1-LOOK, SEE, BUT WRONG DECRIBE and COMMENTS.
LARGE and SMALL ISLANDS / DESCRIBE AS CLOUD
The islands are painted in brown, and leaves, flowers can be seen
clearly. (Even the sandy shore of the island painted too.) One of a
Private collection catalogue this motif explains like that: “Leaves gets
out from clouds." even a 5 year old kid does not make such an
explanation.
White sections around the brown island shows the beach.
MARIGOLD FLOWER / DESCRIBE AS ROSE, CARNATION, PEONY.
There are 2 carnations on the composition. Others are 2 fuchsia, 3 tulips and 1
saz leaf.
The reason why i want to introduce the carnation is usually marigold described
as carnation. However, the structure of the carnation flower (petals) are saw
blade leaves and leaf structure is thin long strips and flower drawn in original
size. These are a very important evidence.
The leaves do not lie us in all floral motifs. Ottoman craftmen attention to
details very much. Especially drew the floral motifs in original size.
But interesting thing is in Christies lot description, describe saz leaf and tulips,
but no word about fuchsia and carnation.
Carnation
3 wrong samples from Christies
Carnation
Rose
Peony
Impossible to be carnation, because structure of leaf edge is saw
blade, not thin long strips. Also seed sac, pod or seedball not on the
top of carnation.
Can not be Rose too because seed sac under petals like carnation
and not visible from the outside. Also has thorns.
Can not be Peony too because seed sac under petals like carnation
and rose and not visible from the outside. Also structure of leaf
edge is not saw blade.
This is not a carnation flower, not rose, not peony. Then what is this
flower? This is the question? No one in the world to this day, even
any researchers, and scholars never ask it. Start our research with
my father, who eventually led and help me alot to create this book
that he realized this is the marigold flowers.
Seed sac is seen very clearly.
Petals edge contoured.
No thorns on the braches and saw blade.
The most important privilege of marigold in the image, the edge
contours of the petals. The front side of petals are red, behind is yellow.
The yellow part turning to upside by twisting and create a counter band
on the edge of the red part. Craftmen to specify this feature, they left
this parts in white (yellow color does not exist). Only in 2 Iznik plate
they used gold gilded to show the yellow contours.
Therefore these three flowers are actually a single flower and it is
Marigold.
So Christies experts published 3 different explanations for only the one
and same motif on the catalouge.
However, which is interesting and ironic, these 3 explanations are false
and incorrect.
Once again i reapeted This is not a carnation flower, not rose, not
peony, it is absolutely marigold.
2- Look but they did not understand. So they did wrong comments
DRAGON MOTIF
Muslin signed Hijri 956 (Gregorian 1549) dated the mosque lamps.
Researchers have never understood the stylized dragon motifs and figures. Some called
Chinese cloud, medallion, rumi motif, even worms too.
Craftmens draw clearly the dragon motif in 1580. Probably they seen this motif in palace
collection on a yuan or ming period plate and copyied.
The Walter arts gallery
This dragon head called a “MASK” in an academic source book.
MOROSINI and SPANGORELLI DE DESSA FAMILY
Morosini Family
Spangorelli De Dessa Family
The original description of the museum is given below.
Object types dish
Date 1570-1600 (circa)
Description
Dish, made of polychrome glazed pottery. The dish has a slightly raised centre, a shallow cavetto
and a broad flattened rim set on a low ground-down foot-ring. It is painted in cobalt blue, turquoisegreen and bole red outlined in greyish black with a central European coat of arms possibly of the
Venetian family of Morosini or the Dalmatian family Spingarolli de Dessa set between windswept
sprays of prunus and campanulas springing from a base tuft.
To make a comment is important, however, is an issue that should be very careful. Now i will give
very interseting information about 10 pieces set dish which had a coat of arm on produced between
1575-80
Coat of arms used on this kind of special items shows the statue of the family. Ulusally this kind of
marks used the introduction of civil society organizations and military units.
As we have seen this coat of arm separated by a red cross on a dark blue and white backgrounds
and 2 sun settled in them. Motif is in rain drop form or almond which used in that period very much.
