Hoofdartikel Cataloguing Medieval Islamic Astro

247 CATALOGUING MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ASTRONOMICAL INSTRUMENTS 248

HOOFDARTIKEL century — notably R. T. Gunther’s Astrolabes of the World (1932)2) — are available,3) including some recently-published catalogues.4) Very few 20th-century descriptions of Islamic CATALOGUING MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ASTRO- instruments reach the standard of the studies of the 19th cen- NOMICAL INSTRUMENTS* tury.5) It is no longer necessary to record every single detail on every new instrument when it is of a kind adequately doc- These two beautifully-illustrated volumes are the latest in umented elsewhere,6) but one can at least compare the piece a series of over two dozen catalogues already published with others in Gunther and in the various available museum which document the largest private collection of Islamic arte- catalogues of widely-different quality and reliability. Here facts in the world. They are another tribute to the good taste the fun begins, particularly if one is dealing with an instru- and academic generosity of the owner, Dr. David Khalili. ment whose geographical provenance and date are not imme- They are proof, if any were needed, of his recognition of the diately evident. Numerous important instruments are importance of objects in their own right, and they constitute unsigned, and instruments with more than one layer of a contribution to Realienkunde, “the study of material inscriptions present a particular challenge.7) There are no objects”, in both Islamic Studies and the History of Science, guidelines that can be summarized here, but researchers are two disciplines overburdened by the preoccupation of schol- welcome in both Oxford and Frankfurt to inspect the two ars with the written word. Many of the objects featured in this catalogue are works of considerable and occasionally exceptional beauty, be they illuminated manuscripts or sci- Studien, 6 vols., Frankfurt am Main, 1990-91, also omitted from the bibli- entific works of art. ography. Three-quarters of the book is written by Emilie Savage- 2) R. T. Gunther, Astrolabes of the World …, 2 vols. (I: The Eastern Astrolabes, II: The Western Astrolabes), Oxford 1932, repr. in 1 vol., Lon- Smith. Part 1:1 (“Body and Spirit”) deals with the depiction don 1976. Gunther could not read Arabic and was often badly advised by of human anatomy in the Islamic world; medicine in those at Oxford who could; nevertheless, he had the good taste to reprint medieval Islam; medical and alchemical equipment; magic Morley's 1865 study as the introduction to his Pt. I. The organization of in Islam; magical equipment, amulets and talismanic objects; the work reflects a Victorian fad which lasted in Britain until the Islamic Revolution in Iran: “Persian” astrolabes are treated first, then “Indian”, divination; and astrologers’ equipment. Part 2 (“Mundane then “Arabian”, then “Moorish”. Amongst the “Arabian” astrolabes we Worlds”) deals with mortars and pestles; beekeeping; find the oldest pieces, of far greater historical importance than many a pretty sphero-conical vessels; stone press-moulds for leatherwork- Persian astrolabe. ing; locks, padlocks, and tools. I have nothing but praise for 3) L. A. Mayer’s Islamic Astrolabists and their Works, Geneva, 1956, or the forthcoming Brieux-Maddison Répertoire (see below) provide access these sections on medicine and especially magic and divina- to the makers and their available instruments. H. Michel’s Traité de l’as- tion, which mark a major step forward in our understanding trolabe, Paris, 1947, repr. Paris, 1976, and the Greenwich National Mar- of these subjects in medieval Islamic civilization. They set itime Museum astrolabe booklet are indispensable, and the various articles the standards for future research in the history of the pseudo- in the new edition of the Encyclopaedia of Islam (Leiden, 1960 to present) dealing with instruments (astrolabes, universal plates, quadrants, sundials sciences, a subject until now unhappily based mainly on tex- and compasses) are not without merit. My two overviews of Islamic instru- tual sources. Part 1:2 “Mapping the Universe” deals on mentation and the state of the field, the only works of their kind, — “Stru- astronomical instruments. Again, Emilie Savage-Smith is the mentazione astronomica nel mondo medievale islamico”, in G. L’E. Turner, leading authority on Islamic globes, and what she has writ- ed., Gli strumenti, 2nd edn., Turin, 1991, pp. 154-189 and pp. 581-585 (bibliography), and “Astronomical Instruments between East and West”, in H. ten here on that subject conveniently supplements what she Kühnel, ed., Kommunikation zwischen Orient und Okzident, Vienna, 1994, has published already (Islamicate Celestial Globes, 1985, pp. 143-198 — are omitted from the bibliography. etc.). 