0. The latter are out-of-date, espec ially the Hakk õ book, the title of wh ich mistakenly implies that all the list ings are maps on sk in whereas many, such as the Greek Ptolemy cop ies dating to the Byzant ine period are on paper. The Hakk õ book is useful, however, for translat ions from Ottoman Turk ish into modern Turk ish. Other key art icles include Cengiz Orhunlu, “H int Kaptanlõƭõ ve Pîrî Reîs,” Belleten 3 4 ( Ųź 70 ): ų35-ų54 ; Andrew Hess, “P iri Re is and the Ottoman Response to the Voyages of D iscovery,” Terrae Incogn ito 6

67 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 scholars and dilettantes have poured over the outl ines of his maps. What d id he intend right at the tip of South Amer ica? Was it T ierra del Fuego or Antarct ica? Many people wonder how an Ottoman mar iner of the early sixteenth century who never made the journey himself could have f igured out the shape of South America so prec isely. Some go so far as to argue that he must have been us ing special maps left behind by an al ien race before the last Ice Age—the most recent time in human h istory that the coastl ine of Antarct ica was not covered by ice and was therefore visible. Historians of cartography seek to understand what maps could have influenced Piri Re is’ 151 3 map that has no exact repl ica anywhere. Piri Re is h imself was somewhat helpful in th is matter. He d id what cartographers today rarely do, although his pract ice was not uncommon for portolan mapmakers of his t ime, he scattered notes and explanations throughout his map. 11 These range from deta iled information on sources he consulted, to bizarre t idb its that scholars are st ill try ing to decipher. Of part icular interest are h is deta iled comments on Christo- pher Columbus (whom he refers to as Qulünbü) and h is voyage of d iscovery to the New World, such as, the very long notat ion located in the South Amer ican landmass in the approx imate present day reg ion of Peru, Bol ivia, and the interior of Braz il (see F igure 1). In th is text P iri Re is narrates the story as he heard it from a Span ish slave, of his late uncle Kemal Re is, who claimed to have accompan ied Columbus on three voyages to the Amer icas. The story tells us that Columbus managed to convince the King of Spa in to g ive h im some sh ips to test out his idea that there was more than just m ist and darkness and an endless Enc ircl ing Sea out in the area of the Western Ocean. 12 Not surpr isingly, Columbus af icionados have a spec ial interest in th is map since none of Columbus’ own maps are extant. Th is interest led to a search for the sources of Piri Re is’ map in the hope of better understand ing the sources of Columbus’ m iss ing map. Scholars have, in other words, appl ied the same (Ųź 74 ): Ųź -3 7; and Sev im Tekel i, “The Map of Amer ica by Pîrî Reîs,” Erdem Ų:3 (Ųź 85): 673-83. The best bibl iographies are to be found in Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing, and McIntosh, P iri Re is Map. See also the art icles in International Piri Reis Symposium (Istanbul: H idrograf i ve Oƾinografi Da ires i Ba ƾkanlõƭõ, ų004). ŲŲ The word portolan has a confused l inguist ic h istory. It is der ived from the Ital ian word portola- no , wh ich referred or iginally to wr itten sa iling direct ions. Eventually it came to refer to mar ine charts with rhumb lines. In order to avo id confus ion, ‘portolan charts’ is used in contrad ist inc- tion to portolani. See, Tony Campbell, “Portolan Charts from the Late Th irteenth Century to Ų500,” in The History of Cartography , vol. Ų, eds., J. B. Harley and Dav id Woodward (Ch icago: Un ivers ity of Chicago Press, Ųźźų), 375 . Ųų Thomas Goodr ich’s translat ion from McIntosh, Piri Re is Map , 70 ; see also, Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing , 58- ź;

68 KAREN PINTO invest igation that I am propos ing in th is paper to the P iri Re is map, w ith one cruc ial difference: they were try ing to see what Columbus saw.13 Discussions on wh ich European map, globe, and Portolan chart P iri Re is consulted are extens ive. Almost every art icle and book on Piri Re is and h is map ra ises its own spec ial set of European cartograph ic poss ibilities. One such map is the Cantino Plan isphere of 15 5 by the Genoese N icholas Canerio or Cauer io. 1 Beyond the resemblance of coastl ines, what is immediately clear is that the iconographic palettes of the Cantino and Piri Re is maps are completely different. Another popular comparison is the Juan de la Cosa map of 15 , wh ich is regarded as the earl iest depict ion of the Americas.15 De la Cosa took part in Columbus’ second voyage and jo ined other expeditions. The layout of kings and castles in West Afr ica present closer parallels w ith the figures on the Piri Re is map, although it is clear that the pa interly tradition is str ikingly different. On the de la Cosa map these kings, carrying crescent-marked flags s ign ify ing their ‘Musl imness,’ are all not iceably lily wh ite whereas the kings depicted on the Piri Re is maps are dark sk inned. Starkly d ifferent in iconographic vocabulary is de la Cosa’s dep ict ion of the newly d iscovered Amer ican continent as a lush, verdant green space punctuated by numerous r ivers, w ith no hint of strange monsters and fr ightening creatures. Th is is in d irect contrast to P iri Re is’ map. De la Cosa’s map does have a Blemmye (headless f igures with faces in the ir chests) and a Cynophal i (dog-faced man); however, he locates them in the Far East in the approx imate location of Ch ina, whereas Piri Re is places h is own var iat ion of these creatures in South Amer ica. Here the parallels end. De la Cosa places portra its in the Atlant ic Ocean, whereas P iri Re is emphas izes sh ips. De la Cosa’s map is dotted w ith flags of crosses and crescents that s implist ically sign ify the dichotomy between the Christ ian and Musl im worlds in the m ind of the cartographer. P iri Re is’ maps, in contrast, are devoid of flags.

Ų3 See, for example, Fel ipe Fernández-Armesto, Columbus (Oxford: Oxford Un ivers ity Press, ŲźźŲ), esp. Plates VI and VII. For deta ils on the importance of the references to Chr istopher Columbus on the map, see Hakkõ, Esk i Har italar, 8ź-ŲŲų; and McIntosh, Piri Re is Map, 6ź-75 . Ų4 Soucek in part icular favors th is map and its poss ible influence on P iri Re is. See Soucek , Turk ish Mapmak ing, 73- 74 . I agree that there are indeed resonances of coastal and cont inental s imilar ity but I d ispute the iconograph ic vocabulary. For a h igh-qual ity downloadable image of the Cant ino map d irectly through the B ibl ioteca estense un ivers itar ia l ibrary of Modena that houses th is map, use the follow ing l ink: http://www.cedoc.mo. it/estense/ info/ img/geo.html Ų5 Fernández-Armesto, Columbus, focuses on the parallel between the de la Cosa map and P iri Re is’ World map of Ų5Ų3. Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing , 73, also mentions th is map when drawing parallels. For an image of the map along with a deta iled analysis of its shape and coordinates see, http://www.stonybrook.edu/libmap/coordinates/seriesa/noź/a ź.htm

6ź PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

There are many other s imilar citations and discussions of the Kunstmann no. 2 map, the Cane iro, the Pesaro, the K ing-Hamy-Huntington, the Egerton Ms. 283, Ruysch, and Waldseemüller maps of 15 7, 1513, and 151 , to ment ion but a few. 1 Iconograph ic analys is of the coasts and outl ines of the continents vis a v is European maps has been extens ive. In add ition, Svat Soucek has carr ied out a study of the sh ips depicted on Piri Re is maps and how they match up to sh ips depicted on European maps, as well as what they tell us about Ottoman sh ips of the early sixteenth century. 17 In all of these iconograph ical stud ies there is one major absence. 18 Wh ile every wr iter—scholar and d ilettante al ike—has focused on the poss ibility that European maps (or al ien technology) may have influenced P iri Re is in the product ion of h is map, l imited attent ion has been pa id to the class ical Islam ic influences present in h is work. Thanks to P iri Re is’ own words these influences cannot be ignored.

Th is is a un ique map such as no one has ever produced, and I am its author. I have used ų0 maps as well as mappaemund i (Yapamondolar). The latter der ive from a prototype that goes back to the t ime of Alexander the Great ( ơskender Zulkarneyn) and covers the ent ire inhabited World—the Arabs call such maps Ja‘far iyyah. I have used e ight such Ja’far iyyah. Then I have used an Arab map of Ind ia, as well as maps made by four Portuguese who appl ied mathematical methods to represent Ind ia and Ch ina. Finally I have also used a map drawn by Columbus (Kolonbo) in the West. I have brought all these sources to one scale, and th is map is the result. In other words, just as the sa ilors of the Med iterranean have rel iable and well-tested charts at the ir d isposal, so too th is map of the Seven Seas is rel iable and worthy of recognition.Ųź

Ų6 See McIntosh, Piri Re is Map , 3 7-4Ų for extens ive l ist and Append ix A, Ų4Ų-Ų53. The list of possible European map cand idates is so long that suff ice to say that almost every s ingle item (book, art icle, web page) that one consults on P iri Re is l ist a set of European maps that the author believes had the most impact on Piri Re is. The alternate focus of th is art icle does not permit an extensive analys is of all these maps. Ų7 Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking, Ų3- ų0. Ų8 I should say two major absences but I w ill avo id tak ing my reader on a detour. The other major absence is an iconological analysis of the images that Piri Re is uses and why. Soucek is the only one who has come close to an iconological study in h is analys is of the sh ips. It is only a short 7-page segment of iconological analysis. I include small segments of iconological analysis but it is in no way extensive and the matter st ill cries out for remedy. Ųź Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking , 50 ; Emphasis my own.

