365

 i
FROM DIPLOMATIC GIFT-EXCHANGE
TO THE TURKISH MARKET:
CLOCKS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank my advisor Prof. Günsel Renda, for her support, invaluable comments and advice. I would also thank the faculty of Archaeology and Art History, Dr. Nina Ergin, Dr. Lucienne Şenocak and Dr. Suzan Yalman, for their support for the last three years as well as Prof. Zeynep İnankur with her support and valuable comments.
I am indebted to thank Museum Director Prof. Haluk Dursun for his support during the first stage of accumulating sources from the Topkapı Palace Museum. For Ottoman Turkish translations in the Appendix, I am indebted to Selim Kuru and Yorgos Dede for their support with Ottoman Turkish.
Finally, my deepest gratitude always goes to my parents, Hülya and Aziz Önder, and my grandparents, Yurdanur-Muharrem Coşar, and Melahat-Necdet Önder for their patience, trust and unwavering support. Last but not least, I am very grateful to my fellow students, Canan Arıkan and Beyza Uzun, for their friendship and love through the study of my master degree.
v
ABSTRACT
The focus of this thesis is on clocks that were sent to the Ottoman Empire by the Europeans either as a diplomatic gift or an object of the Ottoman market in the 18th and 19th centuries. This time period, representing intense diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and Europe, led to a change in the role of clocks from diplomatic gift to object for the Ottoman market with the establishment of temporary and permanent European embassies in the Ottoman Empire and ambassador visits.
Gift-giving was a prerequisite for reception ceremonies in the Ottoman Empire. Highly-valued objects – such as textiles, jewelry and furniture – that reflected the artistic and cultural identity of civilizations were generally the preferred diplomatic gifts. Clocks were also among the gifts by European rulers for the Ottoman court. Different from others, however, the clock is not only an object that is simply a gift, it is also an art object that carries a cultural and artistic synthesis between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. There are innumerable clocks that were sent to the Ottoman Empire, but their numbers increased, especially after they were produced by the Europeans to be sold in the Ottoman market. This increase is because the Ottomans desire towards clocks as an object of daily life augmented the interest in the clock-making industry in 19th century Ottoman life.
Therefore, this thesis aims to offer an artistic analysis of European clocks produced for the Ottomans, as well as Ottoman-made clocks themselves, with a focus on the clocks in the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums collections as well as in private collections, in order to make broader conclusions about the exchange of art and culture between the Ottoman Empire and Europe.
vi
Keywords: Gift-exchange, Clock, Ottoman Empire, Europe, Diplomacy, Trade, Economy, Art object, 18th century, 19th century, Material culture.
vii
ÖZET
Bu çalışma, 18. ve 19. yüzyıllarda Avrupalılar tarafından gönderilen diplomatik hediye veya Avrupalı saat ustaları tarafından Osmanlı pazarı için yapılıp gönderilen saatleri ele alır. Osmanlı Devleti ve Avrupa arasındaki yoğun diplomatik ilişkilerin, özellikle geçici ve kalıcı Avrupa elçiliklerinin kurulmasını ve elçi ziyaretlerin arttığı bu dönemde, Avrupalılar tarafından diplomatik hediye olarak gönderilen saatler zamanla Osmanlı pazarı için üretilen bir obje haline gelir.
Hediye vermek Osmanlı’da kabul törenlerinin ön koşuludur. Tekstil ürünleri, mücevherat, mobilya gibi değeri yüksek ve uygarlıkların sanatsal ve kültürel kimliğini yansıtan objeler genellikle diplomatik hediyelerdir. Saatler de Avrupalı hükümdarlar tarafından divan-ı hümayuna verilen hediyeler arasındadır. Fakat, diğer hediyelerden farklı olarak saat sadece bir hediye değil; aynı zamanda Osmanlı Devleti ve Avrupa arasında kültürel ve sanatsal bileşimi yansıtan bir sanat eseridir. Osmanlı Devleti’ne sayısız saat gönderilmiştir fakat özellikle Avrupalıların Osmanlı pazarında satmak için saat üretmesiyle sayıları artmıştır çünkü Osmanlıların saati günlük hayatın bir objesi olarak görme hevesi 19. yüzyıl’da saat yapım endüstrisine karşı merakı da artırmıştır.
Bu nedenle, bu çalışma Avrupa ve Osmanlı Devleti arasındaki karşılıklı sanat ve kültür değişimi hakkında daha kapsamlı yorumlar yapabilmek amacıyla, özellikle Topkapı Sarayı, Dolmabahçe Sarayı Müzeleri saat koleksiyonları ve özel koleksiyonlara odaklanarak, Osmanlılar için üretilen Avrupa saatleri ile Osmanlıların kendileri için ürettikleri saatlerin sanatsal analizini yapmayı amaçlamaktadır.
viii
Anahtar sözcükler: Karşılıklı değişim, Hediye değişimi, Saat, Osmanlı Devleti, Avrupa, Diplomasi, Ticaret, Ekonomi, Sanat eseri, 18. yüzyıl, 19. yüzyıl, Maddi kültür.
ix
Table of Contents
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………..…v
Özet………………………………………………………………………………... vii
Table of Contents ..……………………………………………………………..... viii
List of Figures………………………………………………………………….……ix
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
Chapter 1: Diplomatic Gift-Exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe
1.1. The Meaning of Gift in the Maussian Model ………..………….………12
1.2. The Meaning of Gift in the Ottoman Context ………...………...........…13
1.3. Gift-Exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe........................17
Chapter 2: From Diplomatic Gift to the Turkish Market: European Clocks
2.1. A European Gift to the Turkish Market: Clock …………..………….….35
2.2. European Clocks with Painted Decoration in the Ottoman Empire ….....43
2.2.1. Landscape Painting as Clock Decoration …...……............…….45
2.2.1.1. Clocks Produced in France ……………………….…...46
2.2.1.2. Clocks Produced in England ……...…………………..59
2.2.2. Floral and Geometric Motifs as Clock Decoration ……….........65
2.2.3. Portrait Painting as Clock Decoration ……………………….…68
2.2.3.1. Portable Objects Decorated with a Portrait ………….. 70
2.2.3.2. Pocket Watches Decorated the Sultans’ Portrait…..…..72
Chapter 3: Clock Production in the Ottoman Market
3.1. Ottoman Clocks with Painted Decoration……………………………… 85
3.2. An Ottoman Clock in a London Exposition……………………………. 88
3.3. An Ottoman Gift: A Dagger Decorated with an English-made Clock on
its Hilt……………………………………………………………… 90
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………98
Bibliography ……………………………………………………………………...103
Appendices
A. Table of Gifts…………………………………………………………..111
B. Catalogue of Gifts……………………………………………………...118
C. Types of Gifts……………………………………………………….....142
D. European and Ottoman Clock-makers Working for the Ottoman Empire………………………………………………………………….143
E. Transcription of Primary Sources………………………………….......144
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Swedish Ambassador Ulric Celsing received by the Ottoman grandvizier, Celsing Collection, Biby Mansion, Sweden, 18th c.
Figure 2 - The Reception of the Ottoman Ambassador Mehmet Said Efendi by the French King Louis XV in Versailles, 18th c.
Figure 3 - Portrait of Adam Potocki with Turkish custome, signed by Franciszek Tepa, Jerusalem, 1853, 11.2x8.2 cm, Cracow National Museum, inv. no. III-r.a. 5.832.
Figure 4 - Abdülhamid I’s porcelain-wares, Warsaw, 18th c. Topkapı Palace Museum, inv no. TSM 21/1, 26/788, 16/88, 26/789, 16/89, 16/90, 26/811, 26/793
Figure 5 - Said Mehmed Paşa, Joseph Aved, Chateau de Versailles, 18th c. Photo by RMN Frank Raux.
Figure 6 - German Fountain, 1898, Sultanahmed Square, Istanbul.
Figure 7 - Mehmed Çelebi in the French palace while presenting the Sultan’s gifts to the King, 18th c., France.
Figure 8 - The Portrait of Selim III, signed by Konstantin Kapıdağlı, 1803, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 17/30.
Figure 9 - Suleyman I convesing with his son in his private library, in the Company of attendants. Talikzade,Şehname, ca. 1596-1600, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. A 3595, fol. 79r.
Figure 10 - The organ clock sent to Mehmed III (1596-1603) for the accession of the Sultan, English.
Figure 11 - Watch Tower, İzmir. Photo credit by the author.
Figure 12 - Scale Model of Watch Tower, Switzerland, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/64.
Figure 13 - Table clock, Russia, mid-19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/258.
Figure 14 - Pocket Watch, Switzerland, circa mid-19th c. , private collection.
Figure 15 - Brooch Watch, private collection, circa mid-19th c.
Figure 16 - Pistol-shaped clock, Switzerland, 19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no.53/122.
Figure 17 -Table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
xi
Figure 18 - A view from Old Beşiktaş Palace. Detail from table clock, France, 1810,
Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 19 - Antoine Ignace Melling, Old Beşiktaş Palace, Voyage Pittoresque plate
no:28.
Figure 20 - The entrance to the Bosphorus. Detail from table clock, France, 1810,
Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 21 - Entry from the Black Sea Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 22 - Entry from the Black Sea, Antoine Ignace Melling (1763-1831).
Figure 23 - A view from Anatolian and Rumelian Fortresses. Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 24 - Table clock, France, 19th century, A. Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 25 - Table clock, France, 19th century, A. Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 26 - Pocket watch, France, 17th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no.53/130.
Figure 27 - Pocket watch, France, 1820, private collection.
Figure 28 - Pocket watch, France, 1830, private collection.
Figure 29- Pocket watch, France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/82.
Figure 30 - Pocket Watch, Geneva, circa 1930, private collection.
Figure 31- Pocket watch, France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum inv.no.53/154.
Figure 32 - Pocket watch, France, 1800s, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/178.
Figure 33 - Pocket watch, Swiss and France, 19th c. , Topkapı Palace Museum, inv.no. 53/157.
Figure 34 - Pocket watch, England, 18th c. , Topkapı Palace Museum inv.no. 53/152.
Figure 35 - Bracket clock, England, 1800s, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv.no.53/346.
Figure 36 - Automata clock, England,18th century, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum, inv.no. 11/550.
xii
Figure 37 - Bracket clock, England, 1770, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum, inv.no. 49/16.
Figure 38 - Tulip-formed pendant clock, England, 1654, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv.no. 53/199.
Figure 39 - Tulip-shaped clocks, 17th century.
Figure 40 - Tulip-shaped clock, Dutch, 17th century, Soltykoff collection, British
Museum.
Figure 41 - Gold and enamel form watch designed as a scarlet Tulip, Geneva, c.1820, private collection.
Figure 42 - Bird case clock, Topkapı Palace Museum, Swiss, 1750, inv. no 53/51.
Figure 43 - Brequet-made pocket watch, France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/172.
Figure 44 - Courvoiser et Cié pocket watch, Swiss and France, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/175.
Figure 45 - Marwick Markham pocket watch, recordon, Topkapı Palace Museum 53/142.
Figure 46 - Wall clock, Germany, 20 th century, Ali Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 47 - Table Clock, Germany, 20th century, Ali Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 48 - Wall clock, Germany, 20th century, Ali Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 49 - Medallion hung around the neck, oil on ivory, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 2/1023.
Figure 50 - Medallion with the portrait of Sultan Mahmud II, oil or mixed media on ivory, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 17/221.
Figure 51 - Ring with the portrait of Napoleon, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 2/3699.
Figure 52 - Printed portrait of Selim III, Konstantin Kapıdağlı, 1793, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. A. 3689.
Figure 53 - A tripod designed with Napoleon Bonaparte’s portrait, Harem Section, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum.
Figure 54 - Plate bearing the portrait of Sultan Mahmud II, Garabet Atamyan, 1896,
xiii
Topkapı Palace Museum , inv. no. 34/418.
Figure 55 - Teacup bearing the portrait of Murad IV, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv.no 34/1615.
Figure 56 - Pocket Watch, French, 18th c., private collection.
Figure 57 - Pocket Watch, Switzerland, 19 th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/184.
Figure 58 - Pocket Watch, Auguste Courvoisier, 19 th century, private collection.
Figure 59 - Edward Prior pocket watch with the portrait of Abdülmecid 19th century,
England, Mehmet Bozkurt Collection.
Figure 60 - Portrait of Sultan Abdülmecid, oin on canvas, ca. 1850, Jean Portet,
Topkapı Palace Museum, 17/215.