4) Reliable catalogues are available for Islamic instruments in Spanish I shall limit most of my attention here to the substantial collections (by S. García Franco), Washington, D.C. (by G. Saliba with S. Gibbs), Rockford, Ill. (by A. J. Turner), Nuremberg and Kuwait (by the pre- section of Part 1:2 dealing with astrolabes, quadrants and sent writer). Brief descriptions (by J. Mouliérac) are available for the instru- other instruments, written by Francis Maddison (pp. 186- ments in the Institut du Monde Arabe in Paris. Catalogues for the Islamic 287), which comprises some one-quarter of the whole. The astrolabes in Chicago (by D. Pingree) and Munich (by B. Stautz) are in guidelines for describing such instruments were laid down in press. Several exhibition catalogues could be mentioned. No catalogues are 1 available for the major collections in Oxford, Florence or Greenwich, the 19th century, ) and various works compiled in the 20th although for the last-mentioned cataloguing is in progress. The best, and in fact, the only real catalogue of a private collection with Islamic instruments is that for the Leonard Linton Collection (Paris: Alain Brieux, 1980). * Essay review of Francis Maddison and Emilie Savage-Smith, Science, 5) Two which do are J. Frank and M. Meyerhof, “Ein Astrolab aus dem Tools and Magic, vol. XII (in 2 parts) of The Nasser D. Khalili Collection indischen Mogulreiche”, Heidelberger Akten der von-Portheim-Stiftung 13 of Islamic Art, general editor Julian Raby, The Nour Foundation, London, (1925), reprinted in Arabische Instrumente … (see n. 1), IV, pp. 307-356, in association with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press, 1997, and G. Helmecke, “Das Berliner Astrolab des MuÌammad Zaman al- 152 pp. and 287 pp. (numbered consecutively). Mashadi”, Forschungen und Berichte der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, 1) See F. Sarrus’ detailed account of the early-13th-century Morrocan Hauptstadt der DDR (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag) 25 (1985), pp. 129-142 astrolabe in Strasbourg (1853); F. Woepcke’s description of an 11th-cen- and pls. 31-32. tury Andalusi astrolabe in Berlin (1858); W. H. Morley’s descriptions of 6) Ideally for an astrolabe one should describe the throne, the mater, the two instruments in the British Museum: an impressive 14th-century Syrian back, the rete, the plates, record all inscriptions (all star-names, all geo- quadrant (1860) and the splendid 17th-century Safavid astrolabe dedicated graphical data, and all the rest), as well as construction marks. to Shah Îusayn (1865); and B. Dorn’s descriptions of three instruments in 7) See three studies published in A. von Gotstedter, ed., Ad radices…, St. Petersburg (1865): a 14th-century Syrian quadrant, a late Maghribi astro- Stuttgart, 1994: one by B. Stautz on an astrolabe bearing the name of an labe, and an early-18th-century Egyptian celestial globe. These descriptions Ottoman craftsman but reworked from an 8th-century original, in fact, the are distinguished by their excellence and their accuracy. Particularly wor- oldest surviving astrolabe; another by S. Ackermann on an astrolabe signed thy of note is the fact that Sarrus taught himself Arabic in order to publish by a renowned Safavid craftsman but in fact reworked from a 12th-century the Strasbourg astrolabe. Only Morley’s description of the London astro- instrument, on which the original maker’s name and date can still be deci- labe is mentioned in the bibliography of the Khalili catalogue, but all of phered; and the third by P. Schmidl on a 17th-century Indo-Persian astro- these studies and many more are available in the voluminous (over 2,500 labe bearing a “signature” by the renowned 13th-century polymath NaÒir pages!!) F. Sezgin et al., eds., Arabische Instrumente in orientalistischen al-Din al-™usi. 249 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVII N° 3/4, Mei-Augustus 2000 250 most extensive photographic archives, which may one day no. 126: a splendid astrolabe from early-17th-century be published. Only the most enlightened museums welcome Lahore, perhaps the most elegant so far known; scholars who wish to look at instruments outside the exhibi- no. 127: an unusual (first known of its kind) astrolabe from tion cases. Most museums are incapable of producing decent 17th-century Lahore with special markings for the qibla; photos, and photos of what are often the most important no. 133: a spectacular, monumental astrolabe from 16th- details have to be made by the researcher, which some muse- century Lahore, the oldest known astrolabe from Muslim ums do not allow. With the Khalili Collection we finally India, here dismissed as “17th century”; have a set of historically-important instruments, competent no. 144: yet another elegant astrolabe from 17th-century photographers, and a generous publisher: a golden opportu- Isfahan; nity to produce a catalogue that will be a model for the no. 158: a highly sophisticated Ottoman quadrant from ca. future. 1800 (?) with markings as yet unexplained; and That opportunity has, alas, been missed. It is indeed with nos. 168-169: two 18th-century Ottoman Turkish exam- remorse that I pen the following criticisms of the most recent ples of an unusual compendium invented in 15th-century work of a senior colleague with whom I have collaborated Egypt. over many years. The introductory sections on astrolabes, This list hardly exhausts the instruments that are of his- quadrants and the qibla are abridged from “Maddison & torical interest: we note in addition a curious 13th-century Turner 1976”, a catalogue prepared by the author and A. J. suspension bracket some 50 cm long, presumed to have orig- Turner for the so-called “Festival of the World of Islam” inally been attached to the frame of a celestial globe (no. held in London in that year, but never published. That was a 120), and the first example of an Islamic declination ring (no. fine work for its time and its publication would have consti- 142), clearly modelled after a European piece. tuted