70 KAREN PINTO

Other than the clear reference to the use of one of Chr istopher Columbus’ charts, Piri Re is’ references are vague and th is has led to an extens ive guess ing game among scholars as to which four Portuguese maps P iri v iewed. 2 No one knows wh ich Arab maps he is referr ing to. It is one of the endur ing myster ies of P iri Re is’ 151 3 map notat ions. S ince most map scholars spec ial- ize in the h istory of Euro-Amer ican cartography, sources of Islam ic mapp ing and illum inat ion do not c irculate in the ir imag inat ion. 21 As a result, many scholars have ignored the impact that the Islam ic cartograph ic trad ition, the Islam ic m iniature trad ition, and the ‘Aja’ ib (Wondrous) fantasy trad ition must have had on P iri.22 Except ional to th is norm is the work of Svat Soucek, who is a spec ial ist in Ottoman cartography and therefore has d isc ipl inary fam iliar ity with Islam ic cartography. 23 Soucek has a search ing gaze and he includes examples of med ieval Islam ic maps in h is book on P iri Re is whereas the major ity of authors undervalue or totally m iss the s ign ificance of the med ieval Islam ic trad ition. 2 The European charts of th is per iod, even w ith their var iat ions, resemble each other. The P iri Re is map stands out as d ist inctly different. Why? The answer is pa interly tradition. The European portolan charts share a style of pa int ing that ties them together and identifies them as belonging to the same tradition. Piri Re is’ map does not f it the b ill. There is some resemblance between it and the coastlines of the afore-mentioned European portolan charts, but, overall, the P iri Re is’ map does not look l ike a European product. Th is sense of P iri Re is’ map

ų0 McIntosh, Piri Re is Map , 6ź-75 . ųŲ See, K. P into, “The Maps Are the Message: Mehmet II’s Patronage of an ‘Ottoman Cluster,’” Imago Mundi 63: ų ( ų0ŲŲ ): Ų55 -Ų7ź, which refers to the same to sideline Islamic cartography by scholars of the period of Mehmed II, which resulted in a whole set of Islamic geographical manuscripts copied during the period of Mehmet being ignored. ųų To his credit, McIntosh, Piri Re is Map , tr ies to account for some of these alternate sources but he does th is in a general way wh ich in no way compares to the spec ificity of his compar isons with European maps and the analys is of place-name h istoriography for wh ich his book is a gem. ų3 Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking. ų4 The essence of the issue is that h istorians of mapping rarely take into consideration the tech- niques used by art h istorians and vice versa . Occas ionally there are except ions, such as, Zeren Akalay, “M inyatürlü bir co ƭrafya kitabõ,” Kültür ve Sanat (Haziran Ųź 76): 60-7Ų, wh ich studies an illustrated carto-geographic Islam ic manuscr ipt from the perspect ive of an art h istorian; and Kay Ebel, a geographer, who incorporates Islam ic art h istorical analyses into her appraisal of Matrakç i Nasuh; Kathryn A. Ebel, “Representat ions of the front ier in Ottoman town v iews of the sixteenth century,” Imago Mund i 6 0:Ų ( ų00 8): Ų-ųų . But these are except ions and for the most part the fields remain hermetically separated.

7Ų PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 be ing different, be ing other-than-European, would be the case w ith or without Piri’s own notat ions confirm ing Islam ic influences. Even the Ottoman Turk ish wr iting, wh ich uses a var iat ion of the Arabic scr ipt, serves to re inforce the overall sensibility of Piri Re is’ map be ing a product of a d ifferent world with a d ifferent set of illumination traditions and paint ing codes. Inferences about the trad itional Islam ic mapp ing and illumination connections with the Piri Re is map need to be put on equal foot ing with inferences about the connections with European portolan charts and mappamund i. Both perspectives are equally deserv ing of a place in the d iscussion of Piri Re is’ map. In order to understand the Islam ic connect ions one needs to begin w ith the meaning of the word Ja’far iyyah that Piri Re is uses to descr ibe the Arab maps he worked with.

What’s in a Word: Ja‘fariyya or Jughrafiya?

Whether it be that the fa ith wh ich creates has ceased to ex ist in me, or that real ity will take shape in the memory alone, the flowers that people show me nowadays for the f irst time never seem to me to be true flowers .ų5

What did P iri Re is mean when he sa id: “...the Arabs call such maps Ja‘far iyyah. I have used eight such Ja’far iyyah”? There has been an extens ive debate on the mean ing of the word Ja‘far iyya that Piri Re is uses to descr ibe the earlier Arab mapping traditions that he consulted. Most scholars who have exam ined th is issue have argued that Ja‘far iyya is a cor- rupt ion of the Arabic word Jughraf iya.2 I am in agreement w ith th is analys is. Orthograph ically it is easy to prove—or at least the f irst part is. In Arab ic, the letter ghayn (transliterated as gh) differs by only a dot from its sister letter ‘ayn (conventionally transliterated as ‘) (see Figure 2).

STAND ALONE LETTERS JOINED LETTERS27

ǝ (‘ayn) ǡ (ghayn) ǆǠǇ (‘ayn) ǆǨǇ (fa’) Figure 2

ų5 Proust, Remembrance , Ų4Ų. ų6 Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking, 6 4; McIntosh, Piri Re is Map, Ų7. ų7 Note ne ither one of these words means anything. I s imply picked the least distracting letters to connect ‘ayn and ghayn so that readers unfam iliar with the Arabic scr ipt can dist inguish these clearly.

7ų KAREN PINTO

It is poss ible that P iri Re is acc identally left the dot out for the ghayn there- by render ing it to us readers of poster ity as an ‘ayn. It is also poss ible that the dot over the letter fa’ (transl iterated as f) was meant to cover both consonants since fa’ l ike ghayn takes only one dot above. We see th is convent ion adopted somet imes in med ieval manuscr ipts where the consonant dots are often left out altogether. 28 Th is is, however, unl ikely because other handwr itten sect ions of P iri Re is’ map do not ind icate the same double use of dots by ne ighbor- ing consonants. It should also be noted that the letters fa’ and ghayn as used with in a word closely resemble each other. Only a sl ight d ifference in shape separates them: fa’ is represented by a completely round and bulbous form whereas ghayn is a sl ightly tr iangulated form that can on occas ion look more round than tr iangular. Wh ile we can argue that the ‘ayn in Ja‘far iyya should really be a ghayn, the misplacement of the letter ra’ (transl iterated as r) for fa’ in Ja‘far iyya is not eas ily explained because the letters look very d ifferent and share no common charac- terist ics. Ra’ does not jo in up to other letters l ike fa’ and is not marked w ith any dots (see Figure 3).

STAND ALONE LETTERS JOINED LETTERS29

ǁ (ra) ǥ (fa) ǆǨǇ (w/ fa) ǅǂǇ (w/ ra’) Figure 3

If Jughraf iya was intended, ra’ should have been located before the consonant preced ing fa’. Th is is therefore e ither a m isspelling or a reference to someth ing completely different —and herein l ies the enduring en igma of th is word that has puzzled many a scholar including myself.3

ų8 No doubt an added tease for us h istorians of posterity struggling to figure out mean ing and intent. ųź Note ne ither one of these words means anything. I s imply picked the least distracting letters to connect fa’ and ra’ so that readers unfam iliar with the Arabic scr ipt can dist inguish these easily. 30 I thank Ekmeledd in ơhsanoƭlu, former Director of IRCICA, Istanbul, and present Secretary General of the Islamic Conference, for br ing ing th is issue to my attention wh ile I was con- ducting research in the Istanbul manuscr ipt libraries. Th is paper is an answer to h is query of a decade ago.