Figure 61 - Engraving of Sultan Abdülmecid portrait, ca. 1850, Jean Portet, Topkapı Palace Museum, A.3719.
Figure 62 - Pocket watch with the portrait of Abdülaziz, Switzerland, 2nd half of
19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, inv.no. 53/241.
Figure 63 - Pocket watch with the portrait of Wilhelm II, signed by A. Lange and Sohne Glashutte, Germany, 1889, Topkapı Palace Museum inv. no. 53/190.
Figure 64 - Table clock, Austria, 1720s, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/194.
Figure 65 - Wall clock, Ottoman Topkapı Palace Museum inv. no. 53/171.
Figure 66 - Wall clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/85.
Figure 67 - Wall clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/86.
Figure 68 - Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/221.
Figure 69 - Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no 53/54.
Figure 70 - Wall clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum inv. no. 53/235.
Figure 71 - Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum inv. no. 53/233.
Figure 72 - Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum inv. no. 53/239.
Figure 73 - Skeleton Table Clock, Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi, 1861, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum, inv. no. 47/221.
xiv
Figure 74 - Skeleton Table clock, Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi, 19th c., Topkapı Palace
Museum, inv. no. 53/52.
Figure 75 - Dagger with a Watch Set, Topkapı Palace Museum.
Figure 76 - Detail from th Privacy Chamber of Ahmed III, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum.
Figure 77 - Detail from the Bereketzade Fountain, 18th c., Istanbul.
Figure 78 - Detail of the dagger gifted from Mahmud I to Nadir Shah, 1747,Topkapı
Palace Museum.
Figure 79 - Back side of the dagger sent to Nadir Shah, 1747, Topkapı Palace Museum.
Figure 80 - Dagger curved watered steel dagger (khanjar) and sheath, the blade
chiseled and inlaid with gold, with a pale green jade hilt pique with gold floral decoration, the sheath lacquered wooden, Iran, the dagger 17th c., the sheath 19th century, Victoria&Albert Museum.
Figure 81 - Dagger with jewel-encrusted handle and enamelled sheath, Iran, late 18th century, Victoria&Albert Museum.
1
INTRODUCTION
The interest in Ottoman cultural history has notably increased in recent decades whereas previously it had been the least studied aspect of Ottoman history, as Dana Sajdi asserts. The interest in the economic and political history of the Ottoman Empire has gradually been replaced with cultural history, particularly with publications attributed as stirring products for cultural history such as Suraiya Faroqhi’s Subjects of the Sultan: Culture and Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire and Ariel Salzmann’s The Age of Tulips (Sajdi 2007, 28). These recent publications have generated a transformation in the research interest of scholars towards cultural and social history of Ottoman history rather than working merely on Ottoman political, military and economic history. Many scholars discuss the reason for this increase; even an inverse relationship has been established between the rise of cultural studies and the fall of anti-decline scholarship, as Sajdi also claims.
Particularly the 18th century is considered a debatable period in Ottoman history because of changes in the balance of power between Europe and the Ottoman Empire. Primary sources found in archives give preliminary data about the diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Europeans, especially with regard to ambassador visits. There exists comprehensive research about the visits of ambassadors between the Ottoman Empire and Europe since they were eye-witness intermediaries in diplomacy. For instance, Faik Unat Reşit’s book (1968) was the first source describing the visits and journeys of Ottoman envoys from the 15th to 19th centuries. Another example is the one recently published by Hüner Tuncer (2010) referring to short descriptions of Ottoman travel accounts beginning with the
2
establishment of embassies. There are even publications of travelers and diplomats, as in the example of the travelogue of Yirmisekiz Mehmed Çelebi Efendi (1970), who was sent to France as an envoy by the Ottoman sultan. The book is a primary source describing his observations throughout his journey to Paris in 1720. Similarly, the travelogue of Ahmed Resmi Efendi, who was sent to Vienna in 1757 and Berlin in 1763 as an Ottoman envoy, sheds light on diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire with Austria and Prussia. On the other hand, there are publications giving information about the encounter of the Ottoman Empire with different parts of Europe in the 18th century in the light of primary sources. For instance, Fatma Müge Göçek’s work (1987) concentrates on the travel account of Yirmisekiz Mehmed Çelebi in order to understand the process by which the West influenced the Ottoman Empire throughout the 18th century. Another example is Virginia Aksan’s book (1997) focusing on the diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire with Europe in the light of the Ahmed Resmi Efendi’s travelogue. She mainly refers to the travel account of Ahmed Resmi Efendi, but also grounds her work in further archival sources about her topic.
Apart from travelogues of envoys as evidence of diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and Europe, art objects provide visual sources as another significant indicator of these relations. The objects, preserved in various museums, are visual representatives signifying the cultural encounter between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Since this thesis focuses on the 18th and 19th centuries, the objects exhibited in the Imperial Treasury (Hazine-i Hümayun) of the Topkapı Palace Museum and the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum play a primary role as visual documents that have survived until today.
3
One of the significant aspects of foreign affairs is gift-exchange, which is identified as a process of gift-gifting in reception ceremonies. Gift-exchange was not unique to diplomatic relations. Its occurrence can also be seen in the Ottoman court itself, between the sultan and his servants. A few research studies about gift-gifting in the Ottoman court itself have been published in recent decades. These are more inclined to examine gift-gifting in the Ottoman court itself rather than focusing on diplomatic gift-exchange. For instance, there exists a book entitled Hediye Kitabı (The Gift Book) that is divided into sections examining the Ottoman gifting system: the gifting system in law, memoirs on gifts, gifts in Turkish literature, customs and traditions in gifting, and so on. Another source is an exhibition catalogue (2011) which touches upon gift-exchange in a limited way because it mainly investigates the gift-exchange in Medieval Islam and Byzantium, Fatimid gifts, gift-exchange between Iran, Central Asia and China under the Ming Dynasty, imperial gifts at the court of India and gift-exchange between the Russian court and its Islamic counterparts from the 17th to the 19th centuries. Other than these works, Hedda Reindl-Kiel’s book chapter (2005b) is a useful study that explains diplomatic gift-exchange of the Ottoman Empire with the West, the Ottoman court’s perception of the gifting system and the influence of gift-exchange on Ottoman diplomacy and economy. Another article by Frédérich Hitzel (2010) similarly talks about gift-gifting in the 16th and 17th century Ottoman Empire and discusses the types of gifts between Europe and the Ottoman Empire. He also mentions the evolutionary meaning of the gift in the Ottoman court. Furthermore, there are several other book chapters and articles about diplomatic gift-exchange focusing on a particular time period or the sultan himself regarding the content of publications. For instance, in Animals and People in the Ottoman Empire, edited by Suraiya Faroqhi, a book chapter by Hedda
4
Reindl-Kiel (2005a) discusses animals as gifts to the Ottoman court. Additionally, John Whitehead’s article (2011) specifically examines the exchange of gifts during the embassy of Mehmed Said Efendi to France in 1741-42. Abdullah Güllüoğlu’s forthcoming article partially mentions gifts sent between the Ottoman Empire and Prussia during the visit of Ahmed Resmi Efendi to Berlin. However, so far no comprehensive publication has concerned diplomatic gift-exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe in the 18th century and 19th centuries.
I have observed that gifts are indicators of the cultural exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe in terms of art and culture. A noteworthy book by Marcel Mauss (1966) and James Carrier’s article (1991) Gifts, Commodities and Social Relations: A Maussian View of Exchange, study the role of gifts in the establishment of social and cultural relations in archaic societies. As I will discuss below, they illustrate the fact that objects given as gifts contribute to the search for gift-gifting in a general way in order to adapt it into the context of gift-gifting in Ottoman diplomacy. When I researched gifts exchanged between Europe and the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century, I found several objects added to the list of Kings to be sent to the Ottoman sultan which were never sent until the era of Westernization. One of the most outstanding objects sent to the Sultan were clocks, particularly after the technological developments in Europe. Therefore, I have principally aimed to focus on the clocks exchanged between Europe and the Ottoman Empire as representative of the icons of the cultural encounter between them.
Clock collections in the Topkapı Palace Museum and the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum exhibit both Ottoman and European-made clocks. The exhibition catalogue of these collections and the first clock collection catalogue of the Topkapı Palace Museum, prepared by Wolfgang Meyer, are my primary sources to give background
5
information about clocks and the perception of time in the Ottoman Empire. Other than these resources, the book of Kemal Özdemir (1993) examines the history of clocks in the Ottoman Empire, and a book chapter of 1001 Inventions: Muslim Heritage in Our World (2006) mentions the evolutionary progress of clocks in a chronological order all over the world; the book written by Otto Kurz (2005) introduces the history of clocks within the borders of the Ottoman Empire and refers to clocks as the object of diplomatic relations. However, there appears not to be any other study that focuses specifically on clocks as a gift of the Europeans to the Ottoman Empire, which is one of the reasons that makes this thesis unique compared with the existing studies. Another reason making this study relevant is that all clocks are specifically described and compared not only to their contemporaries, but to other artworks of its period in terms of its artistic significance.
The historiographical method I practice throughout my thesis is what Clifford Geertz calls, thick description. He explains thick description as a method that focuses on a single object, event or a character in order to understand political, social and economic conditions of the era in a general context. As exemplified in The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a 16th Century Miller, Carlo Ginzburg signifes a character, Menocchio, to display how an Italian character responds to the confusing political and religious conditions of 16th century Italy. By focusing on the attitude of a character, Ginzburg creates a detailed work with the purpose of understanding the cultural and political context of the time. As with literature, it is also possible to apply the same methodology to the history of art. For instance, in the painting of the French artist Eugéne Delaroix ‘‘Liberty Leading to the People,’’ Marianne - the woman holding the flag, the tri-color flag, the half-nude man lying on the ground, the woman kneeling down in front of Marianne, the aristocratic man on the left and the
6
child on the right, are all symbolically and consciously representatives of the French Revolution. This viewpoint presents the intermingling of art with political conditions of the era. As exemplified above, whether in literature or in art, a single human figure, a painting or an object, provides a catalyst for the analysis of a certain time period or place. In the light of these examples, I have attempted to make a microanalysis of gifts, particularly clocks, in order to examine the overall picture of the 18th and 19th century Ottoman Empire. This methodology is beneficial to answer my research questions: can we think of an artwork simply as object in the perspective of diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire? What is the significance of studying gift-exchange in Ottoman political, social, economic and cultural dimensions and what consequences gifts, specifically clocks, have precipitated in terms of Ottoman art?
Accordingly, this thesis is divided into three chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the meaning of ‘‘gift’’ in the Maussian model and in the Ottoman context as well as the process of diplomatic gift-exchange and the gifts sent between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. The search for gifts sent between these two powers pave the way for an analytical assessment, based on the specific interest and goals of countries that guided their choice of objects sent as diplomatic gifts. Chapter 2 discusses the European clocks produced particularly for the Ottoman Empire that were either sent as a diplomatic gift or sold in the Ottoman market. It examines how European clocks were spread throughout the Ottoman Empire although they were simply sent to the Ottoman court as diplomatic gifts and in later decades transformed into objects of commerce as a significant part of the Turkish Market. Furthermore, it offers an artistic analysis of European clocks made for the Ottomans in terms of their decoration classified as those painted with landscape, portrait, floral and geometric
7
decoration compared with other types of art objects of the time in order to draw broader conclusions about the exchange of art and culture between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Last but not least, Chapter 3 focuses on clock production on the Ottoman market by giving examples from Ottoman-made clocks in order to compare them with the European-made clocks.
The thesis is mainly focused on clocks exhibited in the clock sections of the Topkapı Palace Museum and partially in the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum. The reason for this main focus on clocks in the Topkapı Palace Museum is its character as the point of reception and place of storage for the gifts presented to the Ottoman sultan at diplomatic receptions, since the palace functioned not only as a royal residence of the ruler, but also the administrative center of the empire. Also, since later 19th century-gifts, including clocks, sent to the Dolmabahçe and Yıldız Palace Museums were partially transferred and preserved in the Topkapı Palace during the reign of Mehmed V (1909 – 1918) (Ortaylı 2011, 167), this thesis does not include clocks previously preserved in the Yıldız Palace Museum. Although there are other clocks preserved in the Topkapı Palace Museum, I was not able to access the clocks in the museum archive since the Museum Directorate does not make them all available for study. However, the clocks mentioned throughout the thesis are representative sample supporting the main idea about the styles of European clocks made for the Ottomans and the ones made by the Ottomans and each type of clock is catalogued in the appendix. For instance, common characteristics of Ottoman and European-made clocks as well as differences among them - such as where the signature of clock-makers were located and what sort of decorations were applied - are inferred from the clocks exemplified through the chapters. For example, the clocks indicate that while Ottoman-made clocks include an inscription indicating the
8
name of clock-maker and the year it was made on its front face, the same information is located on a hidden part of European-made clocks.