a major step forward for the history of Islamic science Some most unfortunate errors in the catalogue have led to in general and instrumentation in particular. But the abridge- the misinterpretation of some of the instruments. The instruments in the present work are in places good and elsewhere ments are not treated in the light of what is known about the out-dated or simply in error; in any case, they ignore the general development of Islamic astronomy, of which instru- scholarship of the past 20 years. The section under discussion mentation is but a chapter. Our text (p. 186) states that Greek is full of references to “Brieux & Maddison, forthcoming”, texts and copies of Greek astrolabes “provided early Islam a répertoire of instrument-makers and their works, arranged with an instrument that solved problems related to the three alphabetically by maker. References to “Gunther 1932”, and main concerns of Islamic astronomy”, identified as astrol- no less to “Mayer 1956”, the work this Répertoire is intended ogy, the qibla and prayer-times. Yet all but one of the dozen to replace, would have been more useful to the readers for earliest Islamic astrolabes have no markings for astrology, the time being, but the long-awaited Répertoire is apparently qibla or prayer-times. And these were not the three main con- finally on its way to the publishers (C.N.R.S., Paris). On most cerns of Islamic astronomy anyway. The author expresses of the instruments in the catalogue Maddison provides use- surprise at finding a value of the obliquity of the ecliptic ful information and occasional divertissements in the foot- expressed to seconds engraved on an instrument (p. 258b). notes, but the descriptions are often uninspired. But this value, 23°30′17′′, is the parameter derived by the The Khalili instrument collection is at once less significant astronomer-prince Ulugh Beg and his astronomers in Samar- than this beautifully-illustrated catalogue would lead the qand ca. 1430, which was popular for several centuries there- reader to believe, and at the same time more significant than after.8 On matters of a more technical nature the commentary the descriptions of the most important pieces reveal. The cat- is often misguided. There cannot be an instrument carrying alogue itself would have been more valuable if it had been instructions “for calculating the almucantar [!] and the sine critical, in the sense that the few objects of exceptional his- of the rising star [!]” (p. 268 ad no. 158). The markings on torical importance should have been given more attention and the back of an astrolabe (no. 139 on p. 240) have nothing to more fully illustrated. The most historically important pieces, do with the “versed sine”. It is most unlikely that an astro- previously unknown to the modern literature (except for an labe would contain a plate for latitude 0°35′ (p. 230c ad no. occasional auction catalogue), are the following: 133), but the actual latitude can be derived from the plate no. 121: a single plate from a “12th or 13th century Syr- even if is not indicated; unfortunately not even a detail is ian or Egyptian” astrolabe, actually from a 15th-century Iran- illustrated here. The lines on a late Iranian qibla-compass (no. ian astrolabe by a well-known maker; 165 at p. 274) do show not the qiblas for various Shiïte no. 122: a remarkable rete and a single plate from an early- shrines but rather the directions of these shrines from Isfa- 13th-century astrolabe from Isfahan, by the maker of the han. In one case when there are two layers of inscriptions on remarkable geared astrolabe in Oxford (Gunther, no. 5); an instrument, the significance of this is lost (see no. 133 no. 123: a late-13th-century Iranian globe by a maker below). The same problem holds for replacement parts (see known from another instrument, previously misdated by me no. 129 below). to the 10th century, and also by two important astrolabes per- All the signatures on the instruments are grouped together haps made by his father (unfortunately, the present location in vol. I, pp. 419-422. But sometimes the signatures are less of both of these pieces is unknown); important than other inscriptions, which are overlooked. no. 124: a unique but problematic astrolabe from al- Thus, for example, no attention is paid to one important set Andalus or the Maghrib, ca. 1300 (?), with inscriptions in of inscriptions, namely, star-names. In a catalogue such as Judaeo-Arabic; this these should have been included, at least for the histori- no. 125: the mater of an unsigned astrolabe “probably from 14th-century Iran” but actually made by the leading instrument-maker of the Middle Ages, Ibn al-Sarraj of 8) See the articles “Min†aÈa” and “Mayl”, on the ecliptic and its obliq- Aleppo ca. 1325; uity, in the Encyclopaedia of Islam. 