73 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

Ja‘far iyya Jughraf iya

ƨËȇǂǨǠƳ Ƣ ËȈǧơǂǤƳ Figure 4

Or ientalists are st icklers for rules: P iri Re is wrote Ja‘far iyya, therefore he must have intended Ja‘far iyya and not Jughraf iya and so the interpretation that th is was a spell ing error (scribal or Piri Re is’) is not easy to accept in order to conf irm that he was indeed referring to Jughrafiya. But what are the choices (see Figure )? No manuscr ipt has turned up w ith exactly th is t itle. The closest poss ibility is a twelfth century geography by the Andalus i scholar Muhammad ibn Ab i Bakr al-Zuhr i whose manuscr ipt has been translated by M. Hadj-Sadok as ‘K itƣb al- Dja‘r ƣfƯyya.’ 31 At one po int al-Zuhr i asserts that h is work is a copy of al-Fazar i’s copy of the Ja‘raf iyya of the n inth century ‘Abbas id Cal iph al-Mansur. 32 Was al-Zuhr i referr ing to the no longer extant al-Ma’mun id globe? 33 H is descr ipt ion suggests a flat two-d imens ional map resembl ing the form that the maps in the Islam ic carto- geograph ical manuscr ipts of al-Istakhr i, et. al. , take. 3 Spec ifically, al-Zuhr i says: …the earth is spherical, but the Ja’raf iyya is flat as is the astrolabe.35

3Ų M. Hadj-Sadok as “K itƣb al-Dja‘r ƣfiyya,” Bullet in d’Etudes Or ientales, ųŲ ( Ųź 86): 7-3 Ųų . Note “Dj” represents the Arab ic letter “j im.” E. J. Br ill’s Encycloped ia of Islam st ill uses th is system of transliteration. 3ų Some scholars c ite the s ilver globe ( al-Sura[h] al-Ma’mun iya[h] ) that the Abbas id cal iph al- Ma’mun ( Ųź 7-ųŲ 8/8 Ų3-33) is sa id to have comm iss ioned from the sc ient ists who worked in h is Bayt al-H ikma (House of Knowledge) as the fons et or igo of Islam ic mapp ing. There are mul- tiple problems assoc iated w ith the ascr ipt ion of all Islam ic cartography to th is al-Ma’mun id silver globe, foremost of wh ich is that it is no longer extant and we cannot def initively determ ine what it looked l ike. Other than an extremely vague passage c ited by al-Mas‘ud i (d. 345 / ź56) in h is Kitab al-Tanb ih wa al-Ishraf (the Book of Instruct ion and Superv ision), we have no other descr ipt ions of it. For a more deta iled d iscuss ion of the so-called al-Ma’mun id globe, see K. P into, Ways of See ing Islam ic Maps (under rev iew). Note that al-Fazar i’s work is not extant. 33 M. Hadj-Sadok as “K itƣb al-Dja‘r ƣfiyya,” 3 06. See also, Gerald R. T ibbetts, “The Beg inn ings of a Cartograph ic Trad ition,” in The History of Cartography: Cartography in the Trad itional Islam ic and South As ian Societ ies, J. B. Harley and Dav id Woodward, eds., Vol. Ų, Bk. Ų, (Ch icago: Un ivers ity of Chicago Press), ź5. 34 Hence they are somet imes referred to as the Atlas of Islam . These carto-geograph ical manuscripts customarily have the un iversal of Kitab al-Masalik wa al-Mamal ik. For more on what I refer to as the KMMS tradition, see K. Pinto, Ways of See ing . 35 M. Hadj-Sadok as “K itƣb al-Dja‘rƣfiyya,” 306.

74 KAREN PINTO

Is th is what P iri Re is was referr ing to when he employed the word Ja‘far iyya to describe the Arab maps that he consulted? Given how often he and h is uncle, Ke- mal Re is, sa iled in the Med iterranean, it is certa inly possible that he encountered or even owned a copy of al-Zuhr i’s Kitab al-Ja‘raf iyya. P iri Re is’ Kitab-i Bahr iye (Book of Sea-ness/Sea Lore) deta iling the Med iterranean, its shores, its islands, and its ports, is a s ingular testament to Piri Re is’ fam iliar ity with the sea. Even if he didn’t have access to a copy of al-Zuhr i’s work, he may have come into contact with Andalusi merchants who referred to med ieval Islam ic maps as ‘Ja‘raf iyya’ as al-Zuhri does. H. Mu’n is, a Span ish scholar of medieval Islam ic geographers and their works argues that al-Zuhr i’s work was w idely diffused and should, in fact, be regarded as “a popular gu ide for merchants and travelers, put together by someone without wide culture and in a fa irly relaxed style.” 3 The relaxed style would certa inly have appealed to Turk ish corsairs like Piri Re is. Though several al-Zuhri manuscr ipts are extant none of them conta in maps so there is no way of ver ify ing exactly what kind of map al-Zuhri was referr ing to. 37 It does, however, sound as if al-Zuhr i had in m ind the maps of the Kitab al-Masalik wa al-Mamal ik (Book of Routes and Realms) 38 trad ition (KMMS).39 It is to th is trad ition and to

36 H. Mu’n is, al-djughraf iya wa’l-djughraf iyyun fi’l-Andalus , in Rev ista del Inst ituto de Estud ios Is- lámicos en Madr id, x i-x ii ( Ųź 63-4), 84-Ųų 0; and Hal ima Ferhat, “al- Zuhr i,” Encycloped ia of Islam , ųnd edition [hereafter EI 2], XI: 566. 37 Gerald R. T ibbetts, “Later Cartographic Developments,” Ų40 . H. Mu’n is, al-DjughrŔfiya , x i-x ii (Ųź 63-4), 84-Ųų 0. 38 Zayde Antr im co ins th is translat ion for the Kitab al-Masalik wa al-Mamal ik med ieval carto- geographic manuscr ipt tradition, wh ich has up until now convent ionally been translated as the “Book of Roads and K ingdoms.” I prefer “Routes and Realms,” and thank Antr im for her contribution of th is alternate Engl ish render ing of Kitab al-Masalik wa al-Mamal ik. See, Zayde Antrim, “Place and belong ing in Med ieval Syr ia, 6th /Ųų th to 8 th /Ų4th Centur ies,” Ph.D. d iss. (Har- vard Un ivers ity, ų004). 3ź Most of the KMMS maps occur in the context of geograph ical treat ises devoted to an expl ica- tion of the world in general and the lands of the Musl im world, in part icular. These “map- manuscr ipts” generally carry the t itle of K itab al-Masal ik wa al-Mamal ik (Book of Roads and K ingdoms), although they are somet imes named Surat al-Ard (P icture of the Earth) or Suwar al-Aqal im (P ictures of the Cl imes/Cl imates). These manuscr ipts emanate from an early trad ition of creat ing l ists of p ilgr im and post stages that were comp iled for adm inistra- tive purposes. Beg inn ing w ith a br ief descr ipt ion of the world and theor ies about it—such as the inhab ited vs. the un inhab ited parts, the reasons why people are darker in the south than in the north, etc.—these geograph ies method ically d iscuss deta ils about the Musl im world, its c ities, its people, its roads, its topography, etc. Somet imes the descr ipt ions are interspersed with tales of personal adventures, d iscuss ions w ith local inhab itants, debates w ith sa ilors as to the exact shape of the earth and the number of seas, etc. They have a r igid format that rarely var ies: f irst the whole world, then the Arab ian pen insula, then the Pers ian Gulf, then the Maghr ib (North Afr ica and Andalus ia), Egypt, Syr ia, the Med iterranean, upper and lower Iraq, as well as twelve maps devoted to the Iran ian prov inces, beg inn ing w ith Khuz istan and

75 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 one particular manuscript in th is trad ition that I now turn. I bel ieve that P iri Re is had access to th is manuscr ipt and that proof of th is access shows up in the un ique iconography of the flora and fauna of his 1513 map. Before I leave th is d iscussion on Piri Re is’ myster ious Ja‘far iyya reference, I should note that we st ill have not resolved the d ilemma of the transposed fa’ vs . ra’. Al-Zuhr i’s Ja‘raf iyya locates the ra’ in the same place as Jughraf iya. In fact, the Encycloped ia of Islam, Second Ed ition (EI 2) entry on al-Zuhr i l ists him as the author of ‘K itab al-Djughrafiya!’ It is as if someone at Br ill made the decision that M. Hadj-Sadok transl iteration of ‘Dja‘rƣfiyya’ was a modern transl iteration orthograph ic error. Hal ima Ferhat who completed th is entry prov ides no details for the change in the spell ing. Did she consult d ifferent manuscripts from Hadj-