Sun motif is important. It is considered a sacred symbol in Central Asian society. For example, the
sun is also the main motif of the Japanese flag and the Japanese emperors are called “the son of
the sun”. Turks also coming from central asia, so as a result of this they used this motif so much.
Oriental Sun motifs are as circles around lights emitting. This motif only seen on Ottoman Empire
Sultan’s flag or the troops unit which protect the Sultan.
Von Kaiserlich From Kriegsrech / imperial wars" written by Leonhard Fronsperger (1520–1575), an
engraving shows the “Siege of Ottoman army” is the most importan evidence. Behind the Sultan,
you can see the severeal different sun motifs on troops and units flag and coat of arms clearly.
16th century and also before and after, no kingdoms in Europe, the state, the army and units,
feudal states, the legal and illegal communities, which were important, effective in political and
economical issues and rich families flag, symbol, coat of arms etc. never used glittreing sun. In
addition, the unused of a symbol of eastern associative is extremely natural. Only in Spingarolli de
Dessa family coat of arm has star. But their coat of arm is in square form and seperated by a red
cross and 2 star settled in. If they gave this order to Iznik and their coat of arm drawn wrong, what
they would be do? Accept it or give it back?
The allegation is this dish ordered by an Italian or a Dalmatian family. They found at least 8 family
candidates. But “Special Jury” descided that it would be Venetian Morosini family or Spingarolli De
Dessa Dalmatian family.
A thesis based on simple datas, can it be believable?
An Ottoman commander, a general, or a guard of the Sultan and on his unit flags has spederated
by a cross and settle double sun in, can give such an order to Iznik too. Or a gift from Sultan
because of his success. Or a ramadan, circumcision or wedding gift …
3- LOOK, SEARCH but NEVER SEE
Like seperator bands, ants, grasshopper, caterpillars, marigold flower, lavender, fig leaves,
pomegranate flower, daisies feather, alem form ect.
Some Samples
Seperator bands on a Cheese porcelain
Craftmen draw the hinges on the seperators.
Hinges
Ants antenna drawn clearly
Ants
Grasshopper
4- SOME WRITTEN EVIDENCES TRANSLATE WRONG, SO
THERFORE WRONG COMMENTS DONE.
TRUTH ABOUT ABRAHAM FROM KUTAISI
THE BRITISH MUSEUM AN50793300
h:17,1 cm. In the year 959 (1510 AD)
Truth About Apreham From Kutaisi
Written text at the base of the jug translated by The Armenian Patriarchate of İstanbul’s first
secretary, Mr. Vağarşak Seropyan.
“This wine jug is Apreham of Kutaisi’s souvenirs. 11 march 959.”
Mr. Vağarşak Seropyan’s general comment is as follows:
First in the text there is "no word” like “Kcotcay”(Kütahya). Altought the handwriting is not
very good but it is extremely clear and readable. So i’m very suprised that who read and
translated this text made such a big mistake. "Kutayisi" is a city in Georgia. It is very
interesting a man from there worked in Iznik.
With this real knowledge, upon Mr. Vağarşak Seropyan’s find it is very interesting and must
be explamined, how this artist came and worked in Iznik. However the situation is very
clearly describes by historical events.
II. Beyazid period 1510, Ottoman arimies surrounded the terrritory of the kingdom of Imereti
in west region of Georgia, entered and conqured "Kutaisi" the capital city of the kingdom.
Kutaisi was also an industrial and educational city. Interesting relationship is ceramic arts
are very advanced and developed in this city. After the conquest of Goergia and
Kutaisi, probably scholars, artists, craftmen were brought to İstanbul and sent to the
production areas by their knowledge. Abreham of Kutaisi probably arrived in Iznik like that.
This jug can be made in Kutaisi and brought it when he came to Iznik or it is one of the first
jugs he made in Iznik to prove himself. Abreham is an Armenian and lives in Kutaisi and
naturally used his armenian calendar. Date 11 march 959 probably Armenian calendar, not
Hijri calendar. In gregorian calendar it is 1510. This date match and consistent the historical
events.
However both form and technique on the object as well as paint and brushes not carry the
classic Baba Nakkaş period fastidiousness, or it is the capacity of Abreham. This support
the idea that the jug work is a trail and prove himself. A sign and written a note on the
object is a behaviour out off Ottoman culture. The second and more important issue is
British museum described it as Kütahya (Kcotcay) not written in the text. The artist lived in
the city Kutaisi in Georgia.