251 CATALOGUING MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ASTRONOMICAL INSTRUMENTS 252 cally-important pieces. This is a cumbersome task, but it is “Cairo”. This copy should be compared with MS Leiden worthwhile, for often the star-names provide information that Or. 143 of the Îakimi Zij of Ibn Yunus, copied in a remark- is not self-evident from other features. Thus, for example, the ably similar hand, probably in Cairo, albeit by a Maghribi. star-names on the reasonably-respectable-looking no. 132 Obviously Maghribi or Andalusi manuscripts of the confirm that the piece is a fake (see below). The same holds Almagest can be of supreme importance, as stated by Sav- for the entries in geographical gazetteers, which are even age-Smith. more tiresome to publish since they are more voluminous and Now to the sections on instruments other than globes. The more exposed to errors, and the possibility of misreadings is elegant manuscript (no. 118 at pp. 190-192) of the treatise on considerable. But a few entries can suffice to associate an instrumentation by al-Marrakushi, compiled in Cairo ca. unsigned instrument with a particular tradition or even with 1280, is stated as being of Persian or Indian provenance. The a maker, as in no. 146 (see below), or to show that it might copyist bore the nisba al-Tabrizi. I had previously argued that be a genuine historical piece even if it looks merely “deco- this work was known only in Egypt, Syria, Yemen and rative”, as in no. 135 (see also below). Turkey. Here it is contended that — by virtue of this one The most disturbing feature of this catalogue is the more manuscript — al-Marrakushi’s magnum opus was also surprising in the light of the author’s claim to have exam- known in the Islamic East. But Persian and Indian manu- ined numerous fakes over several decades (pp. 195-196 and scripts simply do not look like this one: it is, in fact, copied 199). For not a few fakes are treated here as if they were gen- in a typically Ottoman hand, and plenty of Iranians were uine instruments. Indeed, some “decorative” pieces, albeit employed as copyists in Ottoman Istanbul. This text was the not identified as such, receive as much attention as certain single most important and most influential work on instru- important pieces which have no known parallels or counter- mentation in the Islamic world. But from the point of view parts. A special section dealing only with fakes and their of originality and use for the history of Islamic instrumenta- most common features would have been a most useful con- tion the anonymous treatise in MS Dublin Chester Beatty tribution to the literature.9) Art historians are doubly wary of Persian 102, the discovery of which was announced with instruments because it is well known that dubious instru- much enthusiasm over 15 years ago, should not be over- ments abound (and falsely believed that they can only be rec- looked. The author, writing ca. 1325, describes over one hun- ognized by specialists), and because at least one art-historian dred different kinds of astronomical instruments known from has in all innocence published an article on an astrolabe his predecessors or invented by himself and he illustrates which was later shown to be a forgery.10) Colleagues in most of them.11) * The astrolabe by Nas†ulus dated 927/8, Islamic art history are certainly not well served by this cat- the earliest surviving dated astrolabe, mentioned on p. 208d, alogue, in which genuine historical instruments are illustrated was published in Kuwait in 1995.12) Was it Nas†ulus or alongside rubbish. Bas†ulus? Maddison prefers the former and omits any refer- It seems worthwhile to point to various specific points in ence to two articles in which the evidence for Nas†ulus is some detail, if only to plead for more care to be exercised in presented.13) The medieval sources refer to him as MuÌam- the preparation of future catalogues and of studies of Islamic mad ibn Äbdallah and MuÌammad ibn MuÌammad; in any instruments in general. case, Bas†ulus is assured immortality at least in the Réper- First a few remarks on part of the contribution by Savage- toire. * Maddison explains the latitudes used on Nas†ulus’ Smith. * It would have been appropriate to have included a astrolabe now in Kuwait, namely, 33° and 36°, as “probably photo of the front of the interesting geomantic plate no. 108 for Damascus and Baghdad” and “perhaps for Harran” (p. (at pp. 158-159), but a detailed study is promised and would 208d). These should rather be interpreted as “for Baghdad”, be welcome. * The group of instruments labelled which is where the astrolabe was made, and “for the latitude “astrologer’s globes and a standard” (pp. 160-165) are per- of the 4th climate of Antiquity”, for on his other astrolabe haps more appropriately described as “modern junk”. preserved in Cairo Nas†ulus used 35° for the latitude of Îar- Astrology was a serious subject and serious astrologers ran. Trying to establish which localities were intended by would not and could not have used degenerate instruments medieval instrument-makers who engraved only latitudes is (even though in the end their results might have been a dangerous game.14) * The enormous early-13th-century equally valid). My point is that we need not seek to explain Syrian astrolabe in the Maritime Museum in Istanbul (men- and create a context for every piece of junk that happens to tioned at p. 198c, n. 38) is now published in detail,15) and end up in a collection. Another point is that “decorative” Indo-Persian globes keep surfacing at a disturbing rate and are being acquired by museums who think they are getting 11) This important work is currently being investigated by F. Charette a bargain. * The provenance of two fragments of a manu- in Frankfurt. I have previously claimed that the treatise must have been by script of the Almagest in Maghribi script (no. 116 at p. 176) Ibn al-Sarraj (see below ad no. 125), but Charette has revealed that the is given as “Spain or North Africa”, but maybe it should author was more likely the enigmatic and somewhat eccentric, but still very be “Spain or North Africa, maybe even Cairo”, or just clever, Cairene astronomer Najm al-Din al-MiÒri. 