This thesis is multi-dimensional in terms of its content which implicitly leads to make various inferences regarding not only the artistic appearance of clocks, but also their socio-political duties as in the status of objects of diplomatic gift-exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. In general, the thesis illustrates that there are many different types of clocks,1 and that their dynamics are not the same in terms of their decoration. Clocks specifically made to address different purposes, such as the clocks made by the Ottomans and Europeans for themselves and the ones made by the Europeans for the Ottomans, display how the artistic appearance of clocks are diversified regarding the aim of their manufacturing. The amount of clocks given to the Ottomans as gifts changed parallel to the political affinity of the Ottoman Empire with the country in the 18th and 19th centuries. For instance, French and English clocks form the majority of the clock collections of Turkish museums and private collections; therefore, this thesis focuses on French and English clocks made for the Ottomans, compared with the clocks sent to the Ottoman Empire from any other country as gift.
The museum’s clocks collection took its final form bringing them all together under a single roof between 1978-1979 thanks to the donations and gatherings from the Treasury, Harem, Silver Section, the Library of Ahmed III of the Topkapı Palace as well as other national museums such as the Ethnographical Museum of Ankara, the Istanbul Museum of Turkish and Islamic Arts, the Istanbul Archaeology Museums and the Vakıflar Directorate (Çakmut 2009, 33). The transfer of clocks from other museums led to the largest selection of clocks – with a total of 350 – in
1 All types of clocks mentioned throughout the thesis are listed in Appendices.
9
the Topkapı Palace Museum. 215 of them have been displayed in the third courtyard of the palace and the rest have been preserved in the museum storage since there is not enough space to exhibit all of them (Çığ 1978, 2). Although the number of clocks exhibited in the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum is not as great as in the Topkapı Palace Museum, it is the second largest collection with a total of 284 clocks. 193 of them having been displayed in a room specifically preserved for the exhibition of these clocks (Çığ 1978, 2). Parallel to the construction of the Dolmabahçe Palace in the 19th century, the museum’s clock collection is comprised mostly of clocks brought to the Ottoman Empire from Europe from the 19th century onwards. There have also been clocks in other Ottoman palaces, kiosks, pavilions – such as Beylerbeyi Palace, Yıldız Palace, Ihlamur Kiosk, Küçüksu Kiosk and so on – mosques, military museums, navy museums, public buildings and private collections. Yet, they have been merely exhibited as a part of palace or kiosk decoration, or displayed in military or naval museums to exemplify the mechanical working system of the clocks depending on the context of the museum.
Both in museum and private collections, it is possible to view many types of Ottoman and European-made clocks, from the 16th to the early 20th centuries. However, there are few clocks from the 15th and 16th centuries since they did not survive until our day, which consequently has led museums to display clocks dating mostly from the 18th to 20th centuries. These collections include long-case clocks, wall clocks, table clocks, bracket clocks, travel or carriage clocks, pocket watches, astronomical clocks and form-shaped clocks.2 While some of them were produced in Ottoman workshops, some were acquired as diplomatic gifts of the Europeans and through the purchase of the Ottoman court. Except for some special clocks sent to the
2 See Appendices for the explanations of clock types.
10
sultans as diplomatic gifts, it is not easy to distinguish whether the clocks were gifted or purchased due to the lack of information found in archival records.
As will be introduced in the first chapter, the Ottoman Empire established its primary diplomatic relations with France and England, compared with other European countries such as Switzerland, Austria, Germany and Russia. This is reflected also by the predominance of English and French-made clocks exhibited in museum clock collections. According to the quantitative data, there are 73 English clocks, 68 French clocks, 17 Swiss clocks, 6 Austrian clocks and 1 Russian clock, preserved in the Topkapı Palace Museum (Çığ 1978, 4).
As can be inferred from the above-mentioned, clocks are a broad topic to study. Therefore, this research aims to focus merely on the artistic appearance of clocks and excludes the technical and mechanical aspects. Additionally, clock towers introduced into the Ottoman architecture in the 19th century and built under the influence of European architecture are not included in this thesis. The role of clock towers is extremely significant with the introduction of European-style architecture to the Ottoman Empire, but they require separate and comprehensive work by Ottoman architectural historians.3 Secondly, the evolutionary progress of clocks throughout history as one of the expected topics of this thesis is not included since it is a topic most commonly studied topics by historians. On the contrary, this research will enrich the following studies that examine clocks as diplomatic gifts and contribute to understanding the intermediary role of objects, particularly clocks, as diplomatic gift-exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Even though the role of clocks is considered as a displaying time throughout history, the thesis proves the fact that
3 See Klaus Kreiser, ‘‘Public Monuments in Turkey and Egypt, 1840-1916,’’ Muqarnas 14 (1997), 103-117.
11
they are equally representative of artistic diversity between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Therefore, the aim of this study is mainly to examine clocks as European gifts of the Ottoman Empire in the 18th and 19th centuries as an agent of Ottoman cultural and artistic exchange with Europe and their extension as the objects of the Ottoman market.
12
CHAPTER I
DIPLOMATIC GIFT-EXCHANGE
BETWEEN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND EUROPE
1.1. The Meaning of ‘‘Gift’’ in the Maussian Model
The common usage of the term gift is an object voluntarily and consciously given to somebody without expecting any reciprocity. Rather than its physical value, its spiritual meaning is more significant; the gift functions as an instrumental object that is a reminder of the gift-giver with the objective of bringing happiness to the receiver. According to the classical anthropological approach, a gift relationship is reciprocal, meaning that a gift is given willingly with the expectation that the receiver will respond in kind (Carrier 1991, 122). However, the French sociologist Marcel Mauss, who analyzes gifting system of archaic societies in his book titled The Gift, defines a gift as a utilitarian, superfluous object and service, transacted as a part of social relations (Carrier 1991, 122). This means that a gift is not only simply an object given to somebody, but also a service functionally important in the establishment of social relations among individuals.
In contrast to the earlier academic view, Mauss describes gift-giving as an obligatory and inalienable system. He explains that the gift includes, ‘‘the obligation
13
to repay the gift received… the obligation to give presents and the obligation to receive them’’ (Carrier 1991, 123). Secondly, the gift is an inalienable object because, symbolically, ‘‘to give something is to give a part of oneself’’ (Carrier 1991, 126). That is, since the objects bear the identity of the giver and of the relationship between the giver and the recipient, it is an inalienable object for the receiver. Lastly, a gift, in the definition of Mauss, is ‘‘a system of reciprocity where the giver and receiver are engaged’’ (Mauss 1966, xi), which implies that a gift is a linkage between individuals to establish a mutual relationship.
In addition to the role of a gift on an individual basis, gifts play a social, cultural and economic role within the context of diplomatic relations. Even though it may appear that there is one giver and one receiver in diplomatic gift-exchange, both the giver and the receiver are representatives of a certain culture which is one of the characteristics of reciprocal relations within the tradition of gift-giving. Rather than being representative of an individual action, according to Hedda Reindl-Kiel, Mauss places systems of exchange within an economic framework because the receiver is obliged to return the gift to the giver as a ‘‘social presentation’’ (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 113).
1.2. The Meaning of ‘‘Gift’’ in the Ottoman context
The Arabic word hediyya (هدية ), on hediye (gift) in modern Turkish, derives from the word hidayet (hüda, hedy). In literary texts tuhfe, in’am, caize, belek, ihsan, lutf, kerem, cud, ata, himmet, baha, sure, bahşiş, dest-i cud, himmet-i bala and lutf u ihsan are some of the words commonly used in place of hediye (Ayverdi 2005, 1235). During the language reform, in order to purify Turkish from words that had
14
originated in foreign languages, new words were suggested instead of hediye. After the decision of the Türk Dili Tetkik Cemiyeti (Turkish Language Investigation Union) for the purification of the language in 1934, Tarama Dergisi presented seventy-seven different words to replace the word hediye, but none of these other words were able to account for it (Gürsoy Naksali 2007, 239).4
The meaning of hediye was also changeable, depending on the established political, economic and social relationship of the Ottoman Empire with other societies. According to the theory of Pierre Bourdieu, a gift has a functional role to display the honor of the gift-giver towards the receiver as a ‘‘symbolic capital’’ (Reindl-Kiel 2005 114). By considering the administrative system of the Ottomans, based on hierarchy, the gift was a tool of honor as a symbolic capital. This suggests that gifts, in addition to their symbolic value, were also a form of etiquette that increased the prestige of the Ottomans. For instance, in 1481 when an embassy delegation from the Indian Bahmani ruler Shams al-Din Muhammad Shah was arrested in Jeddah by the local governor, the gifts, which also included the diamond-studded dagger for the Ottoman ruler, were confiscated by the governor. According to contemporary Ottoman chronicles, the confiscation sparked the outbreak of the Ottoman-Mamluk War between 1485 and 1491 (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 115). Whether or not it was a reason for the outbreak of the war, according to Reindl-Kiel, this suggests the sensitive attitude of the Ottomans towards diplomatic gifts.
Secondly, as Bertrandon de la Broquière (1892, 190, cited in Reindl-Kiel 2005, 115) states, the Ottomans perceived gifts as conspicuous consumption which means that the Ottomans evaluated gifts based on their value more than their spiritual value.
4The most commonly attributed words for hediye is armağan, andıç, başlık, kümet and peşkeş.
15
However, Reindl-Kiel claims that apparently in the seventeenth century the tradition of gift-giving changed. The gifts of the sultan were sent to the palace the day before the audience and were put on display on benches along the left portico in the second court (Necipoğlu 1991, 66). After they were displayed, they were put into the imperial treasury, which led to the loss of the gift’s real value; instead, it just became an object for consumption. An example suggesting gifts as conspicuous consumption is from the travelogue of Salomon Schweigger, who accompanied the German embassy to the Porte in 1578-81 as an official Protestant chaplain.
‘‘Diplomatic gifts, mainly gilded clocks, watches, and silver vessels, were not appreciated by the Ottomans. Some of them were converted into money or coin and some of them were sold off. Even beautiful clocks brought to the Sultan over many years are hoarded by him in a big chamber where they are ruined by rust (Schweigger 1964, 61).’’
By considering Schweigger’s words, Reindl-Kiel asserts that in the Ottoman Empire a gift largely lost its symbolic value after it was left into treasury and consequently gained a real value as conspicuous consumption. In a certain sense I agree with the idea that the gifts, after entering the imperial treasury of the Ottoman Empire, gradually gained a casual meaning for the Ottomans, which might also be considered parallel to the number of gifts sent from different parts of the world. Since the Ottomans had political and economic supremacy, particularly in the 16th century, sending gift to the Ottomans was significant for foreigners to acquaint the Ottomans with their own products. Drawing the Ottomans’ attention to their products would positively provide economic opportunities for foreigners by establishing commercial relations which consequently brought about an increase in the amount of gifts sent to the Ottomans along with the loss of their uniqueness. Furthermore, I think that
16
although gifts to some extent lost their symbolic value, they were still significant in Ottoman culture because each was a representative of the aesthetic and artistic identity of a culture. As above-mentioned, Schweigger also states in his travel account: ‘‘… many have been sold off, although he (the sultan) sometimes has them changed around, with a different one being placed in his apartment…’’ (Schweigger 1964, 61 cited in Reindl-Kiel 2005, 113). Even though it is assumed that the sultan did not care about what gifts were sent to him, he exhibited these gifts in his palace, periodically changing their locations. It is also possible that there was a lack of space to exhibit all the gifts sent to him. Since the Europeans were well-aware of the sultans’ delight in receiving gifts, an enormous number of gifts were sent to the sultan. This might have merely enabled him to exhibit some of the gifts alternately or to display them by replacing one with a newcomer. Another possibility is that the sultan might have changed the gift display with a different one depending on the fashion of the time. Stylistic and artistic changes in Europe also influenced the types of gifts sent to the Ottoman sultans, so those new ones could possibly have taken the sultan’s attention, which would have led him to change their display with more fashionable ones. As Hedda Reindl-Kiel claimed, gift-exchange was a special form of conspicuous consumption for the Ottomans, but additionally the attitude of the Ottomans could also have been to display the fashion and trends of the time in the Seraglio.