end ing in Khurasan, includ ing maps of S ind and Transox iana. The maps, wh ich usually number prec isely twenty-one—one world map and twenty reg ional maps—follow exactly the same format as the text and are thus an integral part of the work. Not all these geograph i- cal manuscr ipts conta in maps, however – only those referred to generally as part of the al- Balkh i/al-Istakhr i trad ition, also referred to as the “Class ical School” of geographers. Hence th is part icular geograph ical genre is also referred to as the “Atlas of Islam.” A great deal of mystery surrounds the or igins and the arch itects of th is manuscr ipt-bound cartograph ic tradition. Th is is pr imar ily because not a s ingle manuscr ipt surv ives in the hand of the or iginal authors. Furthermore, it is not clear who initiated the trad ition of accompany ing geograph i- cal texts w ith maps. Scholars of the e ighteenth and n ineteenth centur ies held that Abu Zayd Ahmad ibn Sahl al-Balkh i [hereafter al-Balkh i] (d. 3 ųų /ź34), who—as h is nisba (patronym) suggests—came from Balkh in Central As ia, initiated the ser ies and that h is work and maps were later elaborated upon by Abu Ishaq ibn Muhammad al-Far isi al-Istakhr i [hereafter al- Istakhr i] ( fl . early Ų0th century) from Istakhr in the prov ince of Fars. Al-Istakhr i’s work was, in turn, elaborated upon by Abu al-Qas im Muhammad ibn Hawqal [hereon Ibn Hawqal] (fl . second half of Ų0th century), who came from upper Iraq (the reg ion known as the Jaz ira ). Finally Abu ‘Abdallah Muhammad al-Muqaddas i [hereafter al-Muqaddas i] (d. ca . Ų000 ) from Jerusalem (Quds) is cons idered the last innovator in the ser ies. The problem is that other than al-Balkh i v irtually no b iograph ical informat ion ex ists on the other authors. We are forced to rely on scraps of informat ion scattered here and there in the geograph ical texts themselves for informat ion about the authors. Furthermore, in all the forty-three t itles that Ibn al-Nad im cred its to al-Balkh i not one even vaguely resembles the t itle of a geograph ical treat ise. Accord ing to the b iographers, al-Balkh i was most famous as a ph ilosopher and for his tafas ir (Commentar ies on the Qur’an), wh ich were h ighly pra ised. He is not, however, known in the b iograph ical record for h is geograph ical treat ises. Yet stor ies of how al-Balkh i sired the Islam ic mapp ing trad ition abound and endure. It is for th is reason that the genre is generally referred to as the “Balkh i school of mapp ing.” I f ind th is attr ibut ion of a whole school of mapp ing to a shadowy, myth ical father unfounded. I stubbornly refuse to cont inue the m isnomer and have opted instead for a new acronym: the KMMS mapp ing trad ition. I base th is acronym on the t itle of the genre’s most w idely d issem inated vers ion: al-Istakhr i’s, Kitab al-Masal ik wa al-Mamal ik (KMM). The ‘ S’ added on to the end of the acronym stands for “Surat” (p icture)— i.e. those KMM geograph ical manuscr ipts that are accompan ied by carto -graph ics. For more on the KMMS trad ition, see, K. P into, Ways of See ing.

76 KAREN PINTO

Sadok? Or d id one of the EI 2 ed itors decide that th is was an error and change Hadj-Sadok’s Ja‘raf iyya to Jughrafiya?1 Perhaps P iri Re is made the same type of dyslex ic spell ing error that we are all prone to make and that he had actually intended either Ja‘raf iyya or Jughraf iya. The problem is that he repeats exactly the same m isspelling tw ice in the same sentence.2 It has been conjectured that P iri Re is may have had some l imita- tions in h is command of Arab ic and poss ibly even in Ottoman Turk ish.3 On the other hand, after plowing through th is tongue-tw ist ing section on the var iat ions between the spellings of Ja‘far iyya, Ja‘raf iyya, and Jughraf iya, can anyone blame Piri for this slip?

Possible Ja‘fariyyas (or Jughrafiyas) that Piri Reis May Have Seen: Ba Şdat 334 and its possible connections to Piri Reis’ World Map

And I beg in to ask myself what it could have been, th is unremembered state wh ich brought w ith it no log ical proof of its ex istence, but only the sense that it was a happy, that it was a real state in whose presence other states of consc iousness melted and van- ished. I decide to attempt to make it reappear.44

One th ing that the above d iscussion of al-Zuhri makes clear is that by the twelfth century and onwards, Ja‘far iyyas (or Jughraf iyas) was common parlance in mar itime circles of the Islam ic Med iterranean reg ion to refer to the flat two- dimensional maps found in KMMS-type cartographically illustrated geograph ical manuscripts. Th is at least should put an end to the search for pseudo-Ptolema ic

40 Hal ima Ferhat, “al-ZuhrƯ.” 4Ų Th is bears check ing but sadly I have no access to any m icrof ilms of al-Zuhr i’s manuscr ipts. Hopefully someone w ill undertake the project of track ing down al-Zuhr i’s extant manuscr ipts to prov ide us w ith an answer. For now I have no cho ice but to leave th is quest ion hang ing. 4ų As my husband, Devon R ichards, seasoned ed itor of my work, po ints out: “It is well known by ed itors that a wr iter’s m isspellings are cons istent and form a k ind of signature. If P iri Re is misspelled something once, he’d be very l ikely to do it again.” 43 Others have also referred to P iri Re is’ l imited grasp of Arabic. See, for example, Soucek, Turk- ish Mapmak ing , 7ų. By the early s ixteenth century Ottoman Turk ish and not Arabic was the lingua franca in Anatol ia. On the other hand, even in Ottoman Turk ish the correct spelling is Jughraf iya. So one would have to assert that P iri Re is’ wr itten Ottoman Turk ish in Arab ic script was also faulty. Could th is be why Murad i cla imed that he was the real author of Kitab-i Bahr iye but Piri Re is got all the cred it? See Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking , ź5. 44 Proust, Remembrance, 3 5.

77 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 manuscripts to fit th is b ill.5 P iri Re is intended by th is word ‘Arab maps’ not late medieval/early Rena issance Berl inghier i-l ike portrayals of the world. He clearly says so on his 1513 map.7 So what Ja‘raf iyyas d id P iri Re is see? How can we determ ine th is? He d id not use the territorial layouts of Islam ic maps—or not that we know of s ince the old world section of the map that may have incorporated traditional Islam ic depict ions of the world is m iss ing. All we have to go on is the sect ion of his map that covers the Amer icas and West Afr ica. The outlines of the coasts of South America and West Afr ica are of no ass istance in th is matter because the med ieval Islam ic mapp ing tradition KMMS dep icted the world pr ior to the discovery of the Americas. In the absence of spec ific references our only hope of f iguring out exactly wh ich KMMS manuscr ipts Piri Re is was referr ing to when he sa id that he used eight Arab Ja‘raf iyyas is to exam ine the iconographic elements of h is map for matches between the plethora of fantastic creatures and manuscr ipts of the KMMS illustrated geographical tradition. The iconographic images with wh ich Piri adorned h is map are reflect ive of the k ind of material that circulated around Piri Re is as he was mak ing his world map and present alternate po ints of assessing the impact of Islam ic/Middle Eastern influences upon his work. Th is alternate way of view ing Piri Re is maps w ith a focus on the images instead of the outlines

45 By Pseudo-Ptolema ic manuscr ipts I am referr ing to the fact that there are no extant map manuscripts from the per iod of Ptolemy ( i.e. first century C.E.). Rather the earl iest extant manuscripts date from the th irteenth century and the major ity from the f ifteenth and sixteenth century. Although they are labeled as the work of Ptolemy in fact they are reflect ive of early Rena issance mapping whence was developed the myth of Ptolemy as the father of cartography. Scholars st ill debate whether or not Ptolemy ever actually accompan ied his manuscr ipt with maps or if these were a later Byzant ine interpolation. Francesc Relano, “Aga inst Ptolemy: The sign ificance of the Lopes-Pigafetta map of Africa,” Imago Mund i 47 ( Ųźź5): 4ź-66; O. A. W. & Margaret D ilke & Susan Danforth, “The W ilczek-Brown codex of Ptolemy maps: Notes on the sc ientific exam ination of the Wilczek-Brown codex,” Imago Mund i 40 ( Ųź 88): ŲŲź-ų5; Er ich Polaschek, “Ptolemy’s ‘Geography’ in a New L ight,” Imago Mund i Ų4 ( Ųź 5ź): Ų7-3 7. 46 Berl inghier i’s rend ition of the so-called Atlas of Ptolemy is famous in Ottoman and h istory of cartography circles. It must have created qu ite a splash when it arr ived at Topkap õ Palace shortly after Mehmed II’s death. TKS: G.I. 8 4. Sean Roberts, “Poet and ‘World Pa inter’: Fran- cesco Berlinghier i’s Geograph ia (Ų48ų),” Imago Mund i 6 ų:ų ( ų0Ų0): Ų45 -6 0. 47 If P iri Re is had intended to ind icate that he had used Ptolemy manuscr ipts why would he not have used the more common Batlam iyǃs? The pseudo-Ptolemy manuscripts were not com- monly known as “Jughraf iya”—or at least not in the Islam ic world at the t ime. So it makes no sense to argue that Piri Re is intended to ind icate Ptolemy manuscr ipts when we know he would have known about and consulted KMMS manuscripts. See K. P into, “The Maps Are the Message.” Soucek suggests that “Bortolomye” may have been P iri Re is’ d istortion of Batlamyus; Soucek, 73. Thomas Goodr ich in ema il correspondence suggests that P iri Re is could have been referr ing to the work of Bartolomeo Sonett i.