12) “Early Islamic Astronomical Instruments in Kuwaiti Collections”, in A. Fullerton and G. Fehérvári, eds., Kuwait — Arts and Architecture — A Collection of Essays, Kuwait (no publisher named), 1995, pp. 76-96. See also nn. 24-25 below. 9) See already A. Brieux, “Les astrolabes — tests d’authenticité”, Art 13) King, “A Note on the Astrolabist Nas†ulus/Bas†ulus”, Archives inter- et curiosité, n.s., no 53, août-sept. 1974, pp. 132-150 (18 pp. unpaginated nationales d’Histoire des Sciences 28 (1978), pp. 117-120, and idem and in the offprint), and O. Gingerich et al., “The Äbd al-Aîmma Astrolabe P. Kunitzsch, “Nas†ulus the Astrolabist Once Again”, ibid. 33 (1983), pp. Forgeries”, Journal for the History of Astronomy 3 (1972), pp. 188-198, 342-343, repr. in King, Islamic Astronomical Instruments (see n. 9 above), repr. in King, Islamic Astronomical Instruments, London: Variorum, 1987, IV-V. repr. Aldershot: Variorum, 1995, VI. 14) Some of the rules are outlined in my contribution to the Festschrift 10) See the 1947 paper by M. Aga-Oglu mentioned in Gingerich et al., for John North (L. Nauta and A. Vanderjagt, eds., Between Demonstration op. cit., p. 198, n. 12. and Imagination …, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999). 253 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVII N° 3/4, Mei-Augustus 2000 254 the astrolabe made for Shah Äbbas II and preserved in works. Maddison discusses the question whether he is iden- Oxford was described in considerable detail by Gunther (his tical with the better-known astrolabe-maker Îajji Äli, and no. 18), whose memory should have been evoked by a ref- ventures to assert no more than that they were contempo- erence. * By virtue of the distinctive engraving, the unsigned raries.20) * The 19th-century Qajar astrolabe no. 150 (at p. “13th-century Syro-Egyptian” astrolabe plate (no. 121 at p. 256) is incompetently made, despite the fact that it has whiled 210) can be attributed to Jalal al-Kirmani, who worked at in several major collections, and its most interesting feature Ulugh Beg’s Observatory in Samarqand ca. 1430. Maddi- is perhaps the unfinished grid (for a Mecca-centred world- son’s is a perfectly reasonable guess, and one with which I map) on one of the plates which, as Maddison suggests, could would have agreed had I not seen a plate from Jalal’s astro- have served, had it been completed, “for qibla determina- labe made for Ulugh Beg (now in Copenhagen).16) * On the tion”. spectacular 13th-century rete (no. 122 at pp. 210-211), the The pride of the collection. The magnificent Indo-Persian outer border resembles a planetarium skyline with the astrolabe no. 133 (at pp. 230, 232-233), some 52.5 cm in maker’s name cut in silhouette (compare no. 126 below). diameter, is allotted just two columns of commentary, and is Also the outer border extends beyond the circle of Capricorn, misplaced amongst late Indo-Persian instruments (see below). the outer limit for standard astrolabes. But there is no need It would have been appropriate to have at least this one astro- to postulate some kind of astrolabic clock as the source for labe catalogued with all inscriptions reproduced. It is a fact this idea: such “extended” retes are found on a sub-group of that the inscriptions on this piece are in “both Arabic and Islamic and European astrolabes (both medieval and Renais- Sanskrit”, but the latter are not original and were squeezed sance) and are documented in medieval Arabic, if not in in the limited space left by the elegant Arabic inscriptions. Latin, texts. Thus rather than illustrating “the symbiosis of Hindu and A unique astrolabe from a medieval Jewish community. On Muslim astrological and astronomical traditions”, the inscrip- the remarkable astrolabe with inscriptions in Judaeo-Arabic tions show that the piece was made by a Muslim, entirely in (no. 124 at pp. 214-217) the plates and their engraved lati- the Islamic tradition, albeit with considerable innovation, and tudes have been shuffled (not previously noted), and the that it later fell into the hands of a Hindu, who added some lengthy inscription makes but little sense (which has been inelegant inscriptions in Sanskrit. The provenance is given as obvious to all those who have tried to read it). These features “probably India, 17th century”, but the instrument cannot raise a host of questions about this important piece. More come from anywhere other than India and the star-positions work needs to be done on the dating: was it really made ca. correspond to ca. 1550. Certainly the piece is not obviously 1300 or was it copied from an instrument made ca. 1300, related to the known productions of the Lahore school. In fact quite carefully, but not carefully enough, by a Jewish crafts- the piece represents a tradition about which we know virtu- man at a later time? There is a medieval Catalan astrolabe ally nothing. But it was made in either Delhi or Lahore, since datable ca. 1300 with virtually the same distinctive rete the latitudes on the zawraqi horizons on the rete are for lat- design.17) The various astrolabes with Hebrew inscriptions itudes 29° and 32°. The curves displaying solar meridian alti- that are mentioned here (at p. 214a) are unrelated to the piece tudes on the back serve latitudes 27°, 29° and 32°, the first with Judaeo-Arabic inscriptions.18) serving perhaps Ajmer or Ahmadabad (the piece is