Sent and received gifts were also symbolic of honor, etiquette and power, so the quality of gifted materials was important to show the power of the ruler. Thus, many objects ornamented with precious materials were sent and received by the Ottoman sultans, which also led objects to be included as secondary currency because of their
17
value. Generally, some of the favorable objects were jeweled weapons, clocks, mirrors, lamp-holders, porcelains, cloths, animals, horse equipment, religious books and manuscripts. All these objects were decorated with precious stones, especially gold, diamond and ruby. Even daily-used objects such as the kettle, bowl, jar and tray were ornamented with these precious materials. In addition to these materials, embroidered handkerchiefs, napkins, towels, wrappers, barber’s aprons, but also underwear, caftans and fabrics of all kinds and prices were considered as fashionable gifts in all circles of society (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 118).
1.3. Gift-Exchange between the Ottoman Empire and Europe
There is a lack of information about the availability of Ottoman artworks exhibited in foreign museums. Some scholars assert that these artworks have been exhibited in foreign museums because artworks were smuggled out of Turkey. To a certain extent, this may be possible to claim because, as Mehmed Önder states, tile sales under the arches of the Piyale Paşa Mosque in Istanbul to France, Germany, Austria and Portugal as well as the consignment of a tiled mihrab and wooden window wings to Berlin provide examples that illustrate the smuggling of Turkish cultural heritage (Önder 1989, 5).
Another possible reason for the exhibition of Ottoman artifacts in foreign museums is based on the system of gift-giving in foreign affairs. Gift-giving was a custom in the Ottoman court, particularly for special events such as festivals, circumcisions, wedding ceremonies and the celebration of the New Year. In addition to the gifts given in the Ottoman court itself, gift-giving was also an unavoidable component of foreign affairs. During the reception ceremony of ambassadors, gifts were presented to the Ottoman sultan; similarly, the sultan sent gifts to the rulers of
18
other civilizations. Therefore, since many gifts sent from the Ottoman Empire entered the treasury of those countries as a consequence of gift-giving in diplomacy, it is not surprising to see Ottoman artworks exhibited in foreign museums, as also happens, nowadays, in the reverse in Turkey. For instance, the Imperial Treasury section of the Topkapı Palace Museum includes not only precious objects produced in the Ottoman workshops for the sultan, but also gifts sent to the Ottoman sultan and court officials from different parts of the world. Hence, the artworks exhibited in the Topkapı museum provide evidence of the intense diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire.
The first spark for the emergence of the gift-giving tradition in diplomacy began with the establishment of foreign embassies. From the 15th century onwards, many foreign ambassadors from Europe were received in the Ottoman court. During an ambassador’s visit, gift-giving was an obligatory process of the reception ceremony. For example, in the painting illustrating the reception of the Swedish ambassador Ulric Celsing by the grand vizier in his mansion, gifts presented to the grand vizier are depicted on the right bottom of the painting (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Swedish Ambassador Ulric Celsing received by the Ottoman grand vizier, Celsing Collection, Biby Mansion, Sweden, 18th c.
19
Furthermore, the Ottoman gifts sent by the sultan are also rendered in French paintings. The engraving depicting the reception of the Ottoman ambassador Mehmed Said Efendi by the French King Louis XV in Versailles illustrates the gifts sent by the Ottoman sultan (Figure 2).
Figure 2 The Reception of the Ottoman Ambassador Mehmet Said Efendi by the French King Louis XV in Versailles, 18th c.
These are only a couple of examples that illustrate the process of gift-giving in the reception ceremony, but other than Sweden and France, ambassadors from England, Austria, Holland, Poland, Italy and Russia were also among the cultures with which the Ottoman Empire had diplomatic gift-exchange parallel to the intensifying diplomatic relations.
Pointedly, France, in comparison with other countries, played a primary role in the intensification of diplomatic gift-exchange as a result of the establishment of close diplomatic relations with the Ottoman Empire. This is because in the 18th century, Europe was an the age of transformation thanks to political and economic growth, as well as scientific developments, but France had the leading role in this transformation because of its new forms of entertainment, new style of living,
20
technical and scientific innovations. This led the Ottomans to be interested in French art, architecture and entertainment, as the Ottoman ambassador was able to observe during his visit to Paris (Göçek 1987, 25).
The first Ottoman ambassador to visit the French King in his Palace at Versailles was Yirmisekiz Çelebi Mehmed Efendi between the years 1720 and 1721. As a procedure of the visit, both the French King and the Ottoman ambassador mutually presented gifts to each other. The French King’s gifts to the Ottoman ambassador were mostly based on technological and scientific developments because the French wished to make diplomatic gifts reflecting scientific innovations. For instance, a damaskin gun of gold, pairs of gold pistols, a diamond-studded belt for a saber, pieces of velvet with gold flowers, Savonnerie carpets, large mirrors by Colet, commodes by Cresson, bureaus, a bookcase furnished with glass and a chest, clocks, watches, snuff boxes and some pieces of jewelry were given by the French King Louis XV (Göçek 1987, 142-143).5
After about twenty years, the son of Yirmisekiz Çelebi Mehmed Efendi, Mehmed Said Efendi, was sent to Paris as an envoy of Mahmud I in January of 1742 in order to make an alliance with the French to persuade the Russians to honor the stipulations of the treaty of Belgrade (Whitehead 2009, 149). After the reception ceremony of Mehmed Said Efendi at Versailles, he went to a room in the apartment of Louis XV where the gifts brought to the King were laid out (Whitehead 2009, 156). The gifts presented to the French King on behalf of the Ottoman sultan were mostly military equipment, such as armor, saddles, straps, stirrups, head stalls, sabers, cushions, pistols, cartridge pouches, powder flasks, quivers, guns, daggers,
5 See Table I.
21
and Turkish knives (Göçek 1987, 143-144). However, they were not simple and invaluable materials as might be assumed. Each one was highly studded with precious stones such as diamond, gold, ivory, crystal and pearl which made them more flamboyant and splendid. As a response to the Ottoman Sultan’s gifts, the French King also sent similar types of gifts to the sultan that were given during the reception of the Ottoman ambassador Yirmisekiz Çelebi Mehmed Efendi. The content of the gifts were again based on French scientific and technological developments. For instance, silver chandeliers, a round table, a crystal basin and pitcher, mirrors, Savonnerie carpets, an organ, furniture, telescope, a microscope by M. Lebas, various surgery equipment, tools for clock-making, mathematics and gun-smithing, candleholders, and Lyon silk and cushions were among some of the gifts sent to the sultan (Whitehead 2009, 159-166; Göçek 1987, 144).
As is explained by the affiliation with the French, another example that illustrates the concern of diplomatic gift-exchange is the relationship of the Ottoman Empire with Poland. Although Poland was not allied with the Ottomans until the 18th century, it was closer to establishing good relations with the Ottomans in the 19th century. This could have been to regain the independence of the Poles under the sponsorship of the Ottomans after their partitioning of the Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth in the 18th century and their connection to Austria, Russia and Prussia. This partitioning did not prevent the Poles’ diplomatic relations with the Ottomans. The Ottomans invited the Polish ambassador to the Ottoman courts, as they did for all European ambassadors (Dopierata 1999, 81).
In 1768, the Polish King Karl Stanislaw Leszczynski’s political migration movements and the members of the Bar Confederation also led many people from
22
different occupational groups to migrate to Ottoman cities. For instance, doctors, soldiers, telegraphers, workers, artists and farmers settled in the empire as well as those who spoke Turkish, like the landowner from the east of Poland, Krzysztof Dzierzek, and those who were particularly sent for the diplomatic, commercial and other reasons (Dopierata 1999, 81). This appears to have been a turning point for the Poles in their acquaintance with Ottoman culture. Tadeusz Madja remarks that the Poles were influenced by Ottoman culture and art, especially in terms of textile art, which can be understood from Polish goods that were made in Turkish style. Turkish-themed engravings and drawings made by Polish artists and the depiction of Adam Potocki by Polish artist Franciszek Tepa, wearing an Ottoman costume, provide some of the striking examples of Polish interest and curiosity towards Ottoman culture (Figure 3).
Figure 3 Portrait of Adam Potocki with Turkish costume, signed by Franciszek Tepa, Jerusalem, 1853, 11.2x8.2 cm, Krakow National Museum, inv. no. III-r.a. 5.832.
Furthermore, the fact that some Polish artisans imitated the Turkish style of art for traditional clothes, weapons, tents, carpets, household utensils and horse equipment, in addition to the adaption of some Turkish words to the Polish language, indicate how Ottoman art and culture was embraced by the Poles (Toros 1983, 10).6 In the 19th century, Polish scholars who visited the Ottoman Empire to investigate the remains of Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire were interested in the Turkish
6 Fincan, kilim, tütün and boncuk are the Turkish words found in the Polish language.
23
costume and tradition alongside their research area. One of them was the engraver Edward Raczynski who depicted his observations through his travel to the Ottoman Empire in 1821 (Majda 1999, 48).
All these facts led to the exhibition of a large number of Ottoman artworks in today’s Polish museums. This situation is also parallel to the Poles’ friendly political, commercial and cultural relations with the Ottoman Empire, with the exception of the reign of King Jan Sobieski when there was conflict between the two countries. Since the Poles had good relations with the Ottomans and were interested in Ottoman artworks from the 15th century onwards, they purchased many Ottoman artworks for the decoration of court members’ and nobles’ mansions. Secondly, some of the artworks in the Polish museums were obtained because of conflicts between them during the 17th century. Weapons, harnesses, textiles, carpets, particularly tents, consist of the majority of the booty acquired by the Poles during battles with the Ottomans (Piwocka 1999, 53).7 Thirdly, the intense commercial relations between the Poles and the Ottomans is evidenced by the import of carpets, rugs, tents, weapons, harnesses, Iznik ceramics, shoes, hardware and jewelry from the Ottomans due to their desire for Ottoman artworks. Finally, the king’s commissions of goods from other countries constituted another way in which Ottoman goods entered Poland. For example, Karl Zygmunt commissioned Ottoman jewelry, weapons and velvets for the decoration of the Wavel Chateau. Similarly, some high-ranking Polish individuals ordered precious items from Istanbul, such as Lviv’s archbishop Jan Zamoyski, who in 1663 commissioned twenty carpets ornamented with the coat of arms of the Jelita dynasty for the Lviv Cathedral (Majda 1999, 49).
7 There are 22 Turkish tents in Poland, but this is not the overall number of the Turkish tents that exist throughout all European counties.
24
The Polish gifts sent to the sultan comprised of many different types: sables, basins, kettles, amber clocks, chest clocks and standing clocks, lamp-holders, mirrors, an ebony trunk inlaid with silver containing cups of different colors, sheath for bows, a chess board, a golden chest pen and ink-case, good-quality woolen cloth, heavy velvet, heavy satin, and round and oval plates of various sizes (Anafarta 1979).8 Other than these, the majority of Polish gifts included objects made of porcelain that were commonly used in daily life. For instance, gifts sent by Augustus III, King of Poland, to Sultan Osman III and presented by his envoy, the Minister of Lithuania Jan Mniszech in May of 1756 contained a porcelain clock, three porcelain kettles, twelve porcelain cups, a porcelain bowl, two porcelain medicine boxes and a porcelain dish (TSM, D. 2400/8 Y.1b). However, the only remaining porcelain dinner set gifted by the Poles, as the earliest porcelain dinner set within European porcelains, is exhibited in the European section of the Topkapı Palace Museum with the following Arabic inscription on it (TSM, D. 3360). It says ‘‘This gift is presented as a token of friendly and sincere esteem to the High Ottoman Sultan by the King of Poland from Warsaw.’’9
Figure 4 Abdülhamid I’s porcelain wares, Warsaw,
18th c. Topkapı Palace Museum, inv no. TSM 21/1, 26/788, 16/88, 26/789, 16/89, 16/90, 26/811, 26/793.