78 KAREN PINTO

Figure 5 : Deta il of Braz il sect ion of 1513 P iri Re is world map, show ing Blemmye, Mon- key, Yale, and Un icorn–Bull. of the map leads us to one highly plausible KMMS source: Ba ƭdat 33 [hereafter B33 ], a late f ifteenth/ early sixteenth century al-Istakhr i manuscr ipt located in the library of Topkap õ Palace. 8 Midway along the South Amer ican continent, located well inland from the coast in the reg ion we now refer to as Braz il, atop a large p ile of rose/p ink ish rocks mark ing the Andes, are two cur ious figures: A Blemmye and a monkey. The monstrous man with a f iery-topped head in h is chest (Blemmye style) has an ev il, sadist ic gr in as he holds a stone in one hand and appears to scratch h is inner th igh with the other (h ighlighted by red square on F igure 5). Perched on another rock of the mountain range is a monkey hold ing a p iece of fru it, although it could also be holding a stone (highlighted with a purple circle on F igure 5). The monkey appears to be saying something to the monster. Is th is monkey taunting the monster and threatening to throw someth ing at him or is th is

48 Zeren Akalay, “M inyatürlü bir co ƭrafya kitabõ,” has identified B334 as a Qara Quyunlu manuscript dating to approx imately the Ų460s- 70 s. Tan õnd õ opens her art icle on B334 by talk ing about Piri Re is wh ile Svat Soucek uses the world map from B33 4 in h is book to represent the KMMS Islam ic mapping tradition. Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking, 63.

7ź PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 monkey a fr iend of the monster’s? The image could be interpreted either way. The monster and the monkey sitt ing atop a r idge of rocks appear to be mark- ers for the end of the known world. Is P iri Re is warn ing his v iewers not to go past these mountains because beyond them l ie fr ightening monsters and ev il monkeys?9 The wr iting just above the head of the Blemmye commun icates a different message:

These wild beasts attain a length of seven spans. Between the ir eyes there is a d istance of only one span. Yet it is said, they are harmless souls.50

The Blemmye is intended thus as a fr iendly monster of sort. Perhaps that is why the monkey is dep icted as hav ing a conversat ion w ith it, ind icat ing perhaps that he is not scared nor should intrep id explorers be. Th is is a d ist inct break w ith earl ier, and in fact, co-term inus manuscr ipt trad itions, wh ich en- force and re inforce the not ion that the Enc ircl ing Ocean is full of scary beasts and therefore should not be crossed. P iri Re is appears to be s ignal ing even in his dep ict ion of the fr iendly Blemmye a New—fr iendly—World wa iting to be explored. 51 A s imilar scene of a man (h ighlighted with red box on F igure ) and a monkey on top of some rocks w ith a stone in its hand (h ighlighted with blue box) is to be seen on the map of the Nile in a m id-fifteenth century al-Istakhr i KMMS manuscript with the catalogue number B33 . The parallels between th is image and the image of the monkey and the Blemmye in the 151 3 P iri Re is map are immediately apparent. Although the depict ion is different there is a dist inct resemblance.

4ź Monkeys are cons idered a s ign of ill omen in Islam. See d iscussion on following page and references in footnote 56. 50 McIntosh, Piri Re is Map, 44 , who notes that the translat ion is courtesy of Thomas Goodr ich. The Department of Nav igation: Hydrography and Oceanography of [the] Turk ish Navy pro- vides a slightly var iant but similar translation: “…But they are harmless and docile.” 5Ų It could be argued that the Anonymous manuscr ipt of Tar ih- i H ind-i Garb i carr ies similar “fr iendly monster” mot ifs; see Thomas Goodr ich, The Ottoman Turks and the New World: A Study of Tar ih- i H ind-i Garb i and S ixteenth-century Ottoman Amer icana (W iesbaden: Otto Harrassow itz, Ųźź0). Blemmyes f igure on med ieval European mappamund i from the twelfth- century onwards—most famously on the Hereford mappamund i of the Hereford Cathedral in the UK. The unanswered quest ion is where and how would P iri Re is have seen the dep ict ion of a Blemmye? The earl iest illustration of a Blemmye in a manuscr ipt that I have come across is in the illustrated copy of Ibn Zunbul’s Qanun al-Dunya (TKS Revan Ų638). The fact that the manuscript is located in the Topkap õ Palace l ibrary is compell ing for our invest igation but it is dated to the m id-sixteenth century and th is makes it approx imately fifty years too late to f it with the dating of Piri Re is’ map. Perhaps the influence is in the other d irect ion in th is case: with the iconography of the Piri Re is map influencing the illustrator of TKS Revan Ų638.

80 KAREN PINTO

Figure 6 : Istanbul, TSK, Ba ƭdat 33 [B 33 ]: Picture (Map) of Egypt (Surat M isr) showing Monkey Throw ing Stone at Prophet Moses w ith a Fanged F ish in the Med iterranean; courtesy of the Topkap õ Saray õ Kütüphanes i

The parallels do not end with the man/monster, monkey, and rose/p ink ish mountains but extend also to the strange fish policing the mouth of the Nile (c ircled in purple on F igure ). Th is f ish has long fangs just like the fangs of the antelope or yale depicted on the far edge of the mountain range of Braz il in the Piri Re is map. 52 Th is South Amer ican antelope counterpart trots away from the 5ų McIntosh, Piri Re is Map, 43, identifies th is as a Yale—a spotted horse-l ike mythical creature with tusks and movable horns. For more deta ils, see Wilma George, “The Yale,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Inst itute 3 Ų ( Ųź 68): 4ų5.

8Ų PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 monkey throw ing a stone in a ga it s imilar to that of the leopard (purple c ircle) in the B 33 map, wh ich is shown head ing upstream along the Nile away from Ca iro/Fustat. Th is manuscr ipt is full of images of birds (see yellow c ircle) and, although they do not prov ide an exact parallel with the parrots of Piri Re is, they suggest a source of inspiration for the multitude of birds that inhabit the iconographic spaces of the Caribbean on his map. The nature of the metamorphos is between the f igures on the B 33 map and those of the P iri Re is map is most cur ious. On the B 33 map, the man depicted is shown seated on h is haunches on a prayer mat—as if in the m iddle of pray ing—s ign ify ing h is p iety. The label next to h im ind icates that he is in the desert (T ih) of the Ban i Isra’ il, suggest ing that th is is a dep ict ion of the Prophet Musa (Moses). R ight beh ind the man is the symbol of an aqua blue colored mounta in w ith a tr iple scalloped edge a-la Pers ian m iniature illustrat ion style of the f ifteenth and s ixteenth centur ies. Th is mounta in is labeled “Koh Tur” or Mount Tur. In th is case it is a reference to Mount S ina i, today called Jabal Musa, in Egypt. Tur has a general sense of the mean ing “mounta in” in Quran ic Ara- bic. The word occurs ten t imes in the Qur’an and on two occas ions it expressly refers to Mount S ina i. Most of these occurrences are in reference to the Ban i Isra’ il—Tr ibe of Israel. 53 The monkey is throw ing stones at a p ious man on h is prayer rug. There is noth ing n ice about th is monkey. He has a nasty, v icious look. In Islam ic trad ition, monkeys are cons idered a s ign of ill omen. There are numerous had ith that say, for instance, “If a monkey, a black dog, or a woman passes in front of a pray ing person, h is prayer is null ified.” 5 There are other references to monkeys in the Qur’an, such, as 2: 5, wh ich are connected to Mt. Sina i and the Ch ildren of Israel (2: -71). Th is segment d iscusses how the Prophet Moses saved h is people but in sp ite of God’s mercy some people st ill broke the sanct ity of the Sabbath and as pun ishment would be turned into desp ised apes:

Surely the bel ievers and the Jews, Nazareans and the Sab ians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day, and whosoever does r ight, shall have h is reward w ith his Lord and w ill ne ither have fear nor regret. Remember the day We made the covenant w ith you and exalted you on the Mount [al-T ǃr] and sa id “Hold fast

53 Qur’an: II, 6 0-63, 87-ź3; IV, Ų53- Ų54 ; XIX, 5ų-53, XXIII, ų0; XCV, ų. For more deta ils, see, E. Hon igmann, “al-Tur,” EI 2, X: 663. 54 Had ith cited in both Sah ih Bukhar i 8: Ų0ų and Ibn Hanbal. Add itional hadith, such as Sah ih Bukhar i 5:Ų88 & 7:4ź4, reinforce this idea of negativity. See footnote 50 .