too early An important Mamluk piece. The unsigned “14th-century to be associated with Jaipur). As yet we know of no astro- Iranian” mater (no. 125 at p. 218) is in fact by Ibn al-Sarraj labes with Arabic inscriptions from Delhi. I strongly suspect (Aleppo, ca. 1325), the leading instrument-maker of the mid- that we have here the sole surviving work of MaqÒud Hirawi, dle Islamic period—compare the plate of horizons on his uni- known to have been as one of Humayun’s instrument-mak- versal astrolabe in the Benaki Museum, Athens (Gunther no. ers in Lahore, active ca. 1550. According to a contempora- 140). There are, as noted by Maddison, later Ottoman addi- neous source, he “manufactured astrolabes and globes in such tions on the back, and it is clear that originally the back bore a manner that the observers of his works were wonderstruck” only a trigonometric quadrant and two shadow scales on the (see p. 219a). Surely this is one of them. I admit there is a lower rim, and was thus not completed by the maker. problem with my logic, but this piece has to fit in somewhere. Late Iranian instruments. The unsigned Safavid astrolabe What a pity there is not even an illustration of the back or of no. 146 (at p. 252) is by Qasim Äli Qayini (Isfahan, ca. one of the plates, let alone of the mater with its extensive 1660), not all of whose works are signed. One entry from the geographical table (including qibla values). The latter is the gazetteer would suffice to confirm this.19) * The maker of oldest Islamic Indian (non-Sanskrit) geographical table with another Iranian astrolabe (no. 149 at p. 254) is not named as qibla-values known, since it predates that on no. 131 men- Qummi on this piece, but rather simply as Îajji Äli ibn tioned above. It is surely relevant to the early development ∑adiq. The nisba Qummi appears on some of his other known of the Lahore school under MaqÒud Hirawi (from Herat) that the astrolabe dedicated to Ulugh Beg by Jalal al-Kirmani (now in Copenhagen, already mentioned above), the instru- 15) In the memorial volumes for Aydın Sayılı (published as 3 special ment-maker at his observatory in Samarqand, has special volumes of the journal Erdem, Ankara: Atatürk Cultural Centre, 1996-97). 16) That plate was illustrated in my “Strumentazione nel mondo islam- markings on the plates for the qibla at Samarqand and Herat, ico” (see n. 3 above), p. 165. and that one of the two surviving astrolabes by Ilah-Dad (now 17) Published in the Festschrift for Juan Vernet (Barcelona, 1996), but in Hyderabad), the first member of the well-known Lahore known previously from the description in Gunther, Astrolabes, no. 162. family of astrolabists, bears a plate for Samarqand. A descrip- 18) They appear to come originally from Bologna ca. 1400, but some are later copies. See the new catalogue of European instruments in the Adler Planetarium, Chicago (1998, no. 7), and also the forthcoming Munich catalogue. 20) The possible identity of Îajji Äli and Îajji Äli ibn ∑adiq Qummi 19) See the catalogue of the 15.4.1999 auction at Christie’s of London, is also discussed in the catalogue of the 28.5.1998 auction at Christie’s of pp. 93-96 (lot 51). Another unsigned piece of his is in Greenwich (inv. no. London, pp. 26-30 (lot 52). The matter is not yet closed, but one needs to A10). compare instruments rather than photos thereof. 255 CATALOGUING MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ASTRONOMICAL INSTRUMENTS 256 tion of astrolabe no. 133 alone is worth a master’s disserta- Ottoman instruments of the same kind, and various extant, tion, but this could then lead to a book, for one could take S. but as yet unstudied, texts.21) * On another Ottoman quad- R. Sarma’s 1994 paper on the Lahore astrolabists and their rant (no. 157 at p. 268) the “astronomical tables” display the surviving productions as a guide and have a look of some of time of day as a function of solar altitude and solar longitude the unusual features of their astrolabes — such as zawraqi for latitude 41° (Istanbul). See also no. 160 below on the markings, which have still not been properly explained in the compiler of the tables. * The inscription on the standard modern literature — in order to document their origins in ear- Ottoman quadrant no. 159 (at pp. 268-269) is li-ar∂ (not li- lier (that is, 9th- and 10th-century) textual sources. ar∂ihi) mˆ, which the reader should be told means “for lati- Indo-Persian instruments. On the Indo-Persian astrolabe tude 41° [Istanbul]”. * The provenance of yet another (no. no. 126 (at pp. 222-223) it should be noted that the latitudes 160 at p. 270) is Damascus rather than “Ottoman empire”. of the zawraqi horizons are for 30° and 33°, and one may The father of the maker, namely, ∑aliÌ Efendi al-Muradi, was wonder for which localities these were intended, since the a well-known Istanbul astronomer, compiler of the tables astrolabe was surely made in Lahore (latitude 32°). The date from which those on no. 157 (see above) were taken. 