8 See Table III.
9 ‘‘Âl-i Osman Padişahına Leh Kralı Kemal-i muhabbet sıdk-u hulus izharı için işbu ihda ve irsa eder. Bu Makam-ı Varşova’’
25
It was a gift brought back to Numan Bey from the King of Poland to Sultan Abdülhamid I from Poland, where Numan Bey had been sent as an envoy in June of 1778 (Anafarta 1979). The archival record indicates that 160 pieces of various porcelain ware made in the King’s factory in Warsaw and then were sent to Sultan Abdülhamid I by the King of Poland Stanislaw August Poniatowski (1764-1798) via the Ottoman envoy Numan Bey. They included 73 round and oval plates of various sizes, 16 round and oval lattice-covered plates, 16 fruit trays, 12 saltshakers, 35 oval and round plates and 8 jars (TSM, D. 3360 - D. 2423/5 Y. 1b). This is the first porcelain dinner set that was suitable for the alafranga food scheme (Figure 4).
These Polish-made porcelain wares, illustrated in the exhibition catalogue Uzak Komşu Yakın Anılar: Türkiye-Polonya İlişkilerinin 600 Yılı (2004, 314) are reminiscent of traditional Japanese decorative art since they are adorned with birds, butterflies, plum blossoms, chrysathins and peonies in a vase gilded with blue, yellow, green, red and gold colors. On the one hand, the decoration of these Polish porcelain wares is made in the style of Japanese decorative art. The Arabic inscription written in sülus style, as stated above, implies that the porcelain wares were especially designed and produced in Warsaw, specifically for the service of the Ottoman Sultan. It implies the Polish King’s manifestation and dedication to the Ottoman Sultan of that period, Abdülmecid I, by giving this friendship message from Warsaw to the Sultan.
In addition to porcelains, there are also jeweled weapons, clocks, mirrors, lamp-holders, cloths, animals, horse equipment, religious books and manuscripts among the gifts that were sent to the Ottoman court. Even objects and textiles of daily use, such as kettles, bowls, jars, trays, embroidered handkerchiefs, napkins, towels,
26
wrappers, barber’s aprons, underwear, caftans and fabrics of all kinds and ornamented with precious materials were gifted to the sultan (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 118). The most outstanding kind of gift sent to the Ottomans consisted of animals. Cattles and birds of prey were among the gifts most commonly sent to the Ottomans. For instance, the 17th century Polish King sent 14 black foxes, hawks, stone-grey falcons and various dog leashes as animal accessories (TSM E. 11976/3) whereas a rabbit was among the gifts of the French King Napoleon to Selim III (Renda 2002, 456). The horse was also a European gift frequently sent to the Ottomans. For instance, the horse gifted by Friedrich II to the Ottoman Sultan is illustrated among the images in the Berlin Costume Album,10 in the image titled Turkish Gift of a Horse (Güllüoğlu 2014). On the other hand, there were also animal gifts sent to the Europeans by the Ottomans. For example, during the peace agreement between the Ottoman Empire and Austria in 1699, in addition to a palanquin, tent, Turkish and Iranian textile, carpets, cotton cloth, caftans, sable furs, napkins and small bags for musk, camels, hinnies, Turkish and Arabian horses, leopards and horse equipment such as saddles and harnesses were gifted by the Ottomans to Austria (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 119-120). In response to the Ottoman gifts, the Austrians sent typical European gifts based on the financial value of 2000 gold ducats: a telescope, gold chain and medallion, woolen textiles, and numerous diamonds and pistols (Reindl-Kiel 2005, 119-120).11
All of the above-mentioned examples display the fact that gift-giving was an unavoidable part of diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and Europe. Gift-giving played a functional role in order to display the rulers’ pleasure, value and
10 The Berlin Costume Album includes paintings of a Polish-German artist, Daniel Nikolaus Chodowiecki, illustrating Ahmed Resmi Efendi and his retinue in a set of eleven ‘‘Turkish Miniatures’’ related directly to the Ottoman delegation and its stay in Berlin between 1763-1764.
11 See Table IV.
27
respect from one to another. Furthermore, since the gifts exchanged had financial value, they were also sold off to make money for the imperial treasury. For instance, when the Ottoman envoy Ahmed Resmi Efendi was sent to Berlin in 1763, he took gifts with him to reciprocate an earlier gift by Friedrich II, such as caparisons, riding accoutrements, silken, woolen, and camelhair fabrics, and the like. (Güllüoğlu 2014, 3).12 It is believed that the king secretly sold some of the gifts given to Friedrich II by Ahmed Resmi Efendi even before the latter Berlin at that time (Güllüoğlu 2014, 7).
On February 1, Privy Councilor Köppen was commissioned to have assessed and to sell, through the agency of effective but discrete people partially in Holland and partially in the Empire or other distant lands and for the best possible return, the items stored at the palace in Berlin which are remaining from the Turkish gifts such as caparisons, riding accoutrements, and also the silken, woolen and camelhair fabrics, making payment to the Bank of Ephraim & Son on behalf of his Majesty, without attracting any attention (Güllüoğlu 2014, 7).
Likewise, Ottoman gifts, which included pistols and guns, were presented to the French King Louis XV and sold off or exchanged with the gifts of Tipu Sultan and the Beg of Tunis by the minister of Finance of France on March 1, 1797 (Whitehead 2009, 157).
Other than these financially valuable, sold or exchanged gifts, artistic products and activities such as music, paintings, and monuments were also among the gifts sent by the Europeans to the Ottoman Empire. For instance, the Mahmudiye March composed by the 18th century Italian composer Giuseppe Donizetti was a gift to
12 The gift list is available in Berlinische privilegirte Zeitung von Staats-und gelerten Sachen.
28
Mahmud II (Renda 2002, 5).13 Similarly, the painting made by Joseph Aved depicted the Ottoman ambassador Mehmed Said Efendi wearing his ceremonial robes with an atlas on his hand was given to Louis XV as a gift and was hung at the chateau de Choisy (Whitehead 2009, 154) (Figure 5).
Figure 5 Said Mehmed Paşa, Joseph Aved, Chateau de Versailles, 18th c. Photo by RMN Frank Raux.
Figure 6 German Fountain, 1898, Sultanahmed Square, Istanbul.
Architectural monuments were also among the gifts given to the Ottoman court. For instance, the gazebo-styled German Fountain, still standing on in the Sultanahmed Square in Istanbul, is one of the gifts of the German Emperor Wilhelm II to Abdülhamid II (Figure 6). It was constructed to commemorate the second anniversary of German Emperor Wilhelm II visit to Istanbul in 1898. Likewise, the German Emperor Wilhelm II gifted the Izmir Clock Tower, built in 1901, to Abdülhamid II in order to commemorate the 25th anniversary of Abdülhamid II's accession to the throne.
13 Günsel Renda, ‘‘Searching for New Media in the Eighteenth Century Ottoman Painting,’’ Art, Women and Scholars: Studies in Ottoman Society and Culture, Istanbul: Simurg, 2002.
29
Until now I have only discussed how gifts were given to the highest-ranking person of the country, as the ruler was the first and foremost person gifted in reception ceremonies. However, this does not mean that he was the only person to whom the gifts were given during the foreign affairs. The ruler of the country who established diplomacy also gave gifts to his retinue. Regardless of the purpose of the ambassadors sent abroad, the retinue of the ruler was always gifted with precious materials (Unat 1968, 26).
Figure 7 Mehmed Çelebi in the French palace while presenting the Sultan’s gifts to the King, 18th c., France.
During the first visit of the Ottoman ambassador Yirmisekiz Çelebi Mehmed Efendi, he took gifts not only for the French King (Figure 7), but also for his retinue such as the Regent and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. However, the status was the fundamental determinant of the value of the gifted objects. That is, the value of gifts given to the King never should equal those for his retinue. For instance, two Arabian horses harnessed with ermine fur, one arch with a quiver together with sixty arrows, one saber encrusted with precious stones, eight pieces of very fine muslin, one ermine fur coat and six bottles of Mecca balm were gifted to the French King by Yirmisekiz Mehmed Çelebi Efendi. However, the gifts brought for the regent and the Minister of Foreign Affairs were fewer than the gifts of the King. While the Regent
30
received one richly harnessed horse, six pieces of brocade from Greece, four pieces of Indian cloth, one ermine coat, four handkerchiefs and six bottles of Mecca balm, the Minister of Foreign Affairs merely received an ermine fur coat (Gökçek 1987, 142-143).14 In other words, either the quality or the quantity of the gift was adjusted with regard to the hierarchical order. As illustrated above, although a horse was given to both the King and his Regent, the horse given to the King was of higher quality than the Arabian horse and more horses were given to the king.
Moreover, the gifts given to the Ottomans by the French King also included precious and luxurious goods. The same hierarchical order that the Ottomans followed in gift-giving was followed for the gifts by the French King to the steward, the master of ceremonies and the physician. Each gift given to the steward, the master of ceremony and the physician, based on the technical developments in France, was not more than a gold clock (Gökçek 1987, 142-143). Similarly, during the visit of Mehmed Said Efendi to Paris, the French king gave gifts to the grand vizier and the ambassador himself and other Ottoman officials, according to their ranks, such as the foreign minister (reis’ül-küttab), the Grand vizier’s home secretary (sadrazam kitabeti) and members of the embassy staff, including the ambassador’s son Meksous Beg, the Grand Maréchal and son-in-law Said Ahmed Aga, the Grand Treasurer (hazinedar), the secretary, Doctor Ulaste, the ‘‘imam,’’ the Stablemaster Hasan Aga (ahıremini), two masters of ceremonies (reis) and the first, second and third Armenian dragomans (tercüman) or interpreters (Whitehead 2009, 159).
The Ottoman dignitaries’ deep interest in diplomatic gifts led the Ottomans to be described by contemporary Western societies as ‘‘greedy’’ and ‘‘avaricious’’ since they also commissioned cheap gifts (Reindl-Kiel 2005b, 113-123). At the same time,
14 See Table II.
31
Faik Reşit Unat states that under all circumstances, the Ottomans were considerate to give valuable and unique gifts in foreign affairs. For instance, the gifts sent to Vienna by the Ottoman ambassador Ibrahim Pasha after the Treaty of Passarowitz in 1718 suggest how much the Ottomans gave weight to diplomatic gift-giving although their financial circumstances were strained at the time (Unat 1968, 27). There was a ‘‘gifting-rivalry’’ among them to present the most precious and luxurious goods to each other. The reason behind this, as Fatma Müge Göçek states, is the prestige considerations of the two societies; gifts were not only required for political expediency and purpose, but also indicative of the economic conditions, regional products, relative wealth and industrial development of the two societies (Göçek 1987, 60). This means that gifts exchanged also reflected the relative economic well-being, social interests and tendencies of a society. Therefore it was always preferable to send the most valuable and precious materials as gifts to demonstrate, in particular, the society’s economic well-being.
32
CHAPTER II
FROM DIPLOMATIC GIFT TO THE TURKISH MARKET:
EUROPEAN CLOCKS
I am not interested in the notion of works of art ‘‘reflecting’’ ideologies, social relations or history. Equally, I do not want to talk about history as ‘‘background’’ to the work of art. I also want to reject the idea that the artist’s point of reference as a social being is the artistic community. Lastly, I do not want the social history of art to depend on intuitive analogies between form and ideological content (Clark 1982, 9-10).
In this quotation Timothy James Clark, as an art historian, implies that an art object is separate from its historical, social, political and economic context and defines it as an object in its own sake rather than as an instrument to prove the ideological content of its time. Although Clark initially discussed the notion of removing art from its ideological content, he later emphasizes the reality that art and politics cannot remain separate from each other; on the contrary, art intermingles with other social disciplines. A typical example of the blend of art with politics is the iconographic role of art objects as the representatives of cross-cultural exchange
33
among civilizations. Changes and transformations in the style of art objects, particularly, motifs and patterns appropriated from one culture to another as a consequence of mutual interaction, are significant illustrations of cultural transactions.
Archival documents, travel accounts, manuscripts and paintings are important sources that give clues about the various aspects of political, social and cultural history of the Ottoman Empire. For instance, the travelogues of foreigners who visited Ottoman cities, and the diaries of Ottoman travelers who travelled outside the empire, provide reflections and observations about their experiences. Additionally, paintings of European artists, commissioned by Ottoman rulers as well as Ottoman manuscripts illustrated by Ottoman painters (nakkaş) inform researchers not only the about Ottoman lifestyle, but also about the diplomatic relations between the Ottoman Empire and foreigners. Even the style and content of the paintings, the depiction of certain motifs and patterns, and the use of color and brushstrokes offer significant clues to analyze the artistic tendency of the Ottomans. Ernst Panofsky states: “what I see from a formal point of view is nothing, but the change of certain details within a configuration, forming part of the general pattern of colors, lines and volumes constitute my world of vision (Bann 2003, 88).” As Panofsky asserts, small details elaborating the style of objects bring out a novelty in the form of objects, but this is diversified depending on differences in social, political and economic systems among cultures. Each culture produces materials that rely primarily on its own needs and diversify them according to aesthetic taste. The use of color, types of decoration, shape of objects and even small patterns in their design, give clues about the artistic and stylistic taste of civilizations. Filiz Yenişehirlioğlu claims that, although a floral or geometrical design does not explain a certain historical event, it is an icon of a
34
civilization, which defines a particular design and creative expression that grows out of that particular civilization (Yenişehirlioğlu 1993, 589). This implies that motifs cannot be simply considered as patterns ornamenting the outer appearance of objects and buildings; they also contribute to the formation and recognition of artistic and cultural differences among civilizations.