8ų KAREN PINTO

to what We have g iven you, and remember what is there in that you may take heed. But you went back (on your word), and but for the mercy and grace of God you were lost. You know and have known already those among you who had broken the sanct ity of the Sabbath, and to whom We had sa id: “Become (l ike) apes despised.”55

There is also a Sh i’i had ith that tells of the Prophet Muhammad hav ing a dream of vicious Umayyads turned into monkeys jumping on the minbar (pulp it) wh ile throw ing stones at Imam ‘Al i.5 How and why does the image of the p ious Prophet Moses pray ing morph into that of a monster of the Blemmye model? Even the monkey is no longer a nasty stone-throw ing f iend but dep icted instead as a fr iend of the monster. These can be read as subl iminal coded messages through wh ich P iri Re is commun icates to h is v iewer. S itt ing as he was at the center of the vortex of monu- mental change on the eve of modern ity as the New World was be ing d iscovered, with the outl ines of the world on maps around h im chang ing v irtually every day, we could interpret P iri Re is as subtly cr iticizing rel igion through th is morphed iconography. He was in touch w ith sa ilors, travelers, tellers of marvelous tales. He knew and reflected the on-go ing change in both h is world maps and h is own deta iled vers ion of a Med iterranean isolar ii , the Kitab- i Bahr iye (Book of Sea Lore/Book Concern ing the Sea). Perhaps he was start ing to th ink that the rel igious ideals that had been taught to h im s ince ch ildhood along w ith manuscr ipts in the class ical Islam ic trad ition were nonsense and th is was h is way of express ing it. Yet, if that was the case then why not ignore the ir influences all together? Why even ment ion that he consulted them? There is more go ing on here than meets the eye. Perhaps some form of answer can be found in the seventeenth-century travel wr iter, Evl iya Çeleb i’s (d. 1 8) tongue- in-cheek joke descr ibing the cartographer’s gu ild and the k inds of maps they produced. He cla ims,

Their patron sa int (P ir) is ‘Ikr ima ibn Abu Jahl, who was honoured w ith the honour of Islam at the conquest of Mecca. He had inherited th is sc ience from h is father, who was in his time the sole possessor of the science of astronomy.57

55 Al-Qur’an , ų:6 ų-6 5, translat ion by Ahmed Al i (Pr inceton: Pr inceton Un ivers ity Press, Ųź 84), Ų8- ź. 56 Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays, ed. Muhammad Baq ir al-Ansar i (Qum, Iran: Dal il Ma’ Publ ishers, Ų4ų0 AH), 34Ų-ų. 57 Evl iya Çelebi, Seyahatnâme , Vol. I, 54 8. I am grateful to Svat Soucek for br ing ing th is t imely reference to my attent ion. See, Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking , ź3- 4.

83 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

As Soucek aptly po ints out, th is is an example of Evl iya Çeleb i’s charm- ing w it. Abu Jahl was one of the pagan tr ibal ch iefs of Mecca who opposed the Prophet Muhammad and h is message from the very start of Muhammad’s prophecy to h is bloody end on the battlef ield of Badr in 2 CE. Any good Musl im would recogn ize that the message be ing commun icated by Evl iya is one suggest ing that the cartographer’s art had someth ing in common w ith the heathen. Is Evl iya p ick ing up on and record ing for poster ity a sent iment that was common at the t ime among Ottoman cartographers and had its roots in the sent iments of one of the earl iest Ottoman cartographers? Was Evl iya subtly cr itiqu ing the move away from the class ical Islam ic image of the world to the heathen Western one? It is in th is sacr ileg ious l ight that the morph ing of an image of a Prophet into a Blemmye on P iri Re is’ map should be read. It is suggest ive of a chang ing of the guard and the com ing of a new, blasphemous world replete w ith r isqué images. TKS Ba ƭdat 33 is an exqu isitely illustrated Pers ian rend ition of al-Istakhr i’s Kitab al-Masal ik wa-l-Mamal ik (Book of Routes and Realms) carto-geographical manuscr ipt trad ition. Other manuscr ipts, such as TSK Ahmet (A) 2 83 , wh ich I have ident ified as an Aq Quyunlu Turkman product of the late 1 ’s, is another example of exqu isite illum inat ion. 58 The except ion of B 33 l ies in the inclus ion of an elaborate assembly of f igures—humans, angels, fantast ic beasts, and other flora and fauna—that adorn the seas and lands of the class ical med ieval Islam ic maps. Although elaborate, del icate illum inat ion is a common part of the Islam ic m iniature illustrat ive vocabulary from the twelfth century onwards; th is is one of the earl iest KMMS manuscr ipts to adorn maps w ith figures done in the f ine style of late f ifteenth/early s ixteenth century Pers ian miniatur ists. 59 Unfortunately, th is manuscr ipt has a very general colophon

58 See, P into, “The Maps Are the Message.” 5ź The only other KMMS manuscr ipt decorated w ith flora, fauna, and Islam ic m iniature-l ike figures, is another Pers ian manuscr ipt in V ienna: Cod. M ixt. 3 44 . L ike TKS B33 4, th is Per- sian translat ion of al-Istakhr i also does not conta in a colophon.In h is facs imile ed ition for th is manuscr ipt Hans M ΂ik suggests a s ixteenth-century date for it. M ΂ik notes that the manuscr ipt employs Ital ian paper. Ital ian paper usually comes w ith a water-mark so it should be poss ible to date th is manuscr ipt. M ΂ik has, however, not ident ified one. Hans M ΂ik, Al- Istahr Š und se ine Landkarten im Buch “Suwar al-Ak ŔlŠm,” (V ienna: Georg Prachner Verlag, Ųź 65), ź. The Pers ian Gulf/Ind ian Ocean Map conta ins an image of a f ish w ith Jonah emerg- ing from it (M ΂ik, 3 0). Th is f ish resembles the b ig f ish of the St. Brendan mot if on the P iri Re is map. There are some later KMMS manuscr ipts that are embell ished with flora, fauna, and creatures, such as the two manuscr ipts at the Br itish Library m is-attributed by the ir copy ists to al-Jayhani, but these are late e ighteenth century Mughal Ind ia rend itions. Br itish Library: Or. Ų587 and Add. ų354 ų.

84 KAREN PINTO conta ining a prayer w ithout any reference to the date and place where it was cop ied. Nor does it prov ide the name of the copy ist. In the absence of colophon ic informat ion, all that we have for the purposes of ident ificat ion are the illustrat ions. Zeren (Akalay) Tan õnd õ has ident ified Ba ƭdat 33 as a Qara Quyunlu Turkman manuscr ipt dat ing to ca . 1 /7 .1 Based on the f ine quality of the illum inat ion and the Sh i’a themes incorporated in the manuscr ipt, such as the trope of the story of the Umayyad monkeys throw ing stones at the Prophet’s fam ily and other Prophets, use of the Pers ian language, and Safav id iconograph ic s imilar ities, it makes more sense to ident ify B 33 instead as an early s ixteenth-century Safav id manuscr ipt. 2 It is thought-provok ing to imag ine that P iri Re is may have browsed—or possibly owned—th is manuscr ipt and that its images were in h is m ind as he drew his map of the world. Add itional images from TKS B 33 , such as F igures 7 & 8, prov ide us w ith st imulat ing ins ights into the k ind of images of the world that were c irculat ing in P iri Re is’ m ind wh ile he was conce iving of and execut ing h is map. If more of h is 151 3 map were extant we would have a better answer. As it is, we only have the surv iving vest iges of the illumination on one-third of h is World map. One more image suggests itself as a poss ibility. Sw imm ing in the sea of the Pers ian Gulf/Ind ian Ocean surround ing the B33 map of the Arab ian Pen insula is a mar ine goat. Although it has two small horns rather than a s ingle one, it resembles the image of the un icorn-bull on Piri Re is’ maps as shown on the South American ma inland of Braz il, further up from the image of the monkey and the Blemmye, closer to the Atlant ic coast (see Figure 9).3

60 I am grateful to Hosse in Kamaly for exam ining th is colophon w ith me and confirm ing my find ings. “... By v irtue of its broad coverage and the benef it to be drawn from it, th is book wh ich is called ‘Roads and Routes’ was translated from Arab ic into Pers ian so that people who read it may f ind it useful and those to whom it is read may ga in from it. It is ent itled ‘Roads and Routes,’ and all pra ise belongs exclus ively to God. Completed w ith the support of the M ighty Generous K ing [i.e. God] in God’s pra ise and in seeking his favor.” 6Ų Akalay, “M inyatürlü bir coƭrafya kitabõ.” 6ų For examples of Safav id m iniature art that d isplay iconographic s imilarities with B334 see, Stuart Cary Welsch, Pers ian Pa int ing: Five Royal Safav id Manuscr ipts of the Sixteenth Century (New York: George Braz iller, Ųź 76) and Mar ianna Shreve S impson, Sultan Ibrah im M irza’s Haft Awrang (Wash ington, D.C.: Sm ithsonian Inst itution & New Haven: Yale Un ivers ity Press, Ųźź7). 63 McIntosh identifies th is as a monoceros: “a legendary beast w ith a s ingle curved horn, a horse- like body larger than a unicorn’s, and feet l ike an elephant’s;” McIntosh, Piri Re is Map , 43.

85 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

Figure 7 : Istanbul, TKS: B 33 Map of the World Unusually Or iented West; courtesy of the Topkap õ Saray õ Kütüphanes i.