The academics and researchers who followed the translation and description of the British
Museum's wrong with this object, their thesis are which is before Iznik in late 15th century
or early in 16th century, in Kütahya (Kcotcay) produced ceramics in the quality of Iznik
ceramics is completely decaying and wrong. Sadly, this wrong information is, however,
came to present day in all scientific literature.
British Museum’s original description and translation both in armenian and
english are at below.
Orijinal açıklama:
Object types jug
Date 1510 (dated)
Description
Spouted jug, made of blue and white glazed pottery. It has a globular body and an elaborate
piece-moulded neck with a torus moulding and flaring galleried mouth, standing on a profiled
foot. The handle is in the form of a scaly dragon with gaping maw and serpentine tail. The
straight tubular spout tapers and bends towards the tip. The vessel is painted in tones of cobalt
blue with a band of split-palmette arabesques reserved on a cobalt ground above a narrower
band of foliate scrolls on a white ground. The shoulder has a bracketed panels enclosing leaves
bordered with darts; the torus moulding has a chain band; waisted neck with vertical spotted
lappets separated by leaves, with an undulating rumi scroll below the rim. The spout has vertical
cable bands between tadpole-like motifs. The base has an inscription in Armenian (in bolorgir)
under the glaze: "This vessel is in commemoration of Abraham, servant of God, of Kcotcay
(Kutahya). In the year 959 (1510 AD), March llth".
Inscriptions
Inscription Type: inscription
Inscription Language: Armenian
Inscription Translation: "This vessel is in commemoration of Abraham,
servant of God, of Kcotcay (Kutahya)
a). In the year 959 (1510 AD), March
llth".
Inscription Comment: The base with an inscription in Armenian (in bolorgir)
under the glaze.
Dimensions Height: 17.1 centimetres Diameter: 7 centimetres (rim) Diameter: 7.3 centimetres
(foot)
Curator's comments
Labels: Case No ... Ewer Godman; Godman; 35. The vessel is after a northern
Italian prototype for liturgical use. Record updated on the basis of research
by Edward Gibbs, 1998-1999.
* * *
Another wrong comment and wrong thesis cause this historical mistake is, on the body of
this object sliced rumi (arabesque) motifs used first time by Abreham who is from Kütahya
(Kcotcay) (But in real from Kutaisi). On a basin foot which produced in 1525 the same rumi
(arabesque) motifs applied. The museum’s description about the work on this basin is a
style that has been claimed to Abreham from Kütahya (Kcotcay). These motifs are anatolian
origin. As an example, Rumi (arabesque) motifs on the body of the Syrian production mug
dated back 400 years ago from Abreham from Kutaisi. This motif often used since 1480 on
Iznik objects
12.century Syrian
İznik 1480
DETAIL INFORMATION ABOUT SOME OBJECTS IN THE COLLECTION
Catalogue no. 1 - 2
Tugrakes, Golden Horn motif
Rumi motif
The edge of the plate is paranthesis form. On the center 7 helical spiral Tugrakes- Golden
Horn motif.
Tiny flowers on the middle border.
External border is look like helical spiral Tugrakes- Golden Horn motif. Interesting thing is
rumi motifs added to this application.
Color: Blue on white. Date 1570-1575
Tuğra is the signature of the Sultan. “Tuğrakeş“ name given by Prof.Nurhan Atasoy. Very
proper name. Ground motif of the original Kanuni Sultan Suleyman’s tuğra in Metropolitan
museum collection.
THE METROPOLİTAN MUSEUM
Kanuni Sultan Süleyman’s Tuğra
Catalogue no:4-5
Outer edge borderless study has been applied during Shah Kulu period (1535-1560).
Main motif in the centre and spread to the the edge of the plate is vertical Hatayi Lotus flowers.
Not saz leaves. Vertical Hatayi is a view of vertical section of a flower.
Pairs stylized dragon motifs preserve the fertility of the plate. Dimensions are almost same.
Date: 1535-1545
Vertical Hatayi
Horizontal Hatayi
Catalogue no: 6
Şemse motif
Chinese Ru-Yi motif
Rumi motifler
Zigzag border
Female/male couple Dragon
Wind rose
The edge of the plate is paranthesis form.