Paintings and architectural monuments are the most frequently studied visual sources in the comparison of artistic and cultural interactions of civilizations. However, the analysis of objectsof everyday use – such as porcelains, mirrors, attires, tents, ceramics, carpets, clocks and furniture – are as significant as Ottoman paintings and buildings since they reflect the artistic transformation in Ottoman decorative arts.
As mentioned in the first chapter, diplomatic gift-exchange played a significant role in artistic and cultural transactions between the Ottomans and Europe. Depending on the interest of each culture, gifts exchanged between them were variable. For instance, while the Ottomans mostly preferred to send objects related to hunting and the military, the Europeans sent gifts based on technological and scientific developments of the era. The telescope, clock and the globe, depicted in the portrait painting of Selim III, provide an example of how European technology and science were integrated into Ottoman life and were even depicted in an Ottoman painting (Figure 8).
35
Figure 8 The Portrait of Selim III, signed by Konstantin Kapıdağlı, 1803, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 17/30.
2.1. A European Gift to the Turkish Market: Clock
There is a common belief that clocks were invented by the Europeans since the Europeans were technologically and scientifically advanced in the 18th century. However, in the 9th century, the Islamic ruler, Abbasid ruler Harun al-Rashid, sent a water clock to the Palace of Charlemagne in 807 as a gift, presenting the Europeans with their first introduction to the clock (Kurz 2005, 16). Although there were many other gifts sent by the Islamic ruler to Charlemagne such as tents, silks and candlesticks; the most valuable among them was the water clock, since it was perceived by the Europeans as a marvelous innovation of the 9th century (Kurz 2005, 16). This Islamic gesture of sending clocks to the Europeans as gifts continued in later centuries, consecutively followed by a clock, working also as a planetarium, sent from the Egyptian ruler to the King of Prussia Friedrich II in 1232 (Kurz 2005, 18).15
The interest of the Islamic world in clocks did not disappear after the founding of the Ottoman Empire. Francesco Suriano (1900, 94 cited in Kurz 2005, 114) says that Mehmed II was the first Ottoman ruler who commissioned a clock-maker together with a crystal-maker and a talented artist to work under the service of the Ottoman
15 It was protected in the treasury of Basilicata region of Italy since the clock was assumed to be one of the most unique properties of King Friedrich II.
36
court when he made a peace treaty with Venice in 1477.16 There is not enough information about the identity of the clock-maker and crystal-maker who accompanied the Italian artist Gentile Bellini on his way to work under the service of the Ottoman Empire. However, this at least suggests that a European clock-maker came into the Ottoman court for the first time during the reign of Mehmed II and that the interest of the following Ottoman Sultans towards the production of clocks continued (Figure 9).
Figure 9 Suleyman I conversing with his son in his private library, in the company of attendants. Talikizade, Şehname, ca. 1596-1600, Topkapı Palace Museum, fol. 79r.
Since the Europeans were aware of the fact that the sultans were continuously seeking new and charming objects, particularly those that relied on technology and science, they preferred to send innovative gifts to the Ottoman rulers. Parallel to their intense diplomatic relations, England, France, Germany and Hungary were among the countries primarily sending clocks as gifts to the Ottoman court. Reyhanlı (1983, 52-54 cited in İhsanoğlu 2002, 318-343) says that in 1553 the British ambassador William Harborne, under the rule of Queen Elizabeth I, brought gifts, including a silver clock in the value of 500 pound sterling to the court of Murad III (1546-1595) (Figure 10). The reason behind Elizabeth I sending this high-valued clock to Murad
16Francesco Suriano says “Quando la Signoria fece pace con lui del mille quattrocento settanta sette, pregolla che li mandasse uno, che li facesse christallini, un’altro che li facesse horioli da sonare, e uno bono dipintore.’’
37
III was to encourage a trade agreement with the Ottoman Empire. The degree was signed by the Sultan the next day after receiving the Queen’s gift. The rectangular clock was set on a stone plinth and made of silver and precious stones. It consisted of four compartments, in one of which female and male laborers was raising water from a well, digging mines, carrying ore in wheel barrows, and washing the ore. In a second compartment was a hunting scene with a pack of hounds set against a park and woodland. In the woods were dragons, lions, panthers, snakes and other creatures. Another side compartment showed shepherds taking sheep to a drinking trough and farmers ploughing their fields; the last one showed infantry and cavalry marching towards a castle surrounded by a moat. Every quarter hour, the clock chimed and these scenes came to life (Özdemir1993, 14-19).
Figure 10 The organ clock sent to Mehmed III
(1596-1603) for the accession of the Sultan, England.
Another English-made gifted clock was an organ clock, sent to Mehmed III (1596-1603) for the accession of the Sultan (Özdemir 1993, 75).17 The clock, made by the organ-maker Thomas Dallam, was the most famous gift of the 16th century. It was set on a high-carved oak pedestal supported by five bronze lions. In the center there was a figure of Queen Elizabeth embellished with forty-five precious stones, diamonds, emeralds and rubies, surrounded by eight smaller figures. The royal coat of arms was
17 The actual reason that England sent this organ clock to Mehmed III was to renew capitulations made during the reign of Murad III, since the English Levant Company enjoyed a monopoly over trade with the Ottoman Empire.
38
carved in relief, and painted and gilded. Above was a carved human head surmounted by a cockerel, flanked by two pyramids with star and crescent finials. When the organ was played, bird automatons sang and flapped their wings and the angels carried the trumpets to their lips and played a variety of melodies (Özdemir 1993, 75-77).
Each gift exchange during the diplomatic transactions of the era carried a purpose and reason. As Queen Elizabeth I sent clocks to the Ottoman court, the Austrian ambassador, as the representative of King Ferdinand, brought special gifts, including a wall clock, to make a peace treaty with Süleyman I after the conquest of the capital of Hungary in 1541. During the reception of the Hungarian king the clock is described by the Austrian historian von Hammer:
On the anniversary of Christ’s birth… They (envoys) first ate dinner with three viziers in the pavilion of the Divan (Council of State) seated on cushions…When the meal was over, the viziers went to the pavilion of the sultan, after which the envoys were invited into the royal presence. They presented Sultan Süleyman with a beautiful silver drinking cup and an artfully made wall clock showing not only the hours and days, but the movements of the stars. Twelve serving men carried this clock into the presence of the sultan, accompanied by a clock-maker, to explain how the clock was to be wound. In addition, a book describing all the mechanisms of this work of art was presented. Sultan Süleyman, who had some knowledge of astronomy, examined the machine closely (Çam, 1990, 12-18).
Another example is a gifted clock tower by the German Emperor Wilhelm II for the 25th Anniversary of Sultan Abülhamid II’s accession to the throne (Figure 11). In
39
1901, the clock tower was constructed with foundations in Izmir Konak Square at the commission of Grand Vizier Küçük Said Paşa (1838-1914). This architectural gift is an octagonal tower, featured by five stories, four portals and domed fountains (şadırvan) on four corners. After the establishment of the Turkish Republic, the monograms and coats of arms were replaced by four star and crescent motifs in relief (Özdemir 1993, 208). The tower has also a scale model exhibited in the clock section of the Topkapı Palace Museum (Figure 12). The sülus style inscription, placed above the portal arches, explains that the solid silver model of the Watch Tower was ordered in 1901 by the Izmir Municipality to be presented to Sultan Abdülhamid II as a gift on the 25th Anniversary of his accession to the throne. Both the clock tower itself and its scale model are reminiscent of the eclectic style of Ottoman revival architecture with its baroque, Rococo and neo-classical forms in detail as illustrated in the Pertevniyal Valide Sultan Mosque.
Figure 11 Watch Tower, Izmir. Photo credit by the author.
Figure 12 Scale model of Watch Tower, Switzerland, Topkapı Palace Museum,
90x50x30 cm, inv. no. 53/64.
Similarly, the griffin, or gryphon – a legendary creature with the body of a lion and the head and wings of an eagle – is a gifted clock to Sultan Abdülhamid II by the
40
Russian Tsar Nicholas II on the 25th Anniversary of the Sultan’s accession to the throne (Figure 13). It is featured with the monogram of Tsar Nicholas II – ‘‘N.II. XXV. Abd.’’ – a tughra of Sultan Abdülhamid II set with diamonds. The clock signed by the clock-maker J.H. Moser Co. Paris is made of light-colored jade, known as balgami stone. The gryphon carries a sword and shield encircled with a line of rubies and emeralds on a gold background that is embellished by the jeweler Fabergé (2003).18
Figure 13 Table clock, Russia, mid-19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, 28 cm,
inv. no. 53/258.
The intense desire of the sultan to gain knowledge about the developments in the clock industry spurred the Europeans to produce more mechanical clocks for presentation to the court of the Ottoman Sultans. At the end of the 16th century, European clock-makers and goldsmiths set up shops near foreign embassies and companies in Galata, the commercial center of Istanbul (Acar 2009, 142). Since the Europeans became aware of the Ottoman interest in mechanical clocks, many clock shops were established to increase their trade networks in the market. These clock shops provided new clocks and pocket watches for purchase as well as repair services. Yet, clocks were rarely manufactured in these shops; instead they were imported from Europe (Kurz 2005, 50). Particularly, Geneva pocket watches were popularized in the region after the establishment of a Geneva pocket watches
18 Topkapı Palace Clock Collection, Exceptional Timepieces at the Seraglio (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: T.C. Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Monuments and Museums Topkapı Palace Museum, February, 2013, 50.
41
community in Galata in 1628. As a result, the gifted clock, attributed as ‘‘a key for the admission of foreign envoys into the Sublime Porte’’ (Acar 2009, 143) began to lose its primary function and began to be recognized as an object of commercial network for the Turkish market.
Increasing commercial network between the Ottoman Empire and Europe, parallel to intensifying political relationships, led to the establishment of new industries, as the Europeans set up a clock industry as a commercial activity in the Turkish market. Clock-making was popularized in Europe through the 16th to 20th centuries, especially after developments in the production of mechanical clocks. The technological and scientific superiority of the Europeans over the production of Islamic clocks as well as Ottoman interest in European-made mechanical clocks caused the Europeans to increase clock production for the Turkish market.
Clocks that were tailored for the use by Ottoman women also started to appear in the Turkish market in the 19th century. They were pocket watches, brooch or table clocks, embellished with precious stones such as gold, rubies, emeralds and the like. Generally, pocket watches ornamented with the portrait of a lady (Figure 14), or a clock created as a brooch decorated with landscapes on its face (Figure 15), were made by European clock-makers specifically for sale in the Ottoman market for women’s use.
42
Figure 14 Pocket Watch, Switzerland,
private collection, 3 cm, circa mid-19th c.
Figure 15 Brooch Watch, private
collection, 3 cm, circa mid-19th c.
Furthermore, in the clock collection of the Topkapı Palace Museum there is a Swissmade
pistol-shaped clock from the 19th century, which was especially produced for
use by women (Figure 16). It is golden clock studded with enamel and pearl, but
unusually, it is shaped in the form of a pistol. The clock is adapted to the trigger
featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals on white enamel dial. The clock case is
decorated with pearls and rabbit figures made of golden plates. There are also floral
motifs on the case decoration as a flower is adapted into the barrel. Although this is
an object functionalized as a decorative table clock, it also functions as a perfume
bottle. When the trigger is pulled, the flower on the top of the barrel appears and
sprays perfume.
Figure 16 Pistol-shaped clock,
Switzerland, 19th c., Topkapı Palace
Museum, height 11 cm, inv. no. 53/122.