64 Most med ieval Islam ic world maps are or iented with south on top. Soucek uses th is very world map in h is book on P iri Re is to illustrate the classical Islam ic mapp ing tradition. Was it just a matter of chance that Soucek p icked th is map? Or had he seen B33 4 and thought about the iconographic parallels between it and P iri Re is’ Ų5Ų3 World Map? Soucek does not spec ify but his cho ice of map to illustrate the KMMS trad ition is tell ing; Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing, Plate ź and 6Ų-6 4.

86 KAREN PINTO

Figure 8 : Istanbul, TKS: B 33 Map of the Arab ian Pen insula with Mar ine-Goat depicted as swimm ing in the Persian Gulf; courtesy of the Topkap õ Saray õ Kütüphanes i.

Figure 9 : Compar ison of Mar ine Cow in B 33 and Unicorn Bull in Piri Re is Map

87 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

How could B334 & other similar manuscripts have crossed Piri Reis’ path?

And I beg in to ask myself what it could have been, th is unremembered state wh ich brought w ith it no log ical proof of its ex istence, but only the sense that it was happy, that it was a real state in whose presence other states of consc iousness melted and van- ished. I decide to attempt to make it reappear.65

The unremembered state of Proust ra ises a cruc ial question that plagues all scholars who grapple with the sources of Piri Re is’ map w ithout a conclus ive result. Although some ins ightful comparisons have been made w ith a ser ies of European portolan charts no one has been able to prove def initively how P iri Re is would have had access to them. When and where would P iri Re is have had the opportunity to examine the Juan de la Cosa map, for instance, or the Cantino Plan isphere? With the classical KMMS Islam ic carto-geograph ical mapping tradition the answer is eas ier. P iri Re is l ived in the area where these maps were produced and housed. I have identified a cluster of KMMS manuscr ipts produced in Istanbul after the 17s onward and I argue that these cop ies were l ikely commiss ioned by Mehmed II or one of h is ch ief scholars, possibly the Timurid ex ile, ‘Al i Qushj i, to bu ild up the public l ibraries in newly-conquered Constant inople. The libraries of Aya Sofya and Mehmed II’s Fat ih complex come to m ind. As public l ibraries Piri Re is would at least have had access to manuscr ipts of the stemma I have named the “Ottoman Cluster.” And, it is qu ite possible that these ‘Ottoman Cluster’ manuscr ipts were among the e ight Arab Ja‘raf iyyas he reports as hav ing consulted. Iconograph ically, however, there are no parallels between P iri Re is’ 1513 World Map and the Ottoman Cluster examples. The maps in th is cluster are str ikingly plain and unadorned in compar ison to B33 (see an example of one of the world maps in F igure 1 ). It is, however, h ighly likely that Piri Re is had access to them.

65 Proust, Remembrance , 35.

88 KAREN PINTO

Figure 10 : Istanbul, Süleyman iye, Ayasofya 2971a: Typ ical Map of the World in Otto- man Cluster; courtesy of the Süleymaniye Kütüphanes i

Although there seems to be no v isual resonances between the Ottoman Clus- ter and the Piri Re is map, perhaps we can f ind a textual one. There is a strange reference to the Atlant ic on P iri Re is’ 151 3 World map that many a scholar has puzzled over.

Th is sea is called the western Sea. The Franks used to call it Mar de Ispan ia, wh ich means the Span ish Sea. But once Columbus had explored th is sea and d iscovered these islands [to the west], and after the Portuguese inf idel opened [the route] to Ind ia, everybody agreed that th is sea should rece ive a new name. They called it Ovo Sano, wh ich means Healthy Egg. For, pr ior to [these voyages,] they used to th ink that th is sea had no l imits that its other side consisted of darkness; now, however, they have found out that coasts enc ircle th is sea, wh ich has thus taken the form of a lake—hence the name Healthy Egg.67

66 For more information, see K. Pinto, “The Maps Are the Message.” 67 Soucek, Turk ish Mapmak ing , 6 0; for an original Ottoman Turkish and Modern Turkish translation, see Hakki, Esk i Har italar, 88.

8ź PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

Some have declared it to be a qua int statement and an example of Piri’s naïveté. But if one exam ines the typical world map of the Ottoman Cluster above, keep- ing in m ind that the world as it was known had suddenly changed drast ically for mariners like Piri, then th is statement starts to make sense. The Musl im Bahr al-Muh it (Enc ircl ing Ocean) of yore—the terr ify ing green sea full of m ists and fish that were s ix days long in wh ich Ibl is (the Dev il) lurked with his helpers on mysteriously disappearing islands—suddenly had another land in it! Imag ine the impact that th is must have had on the m inds of mariners of the time—both Mid- dle Eastern and European—reared w ith the idealized image of the world as found in the KMMS tradition and medieval European mappamund i, always r inged by an ocean. Piri Re is’ comment expresses the way in wh ich th is bombshell of 1 92 was reconc iled with the image that the Old World mar iners carried around in their head. The only way it could make sense w ithout completely destroy ing the foundations of their knowledge was if the Enc ircl ing Ocean was conce ived of as a mass ive lake w ith the Old World lodged ins ide it on one end and the New World lodged ins ide it on the other end. The metaphor of an ‘Egg’ expresses th is reconc iliat ion perfectly; it represents a source of potent ial, fertility, and produc- tivity - the unfold ing of a whole new way of see ing the world. Viewed from the perspective of trad itional Islam ic mappamund i, P iri Re is’ statement appears apt. Especially interesting is the way in wh ich the terrify ing Enc ircl ing Ocean of yore reta ins its familiar encircl ing nature but has turned into a ‘Healthy’ lake/sea that nurtures continents and causes them to flourish. It represents a way of th ink ing about the world on the eve of a major geograph ical paradigm sh ift. Instead of cr iticizing Piri Re is for th is statement, we should thank h im for prov iding us with th is fleet ing gl impse into how mar iners of the late fifteenth and early sixteenth- century were reconc iling the sudden alteration in the cont inental layout of the world and the role that the Enc ircl ing Ocean played in this change. The question of how P iri Re is would have had access to B 33 is not clear. We do not know for sure when the manuscr ipt arrived at Topkap õ Palace. All we have to go on is a Sel im III stamp on the m iddle of the front isp iece medallion. Th is g ives the manuscr ipt a def inite presence at the palace somet ime between 17 89 and1 87. Did it enter the palace collect ion earlier and was it s imply not stamped? Or was it a manuscr ipt that was actually owned by P iri Re is and d id not enter the Palace collect ion at Topkap õ Palace unt il after h is death in 155 ? We have a number of reports about P iri Re is and h is so-called ’treasure’ acqu ired through his years of p iracy. Str ipl ing reports two instances of Piri Re is send ing booty to Constantinople. First from Basra, as the Ottoman naval debacle in the Pers ian Gulf was unfold ing, it is reported that P iri “sent the booty he obta ined

ź0 KAREN PINTO at Maskat to Constant inople.” From Egypt, to wh ich it is sa id he had escaped with three galleys, Piri is sa id to have returned to Turkey w ith a caravan of camels laden with presents to assuage Sultan Süleyman’s wrath. 8 None of these g ifts did anything to satisfy the Sultan, who gave the order for P iri’s head to be executed for not allowing the Portuguese to dec imate him and h is sh ips.9 The Sultan, it is sa id, was angered by the fact that P iri Re is was more interested in protect ing his treasures than h is fleet. Whatever the reason for P iri’s execut ion, the result was that his treasures ended up in Topkap õ Palace. There are a number of lav ish albums housed in Topkap õ Palace that also conta in semblances of poss ible influences on Piri Re is’ work and, thus, may also have made the ir way to the Subl ime Porte through P iri Re is’ own personal collect ion.7 Th is leaves one f inal question: Did P iri Re is draw and illustrate his own map? There is no way to know the def initive answer to th is quest ion but it is generally presumed that the cartographer is called the cartographer because he executed the map. D id he just draw the outl ines of the coasts and leave the illumination work for a spec ial ist? When we speak of the images that Piri Re is saw are we speak ing of one person or a mult itude of people: conceiver, executor, illustrator, and copy- ist as separate entities acting in tandem on the project of a map together? 71 P iri Re is’ map appears to have been done by one person. There is a cons istency in the lines, in the illustrations, and even in the hand of the notat ions on strange people and new places that f ills its blank spaces. The only piece that is d ifferent is the colophon. For th is reason, many scholars have presumed that P iri Re is s igned the colophon and that someone else made the map. The colophon, however, is wr itten in a d ifferent vo ice and possibly even in a d ifferent language.72 It has been

68 G. W. F. Str ipl ing, The Ottoman Turks and the Arabs, 1511-15 74 (Urbana: The Un ivers ity of Il- lino is Press, Ųź 4ų), ź4-5. 6ź There is a debate about whether P iri Re is was executed in Egypt or in Istanbul. Svat Soucek confirms Ca iro as the locat ion in “P iri Re is and the Pers ian Gulf,” International Piri Reis Sympo- sium, 30-38. 70 Although I have not d iscussed these albums in th is paper, there are poss ible illumination parallels between some of the images in these albums and P iri’s Re is’ map; see Dav id Roxburgh, The Pers ian Album 14 00-1600: From D ispersal to Collection (New Haven: Yale Un ivers ity Press, ų005). 7Ų The person who drew the New York subway map is a Japanese pa inter, Moro. Should we con- sider him a cartographer or a pa inter? He certa inly drew, pa inted, and illustrated the entire map. I know th is because I have met h im personally and exam ined the or iginal drawing that hangs on his wall at home. 7ų It could be argued that the last letter of the second l ine is not ‘Allah’ but the Pers ian verb ‘ast.’ If th is could be proven to be the case it would conf irm that what has been identified by scholars as Piri Re is’ colophon was in fact written by someone else with Persian language skills.