1003 Hijra is too early for the maker MuÌammad Muqim (see Miscellaneous devices. The instrument called here a “com- also p. 219), unless he really did make astrolabes for 65 years. bined qibla compass and sundial” (no. 163 at p. 274) has no This is the second astrolabe in the collection on which some markings for the qibla. The information on the qibla which of the inscriptions on the rete, in this case the names of the adorns a similar sundial described by Khanykoff in 1857 has zodiacal signs on the ecliptic ring, are elegantly cut in sil- been omitted on this piece. * The instruments known in Ara- houette (see no. 122 above), a remarkable achievement. * The bic as daîrat al-muäddil, “equatorial semi-circle”, of which rete on one Lahore astrolabe (no. 129 at pp. 223 and 225), of there are two examples in the Collection (nos. 168-169 at pp. which Maddison writes: “the arabesque tracery of the rete is 278-279), are of some historical interest. First devised in flat, perhaps because it remained to be decorated”, is simply Cairo in the 15th century and described in a treatise by their a crude Ottoman replacement, indeed unfinished. * On yet inventor al-Wafaî, they are otherwise known only by a few another Lahore astrolabe (no. 131 at pp. 226-228), the qibla Ottoman Turkish examples. Instead of “the equatorial circle markings on two of the plates are not known from any other could also be used to establish (imperfectly) the times of instrument, and these are of such historical interest that it is Muslim prayer, and some examples… have additional sun- a pity they are not illustrated. This is the first evidence of any dials” (on p. 277b) read “the equatorial semicircle cannot be serious interest in the qibla amongst the Lahore astrolabists, used to find the time of the afternoon prayer, and some exam- though see now no. 133 above. * The dating of the elegant ples, like the one sketched here, have additional sundials Iranian astrolabe no. 145 (at p. 250) to ca. 1660 is too early showing that prayer-time for a specific latitude.” The curve by at least a century. It is more typical of the instruments of for the äÒr is formed by the word äÒr itself, but this is not one Äbd al-Ghafur, who produced pretty and competently- clear from the sketch. The geographical information around made instruments a century after the most intensive activity the base of the instruments, that is, names of localities of the Isfahan school. assigned to each 5°-sector around the Ka¨ba depicted at the Quadrants. The history of the quadrant in Islam presented centre, which Maddison noted was “employed in traditional here (p. 266) is vitiated by the fact that the quadrans novus Islamic geography” (p. 277a) and “in some respects decid- of Profatius (Montpellier, late 13th century), not known in edly out of date” (p. 278c), derives from the sacred geo- the Islamic world, is not directly related to the astrolabic graphical tradition of Islamic folk science.22) quadrant, which is a purely Islamic invention (Cairo, 12th or Some minor points. * On p. 208a, the Yemeni scholar al- 13th century). But the modern literature on the quadrant is Hamdani (d. 945) is here made into a “Persian” al-Hamadani. cluttered with this false association of the astrolabic quadrant * The bibliography in n. 7 on p. 208 is incomplete: there is with Profatius. * In his discussion of a fine globe dated an article on the origin of the astrolabe according to the Ara- 1285/86 by MuÌammad ibn MaÌmud al-™abari (p. 212a ad bic sources in Journal of the History of Arabic Science 5 no. 123) Maddison mentions the horary quadrant for latitude (1981), pp. 43-83. * The length of daylight given on the side 36° by one MuÌammad ibn MaÌmud now in New York of the unsigned plate for latitude 30° (p. 210 ad no. 121) is (illustrated in the article “Rub¨” in the Encyclopaedia of 13h58m not 13h18m. All such data can easily be controlled for Islam). I had claimed that this dates from the 10th century, accuracy. Underlying this particular value, on a 15th-century since it was supposed to have been found in a 10th-century astrolabe plate, is Ptolemy's value of the obliquity of the layer of excavations at Nishapur. The identity of the makers ecliptic! * For 30°27′ on p. 226d read 33°27′, an attested suggested by Maddison is confirmed by the fact that the dis- 14th-century value for the latitude of Damascus. * The name tinctive engraving on the two pieces is identical. Thus my of the maker of the Ottoman quadrant no. 156 (at p. 268) dating of the quadrant, which seemed quite reasonable to me reads “Îasan Îilmi B-k-b-r Zade”, the last part of which once upon a time, was wrong by some three centuries. One should not conclude that al-™abari worked in Nishapur, 21) Such quadrants, which aroused the interest of the most inspired whose latitude was taken as 36°, because that was also taken Ottoman instrument-makers, generally owe their original inspiration to such as the latitude of the 4th climate (see above). The horary 14th-century instrument-specialists as Ibn al-Sarraj and Ibn al-Sha†ir—one quadrant by Sa¨du ibn Äli mentioned in n. 3 at p. 213c was such is now described by F. Charette in the Festschrift for Walter Saltzer published in Kuwait in 1995. * The instrument no. 158 (at p. (Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1999). 22) On this see the article “Makka. iv. As centre of the world” in the 268) is not an astrolabic quadrant, but rather a highly sophis- Encyclopaedia of Islam. Ottoman instrument-makers favoured these ticated device on which there is no published information. schemes of sacred geography because they were ornamental and there were Alas only one side is illustrated, whereas the standard quad- no unhappy gaps in the south-east and south-west. They were surely aware rants mainly have both front and back illustrated. This piece that the qibla directions underlying these schemes were quite different from those computed by mathematics. But the latter they chose not to depict on deserves detailed investigation together with other rare instruments. 257 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVII N° 3/4, Mei-Augustus 2000 258