43
2.2. European Clocks with Painted Decoration in the Ottoman Empire
Archival records indicate that some clocks came to the Ottoman court as a diplomatic gift while others were produced specifically for the Turkish Market, especially after the increasing interest of the Ottomans in the clock-making industry. They give detailed information about the majority of clocks, whether sent to the Ottoman court as a diplomatic gift or produced for the Turkish Market. They suggest that while clocks dating back to the 16th and 17th centuries were sent as diplomatic gifts to the court of the sultan, in later centuries they were produced and sent to the Ottoman cities in order to increase commercial networks of the Europeans in the Turkish Market. Today many clocks, mentioned in court records have remained to our day, but some qualified Ottoman and European-made clocks preserved in the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums make it possible to study their types, styles and techniques.
There are many techniques applied for the ornamentation of clocks both in Ottoman and European clock-making. The most common one is the decoration of the clock with the use of precious stones, as exemplified in the previous chapters, since the use of jewelry in the decoration makes clocks more precious due to their physical value. Apart from the decoration of clocks with jewelry, painting is another type of technique applied in the decoration of European-made clocks. Floral and geometric designs are the most commonly applied decorative styles, both in Ottoman and European-made clocks, whereas landscape and portrait painting, as other types of decorations, merely decorated European-made clocks produced for the Ottomans. This shows that European-made clocks made for the Ottomans are distinctive with the use of this particular technique in their decoration, but clocks exhibited in museum collections are also significant indicators of how the Ottoman court and the
44
city were perceived and illustrated by the Europeans. Therefore, in this chapter I will only focus on European-made clocks marked by their painted decoration and subdivide the chapter into three sections: clocks adorned with floral and geometric design, landscape painting, and lastly portrait painting.
Studies on clocks themselves and archival documents help to gather information about ‘‘when,’’ ‘‘where,’’ ‘‘why’’ and ‘‘for whom’’ these clocks were produced and sent to the Ottoman Empire However, the biggest problem, as far as I have encountered during my research, is to find the answer of who made the painted decoration on the clocks. Since most of the clocks were signed by clock-makers inside the back cover of the clock, it is not difficult to discover by whom the clock was produced. In my opinion, the person who worked on the mechanical system of the clock and the person who painted the clock surface were two different persons, like a manuscript which was written by a hattat (calligrapher) and painted by a nakkaş (painter). Additionally, painting and clock-making are two separate craftsmanships requiring different skills and abilities in their formation, not only in the Ottoman Empire, but also in Europe. Considering all of these, painted decoration on clocks could not have been made by clock-makers; rather, they were possibly painted by a European artist of the era, in mixed media. Even though we are not able to identify the artists of the paintings on the clocks, they are significant material evidence giving clues about what were the most striking themes depicted by the Europeans on clock decoration as well as how the Ottomans were perceived by European artisans.
According to my research, the majority of clocks with painted decoration which were sent to the Ottoman court were from France, and followed by those produced in
45
England, Germany and Switzerland. This again indicates the earliest intense diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire with France through the visit of Ottoman envoys to the court of the French Kings as mentioned in Chapter 1. The total number of clocks, particularly studied in this chapter is thirty. Eleven of them are from France, seven from England; six from Switzerland, four from Germany and two clocks are the co-production of French and Swiss clock-makers. Although each clock is decorated with paintings, their types and used materials provide distinguishing features. Regarding the usage of clocks, their types – as will be exemplified in this chapter by table, pocket, bracket and wall clocks – differ from one another. Secondly, the clocks are differentiated by the variety of materials used – such as porcelain, metal, wood etc. – yet the painting technique may not vary since the enameling technique used on the clock surface, due to its permanence, is common to all.
2.2.1. Landscape Painting as Clock Decoration
Landscape paintings are the most widespread decorative motifs applied in the design of European clocks produced for the service of the Ottoman court and the Ottoman Market. Since European clock-makers produced clocks decorated with panoramic views from Ottoman cities, particularly views that reflected the natural beauty of Istanbul, the landscape was widely chosen as a subject for clock decoration. The life in Istanbul and the topography of the city itself were always among the most common themes found in the travel accounts of European travelers, as well as the engravings and paintings of European artists.
46
2.2.1.1. Clocks Produced in France
The most outstanding clock decorated with a view of Istanbul is a table clock produced in France in 1810 (Figure 17). This clock is known as one of the seven Pendule Sympathique (Çakmut 2009, 47) clocks, exclusively made for the palace by the well-known French clock-maker Abraham-Louis Breguet19 (1747-1823) (Çakmut 2009, 44). The word Sympathique expresses the mysterious sentiment evoked by the harmony of the universe, and between the main units of the human body, which also indicates that it was a clock specifically selected by French clock-maker Breguet. This Ottoman-Turkish dialed clock was sold for 35,000 French Francs to the French Foreign Ministry and later presented to Mahmud II by Napoleon I as a diplomatic gift (Çakmut 2009, 47). It states that the French Emperor (Napoleon I) presented this clock to the highest dignitary. It was inscribed in the book of donations: This is a table clock, manufactured by Breguet, which stands between four columns decorated with emeralds and rubies. It also has a landscape panorama of the Bosphorus on its enamel.20
19 Abraham-Louis Breguet was originally from France, but he was born in Switzerland in 1747 and died in Paris in 1823. He learned clock-making from the second husband of his mother, Joseph Tattetten. He worked in Versailles as an apprentice and in later years developed himself as a clock-maker.
20 Rikâbı Kamartâbi Hüsrevaneye arz-ı takdim olunmak üzere Fransa İmparatoru tarafından irsal olunup bu defa vürud eden takdimelerin defter tercümesidir: Zernişanlu dört sütun üzerine mevzu‘ ve zümrüt ve yakut ile müzeyyen ve üzerine minakâri olarak Haliç-i İstanbul’un manzarı menkuş olan Brekekâri piştahta saati (Meyer N/A, 12).For an extract of the notes in the archive of the Topkapı Palace Museum see TSM F-11976/10.
47
Figure 17 Table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, 29,5 x 33,5 cm inv. no. 53/106.
In terms of its decoration, this golden-case clock works with a synchronized pocket watch system on its topmost point. The pocket watch is inserted into a crescent-formed pedestal, ornamented with tulip-shaped reliefs. At the center of the pocket watch there is another crescent studded with small pieces of emeralds surrounded with Rococo motifs. The silver clock is placed amidst four gilded columns standing on four feet and all sides of the clock are covered with glass. While the upper parts of the clock are symmetrically ornamented with seven emeralds, its lower part is decorated with the same number of rubies. There are also four painted panoramic views illustrating the city of Istanbul from four different angles on the lower part of the clock. The artist of the panoramas, depicted on the clock surface, is not known, but he could have been inspired either by previously made engravings during the visit of European artists to Istanbul or from European travelogues that describe every detail about the city in depth.
Since photography had not yet been invented, engraving was one of the most common techniques, practiced not only by European artists, but also in European art schools as an educational tool to introduce paintings of famous European artists to
48
students (Arslan 1992, 20). Hence, the artists who created the painted decoration on clocks could have possibly been inspired by European engravings, as supposedly is the case for this French-made table clock. One reason for this assumption is the depiction of the same subject-matter – such as the Seraglio Point, the Golden Horn, Galata, the entrance to the Bosphorus, palaces, kiosks and fortresses, and so on – both in engravings and clock surfaces as is illustrated on this clock. For instance, the clock is similarly painted as in the engraving of the French artist and traveler Antoine Ignace Melling (1763-1831) illustrating the Old Beşiktaş Palace. (Figure 18-19). In this case, the palace, the Tiled Pavilion and the cypresses around the palace are almost depicted in a similar manner to Melling’s engraving, but the difference is that while Melling’s engraving includes human figures standing in sailboats and on the shore (Figure 19), there is not a single figure in the painting depicted on this clock face.
Another panorama illustrating a view from Istanbul is the entrance to the Bosphorus depicted on the front of the clock (Figure 20). The Galata Tower on the right and the Seraglio Point on the left are rendered in vivid colors. The mosques’ silhouettes, in sequence – Sultanahmed, Hagia Sophia, Süleymaniye and Fatih – are pictured behind the Topkapı Palace, even though their architectural details are not clearly recognizable. The last two panoramas illustrate the view of Rumeli Feneri (Figure 21) and the Anatolian and Rumelian Fortresses (Figure 23), which again seem to be inspired by previously made Melling’s engraving (Figure 22). However, their common point is that the artist who decorated the four sides of the clock with the views of Istanbul applied particular elements of European art – such as perspective, tonal variation and shading.
49
Figure 18 A view from Old Beşiktaş Palace
Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 19 Antoine Ignace Melling, Old Beşiktaş Palace, Voyage Pittoresque, plate
no:28.
50
Figure 20 The entrance to the Bosphorus.
Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no 53/106.
Figure 21 Entry from the Black Sea,
Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Figure 22 Entry from the Black Sea, Antoine Ignace Melling (1763-1831).
51
Figure 23 A view from Anatolian and Rumelian Fortresses
Detail from table clock, France, 1810, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/106.
Another French-made clock, decorated with a landscape painting, is a porcelain table clock from the 19th century (Figure 24). The painting is placed under the enameled dial, featuring with Ottoman Turkish numerals, amidst two twisted columns on the front surface. It probably illustrates a shore in Tarabya with domestic architecture, a fountain, and figures detailed around the shore. The clock case is painted with a bouquet of flowers, framed with a gilded circle on a blue background. Similarly, another French-made table clock, made from gold-plated zinc with a porcelain clock face is painted with a blue-framed landscape both on the upper and lower part of the clock, which illustrates village houses amid trees near a lake (Figure 25). The region depicted in the painting is not recognizable since there is no clear distinguishing mark. Furthermore, the artist could have created his own imaginary scene.
52
Figure 24 Table clock, France, 19th c.,
27x35x17 cm, A. Naim Arnas collection.
Figure 25 Table clock, France, 19th c.,
26x46x14 cm A. Naim Arnas
collection.
Apart from the decoration of large-sized clocks with landscape paintings, the front
and back cover of some pocket watches are also ornamented with landscape painting.
However, paintings depicted on pocket watches do not illustrate panoramic views, as
we have seen on large-sized clocks decorated with paintings by European artists,
since the small size of pocket watches limits the ornamentation space. Therefore, the
main theme of the paintings that the elaborate pocket watch covers is a view of a
sunny seascape with the depiction of sailing boats on the sea, towers, fortresses,
gardens, and a sequence of small-sized houses on the shore.
53
Figure 26 Pocket watch, France, 17th century,
Topkapı Palace Museum, dial diameter 4,5 cm
inv. no.53/130.
Figure 27 Pocket watch, France, 1820, private collection.
Figure 28 Pocket watch, France, 1830, private collection.
54
Figure 29 Pocket watch standing on a case, France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, dial diameter 63 mm, inv. no. 53/82.
For instance, the four groups of pocket watches illustrated above display that, even though the paintings on the pocket watch covers differ from one another, the subject- matter of sunny and bright seascapes scattered with sail boats floating on the sea does not change (Figure 26-27-28-29). The Bosphorus, as seen on the large-sized table clocks, is also the subject of pocket watches, although the size of the watch is not large enough to depict every detail in depth. For instance, a pocket watch that was produced around the 1830s for the Ottoman Market illustrates a view of the Bosphorus and a village in the background with a sunset behind mountains (Figure 30). The landscapes are framed with a dodecagonal form and surrounded by floral motifs on a blue enamel background.
Figure 30 Pocket Watch, Geneva, 48 mm, circa 1830, private collection.
55
My second point concerns the coherent appearance of pocket watches regarding the decoration of their cover, chain and dial. The colors used in the cover design are harmonized with their dial and chain, indicating the artist’s respect for the clock-makers’ style. For instance, the painting on the cover of the pocket watch, made by the French clock-maker Le Roy, is encircled by a red brown frame, and the same color is encountered in the roofs of buildings and the body of sail boats (Figure 26). The outermost frame, colored with light green, is similarly harmonized by the colors of trees and grass around the shore. Another sample is a French-made pocket watch from the 18th century, signed as ‘‘Breguet et fils’’ (Breguet and his sons)21 (Figure 29) (Salomons 1921, 7). The pocket watch, seated on a vase-shaped pedestal synchronized with a case, has a white enamel Ottoman Turkish dial, and is surrounded by golden Rococo-style decorative motifs and a chain at the top. This harmonizes the pocket watch with its gilded pedestal, decorated with a lyre,22 a musical instrument, with a relief design at the center of the front cover. On the back cover of the pocket watch, an Istanbul scene, shown in the Topkapı Palace Museum Clock collection exhibition catalogue (2013, 134) is depicted in the blue-colored hexagonal enameled star, framed by a tiny band. It is similarly surrounded by red floral motifs on a blue background as the dial is designed on its front side. The landscape at the center of the back cover of the pocket watch is also harmonized by the colors of the band surrounding the painting since same colors also ornament the bands of the pocket watch. All of these again exemplify the artist’s faithfulness to the
21 Around 1807 Breguet took his son, Louis Antonie, who was born in Paris in 1776, into partnership. After the partnership, the name of the Breguet’s firm changed from ‘‘Breguet’’ to ‘‘Breguet ét Fils’’ (Salomons 7-9).