One of the most important objects for Motifs. In the center 4 Chinese Ru-Yi motif medallion.
Ru-Yi motif is "power symbol" in China. A wind rose in the center of this medallion.
4 Ru-Yi motifs in the inner side is settled on the double rumi motifs.
4 elliptical frames which is called Şemse in Turkish, means stylized sun located on the
ground. Inside of these motifs are couple of female / male "Stylized Dragon" motif. An
outstanding application.
Double flowers are daises on the spaces.
The external edge border is leaves "zigzag" pattern.
Colors: Cobalt blue and turquoise on white. Date: 1580
Motifs in the Şemse (medallion) are stylized double dragon motifs not "Circle of Musli" Because
these motifs applied 40 years ago before Musli in 1510. At the begining of the lecture i give the
information about dragon.
Stylized Dragon
Şemse (elliptic motif medallion)
One of the important objects in the collection.
Rumi motif
Catalogue no.7
Chrysanthemum
Muscari Buds
The edge of the plate is paranthesis form.
Calligrapher Kara Memi's classic composition. Various flowers and plants gets out from soil
and grass are spread all over the plate.
Main motif of the composition is muscari buds in the 5 large chrysanthemums.
The external border is "Chinese dragon skin pattern". But it mutated after 1540 and turned
completely to small circles which is called classic Iznik edge border.
Color: Blue, gray and black on white. Date: 1575
These are not saz leaves, they are chrysanthemums. There is no hyacinths.
Catalogue no:8
Spring flowers
Marigold
Tulip
Hyacinth
Spring flowers
Straight-edged form plate.
Classic Kara Memi composition. There is a red tulip under the white one which these
flowers gets out from soil and grass. From left to right, white spring flowers, 2 marigold
with ones broken branch, spring flower, 2 marigold with ones broken branch, hyacinth and
4 branches of a blossoming red spring flowers.
External border is a very bad application. Date: 1575
Color: Coral red, white, green and black on white.
"Four flowers" is the name of application, not a style. Kara Memi style has been accepted. This
style is some various flowers get out from the soil and spread all over the plate. Kara Memi copied
a Yuan period Chinese porcelain plate in Topkapı Palace and create this composition. Copied
plate shown below.
Topkapı Palace Collection
Yuan-Ming Dynasty period 1400s
Catalogue No:9
Lotus
Chinese Ru-Yi motif
Spring flowers in Alem form
Pomegranate
Grass gets out from soil
Bell Flowers
Straight-edged form plate.
Classic Kara Memi composition. Vertical section view Lotus flower and a pomegranate in
this lotus gets out from the grass. This combination gets out from a Ru-Yi motif.
2 spring flowers branches which is symmetrical called “Alem Form“. Bell flowers also
create another Alem Form too.
The external border is "Chinese dragon skin pattern". But it mutated after 1540 and turned
completely to small circles which is called classic Iznik edge border.
Color: Blue tones, green, coral red and black. Date: 1575+
Alem Form. Used on mosque minarets, domes and top of the flagpoles.
Catalogue no.25
Main composition is 5 lotus flowers are in wind rose form. We can see çintemani
between them.
Catalog no:28
Catalog no:33
Desmazeria
I can not say it is "wheat sheaf“ . Craftmen have done very details drawings. They painted floral
motifs in their original size. Very small feathers on the daisy branch. Pollen of pomegranate, they
draw even small ants. However, if this motif is "wheat sheaf“ ; why they did not draw the thin,
long, straight bushes on the top of the spikes? It is probably “Desmazeria”. It is the only motif i
have not figure it out yet.
Desmazeria
Catalogue no:36
Ru-Yi motifs create a composition.
The Yuan Dynasty period (1279 – 1368)
Symbol of the Buda’s first discipline of the 8 main philosophy. Chinese Kingdom baton’s top is in
this motif shape.
Catalogue no:38
Straight-edged form plate.
15 pieces wheel of forture around the bird view flower.
Half flowers on the outer border.