Maddison translates as “[known as] Gebirzade” and renders Another pretty Iranian astrolabe (no. 148 at p. 254) is recog- “the son of the infidel”. Since the maker hailed from the city nised as a fake but no reasons are given, and there is no cross- named Of in Anatolia, Maddison makes Îasan Îilmi’s father reference to p. 196, where they are indeed elaborated (the a Christian “infidel”. But it is not acceptable to insert ecliptic runs the wrong way round, the star-pointers bear no “[known as]”, and the name is Bakbar Zade. The problem is names, etc.). * The very mysterious “globe with astrolabe to explain Bakbar.23) components” (no. 151 at pp. 256, 258-259) has no conceiv- On fakes. Not all “decorative” instruments are to be sim- able use. There is no connection with the spherical astrolabe, ply dismissed as worthless from a historical point of view. A which is a serious instrument. I confess that, like Maddison, rather elegant 20th- (or 19th-?) century fake astrolabe from I have no idea what the maker of this piece had in mind. Iran (no. 119, p. 195) selected by Maddison for special men- It is always useful to have new catalogues that are richly tion bears an inscription which led him to suspect that it was illustrated. The authors are to be commended on bringing this copied from the splendid astrolabe which the astronomer al- work to completion, but only Emilie Savage-Smith has done Khujandi made in 984/5. The latter is in a Kuwaiti collection real justice to the artefacts entrusted to her. A golden oppor- and was published in Kuwait in 1995.24) This particular fake, tunity has been missed to pay due respect to several astro- with the small circle on the rete being a degenerate quatre- nomical instruments of exceptional historical importance and foil, is of considerable historical interest, not least when com- to differentiate them from run-of-the-mill pieces and — pared with no. 179 in the catalogue of the Leonard Linton aü#u bi-llahi — from deliberate fakes, forgeries, “decora- Collection (see n. 4 above). Nevertheless, it was not copied tive” pieces, call them what you will. from the astrolabe of al-Khujandi, so the logic of the asser- tion that it was made after 1965, when the maker’s name on DAVID A. KING that astrolabe was first read properly in the West (any liter- ate Arab could have read it during the past millennium), is Institute for the History of Science defective.25) * The late Iranian astrolabe no. 132 (at p. 230) Johann Wolfgang Goethe University is incompetently made: look at the intersections of the hori- Frankfurt am Main, Januari 2000 zon and prime vertical, which fall outside the ecliptic. * The marble astrolabe mater (no. 135 at pp. 236-237) certainly looks highly dubious at first sight, but the geographical gazetteer is serious and merits investigation. Maybe it was part of an entire astrolabe in marble, but it was not intended for pedagogic purposes beyond teaching Hindus the Arabic names for astrolabe components. * The two astrolabes from “India ca. 1800” (nos. 135-136 at pp. 237-238) are two modern fakes from one and the same workshop, made in New Delhi ca. 1980.26 * The qibla-indicator bearing the name of the celebrated Äbd al-Aîmma (no. 162 at p. 274) is a fake— compare the signed piece in the Time Museum, Rockford, Ill. (unpublished), or the very similar unsigned piece in Oxford attributable to him. * The astrolabe bearing a rather dubious signature naming the maker as the celebrated Äbd al-Aîmma is a deliberate forgery (no. 147). The “signature” is proof enough, but the real Äbd al-Aîmma would never have put the star dhanab al-‘aqrab just above (al-nasr al-)waqi¨. *

23) The name is clearly written, and there is a fatÌa (a-vowel) above the name, so it cannot be, for example, Bukayr (which would require but one more dot on the second baˆ). The only explanation I can think of is that Bakbar might be a corruption of the widely-used Sunni name Abu Bakr, as used for nick-names in Turkey (see the “barely recognisable hypocristic” forms of common names in the article “Ism” in the Encyclopaedia of Islam at p. 180a, where unfortunately no form derived from Abu Bakr is given). 24) See n. 12 above. 25) If Gunther had been able to read Arabic, al-Khujandi’s superb astrolabe would now be in Oxford: it was offered to him ca. 1930 but he did not believe the early date claimed by the vendor. At least the piece is with an owner who made it available for publication and it was not stolen by the Iraqis in the Gulf War, for the owner fled Kuwait with it in his pocket (but lost the rest of his collection). 26) Another identical astrolabe from the same workshop was purchased in Bombay in the early 1980s by a German sea-captain. He then offered it to the Deutsches Schiffahrtsmuseum in Bremerhaven, who consulted with me as to whether they should acquire it. I told them to have the sea-captain take it back to India and get his money back. This he surely did, for a few months later a Lufthansa pilot brought me the same instrument, which he too had purchased in Bombay. This astrolabe, like the others from the same workshop in New Delhi, which include also European astrolabes, is char- acterised by the excessive thickness of its back. Hence these instruments are unduly heavy for their size.