źŲ PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3 translated as follows: “The person who drew it is poor P iri, son of Hac õ Mehmed, and paternal nephew of Kemal Re is—May God pardon them both!— in the c ity of Gall ipoli, in the month of Muharrem the sacred of the year 919.” 73 Th is nota- tion uses the th ird person vo ice whereas all the other notations are expressed from a f irst-person po int of view. Why would scholars d iscount the first person vo ice, wh ich is all over th is map, as P iri Re is’ but accept instead an illegible scrawl in the th ird person as P iri Re is’ handwr iting? I conclude the reverse: that the map w ith most of its wr iting and illustration is P iri Re is’ hand, whereas the scrawl is a th ird party signature confirm ing that Piri Re is made this map.7

Conclusion: Life in a Cornucopia of Images

Undoubtedly what is thus palp itating in the depths of my be ing must be the image, the visual memory wh ich, be ing linked to that taste has tr ied to follow it into my conscious mind. But its struggles are too far off, too much confused; scarcely can I perce ive the colourless reflect ion in wh ich are blended the uncapturable wh irl ing medley of rad iant hues, and I cannot d ist inguish its form, cannot inv ite it, as the one possible interpreter, to translate to me the ev idence of its contemporary, its inseparable paramour, the taste of cake soaked in tea.75

Piri Re is’ l ife—1 7s-155 —co inc ided w ith the or igins of a cornucop ia of finely illustrated manuscr ipts. From the th irteenth century onward, f irst w ith the Mongols and then the ir successors the T imur ids, in Iran, and later the Turkman in Iraq, Iran, and Eastern Anatol ia, f ine m iniature pa int ing flowered in the M iddle East. The Ottoman Emp ire, as the most powerful ent ity in the reg ion, rece ived the l ion share of these exqu isitely illum inated manuscr ipts. As major groups were absorbed—such as the Aq Quyunlu (Wh ite Sheep) Turkman and other groups in Anatol ia—and as major battles were won, elaborately illustrated and illum inated manuscr ipts as well as the art ists who made them began to flood into Anatol ia seek ing safety, stab ility, and a good wage. A br ief exam inat ion of the hold ings in Topkap õ Palace and other l ibrar ies in Istanbul suff ices to conv ince us of th is. The reg ion was awash in beaut iful hand-pa inted manuscr ipts adorned w ith gold leaf and other prec ious colors. 7 Even a late f ifteenth century h istor ian l ike Mustafa

73 Translat ion based on Soucek, Turk ish Mapmaking, 4ź. 74 A close exam ination of the map in situ is needed to resolve this matter. 75 Proust, Remembrance, 35. 76 To those w ish ing to get an impression ist ic sense of what it must have been l ike, I recommend Orhan Pamuk’s, My Name is Red (Toronto: Knopf, ų00 Ų), or in Turk ish, Ben im Ad õm K õrm õzõ,

źų KAREN PINTO

Al i, who was only a wr iter not an illustrator, acknowledges h is exposure to these sources through a l ist ing of the works that he had access to wh ile complet ing h is Menak ib- i Hünervan (L ives of art ists). H is deta iled d iscuss ion of T imur id art ists and call igraphers conf irms h is access and exposure to a host of Pers ian illum inated manuscr ipts. When talk ing about the Iran ian T imur id art ists he says:

Every one of them was famous at that t ime and their [reed] pens were l ike planted saplings of pleasure in the garden of Baysunghur’s esteem. The beauty of the ir wr iting and letters had been accepted as the pr ide of calligraphers of that age. It is generally accepted that the fash ion of nasta‘liq, gold sprinkling, mounting, illustration, illumination, and other fitt ing adornments emerged from that t ime onwards.77

Imag ine then, Piri Re is the young mar iner, follow ing in the footsteps of h is uncle, the great Kemal Re is, grow ing up in Gall ipoli where the Aegean Sea meets the Marmara Sea. Influenced by charts and maps and the talk of mar iners, on the one hand, and the rich cultural heritage of his Islam ic world, h is l ife must have been filled with images from mult iple worlds. To be a cartographer of P iri Re is’ caliber on the eve of the s ixteenth century one had to br idge the worlds of the sea and of pa int ing. Somewhere toward the end of the f ifteenth/early sixteenth century a bomb was dropped on h is mar itime world: the discovery of Amer ica filtering back through the tales of mariner’s and sh ips’ ass istants. Some sa ilors showed up w ith maps depict ing th is new land. These maps and accounts sent shock waves through the late fifteenth/early sixteenth Ottoman mar iner’s world. Re is dec ided to prepare h is own charts, no small feat s ince he needed to br ing the old world and the new world together in one space and conv ince people of a new way of seeing the world around them. We know that P iri Re is understood the importance of illumination and the changing times because he came out with his own mass marketable vers ion of the popular Ital ian isolari: h is Kitab-i Bahr iye . As Hess aptly puts it,

… the l ife of Piri Re is reflects much of the h istory involved in the f irst impact of the Voyages of D iscovery on Turko-Musl im lands. … Caught between the edges

(Istanbul: ơletiƾim, Ųźź8) . Books on miniature pa int ings from th is per iod are too numerous to list. Through his study of late f ifteenth and early sixteenth century albums, Roxburgh, Pers ian Album , prov ides us with a sense of the popular ity of hybrid albums conta ining calligraphy and miniatures. See also, F iliz Ça ƭman and Zeren Tan õnd õ, The Topkap õ Museum: The Albums and Illustrated Manuscr ipts, translated and expanded by J. M. Rogers (London: Thames and Lon- don, Ųź 86). 77 Roxburgh, Pers ian Album, 8Ų-83.

ź3 PơRơ RE ơS’ WORLD MAP OF 151 3

of two civilizations already cast in the ir molds… the last chapter in the h istory of th is man of act ion and sc ience saw the Sultan execute h is own front iersman rather than change the institutions wh ich brought the man and the front ier into be ing.78

Piri Re is’ mapp ings heralds the first signs of a hybr id techn ique of Middle Eastern map-making fused with European influences. Th is form of hybr id mapmaking would become popular in the nakkaůhanes (Ottoman pa int ing studios) and br ing about a new style that can be identified as the expression of classical sixteenth and seventeenth century Ottoman paint ing and map-making. It is my hope that th is paper w ill open up new avenues for approach ing Piri Re is’ work that moves away from the emphas is on match ing up coastlines with the European maps of the t ime to see who beat whom to wh ich place and what bulge first! There is much work to be done in identify ing and understanding the iconography of Piri Re is’ map. It is a r ich subject cry ing out for greater attent ion. We are long overdue for an in-depth iconological study of his work.

Search in’ h is eyes, look in’ for traces: Piri Re is’ World Map of 1513 & its Islam ic Iconograph ic Connect ions (A Read ing ǲrough Baghdad 334 and Proust) Abstract H The remnant of the 151 3 world map of the Ottoman corsa ir (and later adm iral) Muh idd in P iri, a.k.a. P iri Re is, w ith its focus on the Atlant ic and the New World can be ranked as one of the most famous and controvers ial maps in the annals of the h istory of cartography. Follow ing its d iscovery at Topkap õ Palace in 1929, th is early modern Otto- man map has ra ised baffl ing quest ions regard ing its fons et or igo. Some scholars pos ited anc ient sea k ings or al iens from outer space as the or iginal creators; wh ile the influence of Columbus’ own map and early Rena issance cartographers tantal ized others. One quest ion that rema ins unanswered is how Islam ic cartography influenced P iri Re is’ work. Th is paper presents h itherto unnot iced iconograph ical connect ions between the class ical Islam ic mapping trad ition and the P iri Re is map. Keywords: P iri Re is, World Map of 151 3, Ottoman Cartography, Islam ic Cartogra- phy, Islamic Wondrous Trad ition, Islamic Manuscript Illumination.

78 Hess, “P iri Re is and the Ottoman Response to the Voyages of D iscovery,” 3 7.

ź4