Color: Blue on white. Date: 1580+
No.37
No.43
No.39
No.44
No.42
No.45
Seperator bands around the Medallions on the centre. Only at no: 45 there is a
wheel of fortune on the centre. Date: 1580+
Catalogue no: 46
Catalogue no: 47
Double "Simurg" motif.
Simurg is mixed with peacock by many researchers. I want to give some detail informaiton about
this.
Simurg(Farsça/İran) - Zümrütü Anka(Osmanlıca) – Phoenix(Latince)
Sassanid era (Iran) ancient silk fabrics. Figure Simurg (Phoenix / zümrütüanka
bird) 6.7.century
Big head, his expression scary, his eyes wide open. The neck is short and
thick, collar necklace on throat. The legs are short and thick. In view of the tail
of a peacock tail.
(Simurg-Phoenix
The Phoenix bird) relief. Byzantine Period, 10th century AD.
Istanbul Archaeology Museum
The original description of the museum:
Wolf head. In the throat collar / necklace. The front of the body looks like lion,
back of the body were described as peacocks tail. This motif became the
Byzantine art with the influence of the Sassanids prevailing in Iran. Simurg
(Phoenix / phoenix); a mythological figure motifs on fabrics, stones and silver
artifacts.
Peacock
Differences between Peacock vs Simurgh / phoenix:
1- The head of the peacock is very small relative to the body. The head of the
Phoenix is bigger. "The birds on the plate is bigger.“
2-Peacocks face is too small, so eyes, nose and mouth structure inconspicuous.
However, in view of the Phoenix's face is clear on the objects. "As in the Plate“
3-Peacocks neck is thin and long. Phoenix neck is short and thick. "The neck of the
birds are short and thick on the plate.“
4- No collar or a necklace on the throat of a peacock. Phoenix figure has collar /
necklace. "The birds on the plate also have collar necklace."
5- Peacocks legs long and thin. Phoenix legs are short and thick. "The birds on the
plate have short and thick legs."
The motifs of birds on the plate carries all of these features. For these reasons,
these figures are not strictly peacocks, these are simurg / phoenix / zümrütü
anka birds.
Same plate at British Museum Collection
British Museum collection
Simurgs
THE GULBENKIAN MUSEUM
Peacocks
Lizbon
Catalogue no12
Marigold
Saz leaves
Half flower border
Wild roses
Tankard or Mug.
Saz leaves on neck and body in Alem form(Crescent moon look each other). Wild roses on
the vases between these leaves dominant the composition.On the base Marigold gets out
from the soil also accompanied them.
Half flowers on the rim.
Color: Blue, green, coral red, black on white. Date: 1575-80
Catalogue no:13
Çintemani
Tiger skin woolfell or fur
Tankard or Mug.
Single and triple çintemani with tiger skins(woolfell or fur) application. 4 simple border
application also:
Color: Blue, green, coral red, black on white. Date: 1560-70
Catalogue no 16
Separators
Double chain motif
Spring flowers
Tankard or Mug.
3 rows separator band application. Spring flowers in these seperator bands. Motifs around
the main body unfortunately deleted. Border around the top rim double"zencerek" (chain).
In the neck area there is a simple border application.
Color: Blue, green, turquoise, coral red, black on white. Date: 1575
Different Lids
Main motif Wind Rose
No:48
No:51
No:49
No:50
No:52
No:53
Small bowls. These 6 bowls are very important in this collection. Because until today only 2 bowls
in the world in this form, height, and diameter. 6 small bowls are now in Croatia. These are
porbably wine or coffee bowls. “ Lianzi bowl” is a little different of these 6 bowls. Pattern seen
outside of no 52 bowl, is “Ling Zhi” mushroom which is considered the elixir of immortality in China
and very valuable also. Curved leaf structure of this motif of the Ling zhi mushroom is one of its
characteristic and not confused with lotus flower.
The Yuan Dynasty period (1279 – 1368) Ling Zhi mushroom motifi
Fire or flame circle on the centre of bowls no: 48-50-51-52. Do not think it
is a coat of arm. If it is a coat of arm, you want your coat of arm on a small
bowls or bigger one for show off?
Zigzag border motif on the egde of the bowls no:48-51-53.
Contact Details:
Mete Demirel
Email: [email protected]
Site: www.iznikciniveseramikleri.com
Phone: +90 533 231 72 70