22 The Lyre is a musical instrument frequently painted in the decoration of clocks. In addition to its decoration on the clock lids, there is also a clock shaped in the particular form of the lyre, which displays the popularity of the instrument. This lyre-form clock, made during the reign of Louis XVI around the 1790s in Paris, is a table clock decorated with bronze motifs on wooden surface. See TSM inv. no. 53/60.
56
clock-maker’s craft by making the clock design coherent in terms of style and tonal variation.
Figure 31 Pocket watch, France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, 4,9 cm, inv.no. 53/154.
The clocks mentioned above signify that the rendering of similar subject-matters is one of the common characteristics; however, the clock illustrated above is different from others with its style and decoration (Figure 31). This Breguet-made golden clock23 features Ottoman Turkish numerals on its white enameled dial, and its back cover and chain are ornamented by white floral motifs on a black background. The painting on the back cover characterizes the capsizing of a sailboat in a dark blue sea view, which has not occurred in previous examples. The depiction on the clock face, different from the landscape paintings illustrating sunny and clear seascapes, leads me to think that clocks might also be produced to commemorate a certain event or to be given to a sailor participating in warfare at sea.
As exemplified in the previous clock, the French clock-maker Breguet (Salomons 7-9), known as a genius and inventor of his time, was the most renowned clock-maker in the 18th century. This can be inferred from his innumerable clocks produced for Kings and Queens. His first relations with the Ottomans began through the
23 Özgen Acar claims that Breguet-made clocks, decorated with landscape paintings, were painted by the artists Richter and Troul, but there is no further information about the artists, painting the clocks in any other source.
57
Ottoman envoy Esseyid Ali Efendi. Whenever he visited Paris, Esseyid Ali Efendi purchased clocks and watches from Breguet’s firm. At one point, Esseyid Ali Efendi sent a letter to Breguet requesting him to set up a branch in Istanbul. Ali Efendi’s proposal would also have been beneficial for his firm if accepted since he would have increased his own production by making clocks and watches for the Ottoman palace and the Turkish Market. Brequet decided to set up an agency in Galata at the end of 1811 and produced a large quantity of clocks for high-ranking people in the service of the Ottoman court. He also charged a clock-maker, Le Roy, as his sales representative since he was a competent, talented, faithful and honest person, according to Brequet.24
Figure 32 Pocket watch, France, 1800s, Topkapı Palace Museum, dial diameter 5 cm, inv. no. 53/178.
There are also examples of pocket watches decorated with musical instruments on their back covers, although the other side is decorated with a landscape painting. As the lyre has been viewed as a decorative motif on the front side of the clock case, mentioned in the previous example (Figure 29) the French-made pocket watch, produced around the 1800s, is similarly decorated with musical instruments of Western origin – such as a mandoline, drum, harp and tambourine – on the top of the back cover (Figure 32). The musical instruments are placed at the center of a dodecagonal star-shaped frame, encircled by floral motifs. The outermost edge of the
24 Le Roy worked not only as the sales representative of Breguet, but also selling clocks that he made himself. Therefore, it is possible to come across the clocks produced by Le Roy in collections, as exemplified with TSM 53/130. The name of Le Roy should not be confused with French clock-makers Julian, Pierre and Charles Le Roy (Meyer, N/A).
58
front and back cover of the pocket watch is decorated by eleven sets of triple leaves embellished with diamonds while its fob chain is designed to take the shape of five sets of golden leaves and the same number of pink enamel flowers with a diamond fragment at their center.
Figure 33 Pocket watch, Switzerland and France, 19th c. Topkapı Palace Museum, 5 cm, inv.no. 53/157.
Another clock similarly decorated with musical instruments is an August Courvoisier et Cié pocket watch made in collaboration in France and Switzerland (Figure 33). The front cover of the clock is decorated with enameled musical instruments such as guitar, lute, harp, tambourine and trumpet, whereas the lid of the back cover illustrates a view of Istanbul, including the Golden Horn, harbor, mosques and old houses. The outermost portion of the paintings on both sides, framed with a dodecagonal form, is decorated with flowers and leaves. The white enamel dial, featuring Ottoman Turkish numerals, is also decorated with flower bouquets giving the shape of a crescent at the center.
59
2.2.1.2 Clocks Produced in England
English-made clocks form the second largest group of clocks in the Turkish museum collections after French-made clocks (BOA.MKT.MHM. 50/3).25 The first English clock, sent to the Ottoman court in 1583, came from Queen Elizabeth I to the Ottoman Sultan as a gift with the ambassador, Thomas Dallam, in 1595. It featured a figurine and an organ in the value of 500 pound sterling, but it has not survived (Çakmut 2009, 42).
Although this clock does not exist today, there are many English-made clocks preserved in the museum collections, which are decorated with landscape paintings. Galata (Acar, 143) was one of the popular themes, as depicted on the back cover of the English-made pocket watch. Since Galata was a prestigious commercial center in Istanbul due to its proximity to foreign embassies and companies, the Genoese merchants were particularly colonized in this region. From the 16th century onwards both European clock-makers and jewelry-makers followed the Genoese way and set up their shops in Galata. Although the majority of clock-makers in Galata were European, there were also Ottoman clock-makers working in the same place. In 1735, the number of Swiss clock-makers and their families living in the region reached up to 160 people. This gilded watch (Figure 34), signed as Perigal-Royal Exchange (Çakmut 2003, 80), has a painting on a gold enameled cover, which depicts a sea view pointing out the Galata Tower on the left and a very large sailing boat at the center with a small boat on its front side. The painting is framed by small rubies, and the outermost part of the pocket watch is adorned with floral and geometrical motifs against a dark green background.
25 See Appendix I.
60
Figure 34 Pocket watch, England,
18th c., Topkapı Palace Museum,
5,5 cm, inv. no. 53/152
A large-sized automata bracket clock (Figure 35), produced by an English company, Recordon, in London in the 1800s, is structured like a tower divided into three sections narrowing from its pedestal to the tower. The lowest part of the clock is decorated with a landscape painting placed between two Corinthian-like columns, and yet, it does not illustrate a region from the Ottoman Empire. The artist depicts the view of a river as if he is watching the landscape from a palace courtyard, inferred from the decorative walls surrounding the courtyard. There is also a variety of trees and flowers as well as gunpowder illustrated in the courtyard garden. The linear perspective and shading of the buildings on the shores display the fundamental techniques of European painting. In the middle part of the clock there are three dials covered by a half dome under a cage-shaped tower. This clock, dominated by red color, is not an example of French-made clocks since neither Istanbul nor a view from Anatolia is the subject of the painting depicted on the clock face. Similarly, another English-made clock, shaped-like a tower, is an automata clock, made by the famous clock-maker George Prior (Meyer N/A, 17)26 (1782-1830) in the first half of the 18th century (Figure 36). This wooden case clock, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is assumed to be produced for the Turkish market, but as in the previous
26 George Prior was famous as a maker of pocket watches to be exported to the Ottoman Empire during the period from 1793 to 1830. His exceptional clocks are to be seen in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and in the British Museum in London, in addition to the Topkapı Palace Museum.
61
example the painting on its lowest part does not illustrate a scene from the borders of the Ottoman Empire. There are animal figures, curled crystals in the shape of a waterfall and small boats and sails moving when the organ inside the clock starts playing music, hourly or every three hours. Lastly, another English-made clock, with Ottoman Turkish numerals is a bracket clock on its dials, produced by the famous company Markwick-Markham (Meyer N/A, 18)27 in 1770 (Figure 37). The painting on the clock face again is a landscape depicting a forest and a river seen behind trees, different from the views of Ottoman cities and villages. The unusual appearance of these English-made clocks brings two possibilities to mind: firstly, although the clock-makers produced clocks suitable for the Ottoman market by placing Ottoman Turkish numerals on their dials, the artists preferred to paint what they wished to see on the clock face. Secondly and most likely, these clocks were first produced for the English market and later were converted to suit Ottoman taste by changing their mechanisms with dials that featured Ottoman Turkish numerals.
Figure 35 Automata Bracket clock, England, 1800s, Topkapı Palace Museum,
170x70x50 cm, inv. no. 53/346.
27 Between 725-1780 Robert Markham worked together with his son-in-law James Markwick in London and the name of company changed to Markwick-Markham.
62
Figure 36 Automata clock, England, 18th c., Dolmabahçe Palace Museum, 45x90 cm, inv.no. 11/550.
Figure 37 Bracket clock, England, 1770, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum, 29x51 cm, inv.no. 49/16.
Figure 38 Tulip-formed pendant clock, England, 1654, Topkapı Palace Museum,
diameter 7,8 cm inner case 5,2 cm intermediary case 6,2 cm outer case 7 cm, inv. no. 53/199.
63
The oldest English-made clock in the collections of Turkish museums is a pendant clock, dating to 1654 (Figure 38). According to the exhibition catalogue Zamanın Görünen Yüzü: Saatler (2009,103), this clock from England presented to the daughter of Ahmed III, Fatma Sultan, was transferred to the palace treasury in 1733 from the estate of Fatma Sultan. It has a yellow metal dial, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals and is signed ‘‘Bird’’ on the back cover of the clock mechanism. Each side of the clock is decorated with paintings depicted in the style of Turkish miniatures, according to Wolfgang Meyer (Meyer N/A, 37). They illustrate the ship of a commander of the Naval Forces (Kaptanpaşa Baştarde Gemisi), a horse carriage and hunting scenes (Meyer N/A, 37). There are human figures with Ottoman headgear on the horseback. While the inner surface of the three leaves of this tulip-shaped clock is covered with paintings, its outer surface is covered with green enamel and features an Ottoman Turkish inscription in verse: ‘‘Saatlerden biri Fakir İbrahim için çalıyor, senesi 1063’’ (One of the clocks chimes for Fakir İbrahim in the year 1654) (Meyer N/A, 37).
Apart from the uniqueness of this clock as the earliest English-made clock existing in Turkish collections, what is also distinguishing is its tulip-shaped appearance (Segal 1993, 17).28 Its popularity became a model for clock-makers and led them to produce clocks in tulip form for women to wear as a necklace. For instance, two tulip-shaped clocks from the 17th century, made by Jean Rousseau (Figure 39) and by a Dutch clock-maker, Bayr (Figure 40) (Britten 1904, 152) suggest the mass production of tulip-shaped clocks not only in England, but also in other parts of Europe. This fashion of producing tulip-shaped clocks was also
28 Throughout history, the tulip was a luxurious item among the aristocracy, which is evident historically in Holland where the price of one tulip bulb was equal to the price of a house. As the most popular flower of the time, it was even used as a motif in the paintings of European artists such as Phillippe de Champaigne, Claude Monet, Pierre Auguste Renoir, Henri Matisse and Paul Cezanne.
64
integrated into the Ottoman court as an English gift that could be sent to the common Ottoman woman. Lastly, this tulip-shaped clock (Figure 41) indicates that English clock-makers also produced watches for women to wear around their necks. This provided ladies with a portable clock for everyday use, compared with large-sized bracket clocks, table clocks and wall clocks. However, these clocks did not lose any value due to their small size. On the contrary, as F. J. Britten states, popular floral designs of the 16th and 17th centuries that primarily included clock cases in the shape of a tulip, the most desirable and popular flower of its time (Britten 1904, 153), were more charming than early watch case examples.
Figure 39 Tulip-shaped clocks, 17th century.
Figure 40 Tulip-shaped clock, Dutch, 17th century,
Soltykoff collection,
British Museum.
Figure 41 Gold and enamel form a watch designed as a Scarlet Tulip, Geneva, c.1820, private collection.
65
Another unsually shaped clock, which includes a landscape painting on its decoration, is a Swiss-made musical hanging bird cage clock, preserved in the collection of the Topkapı Palace Museum (Figure 42). The white enamel dial of the clock, featuring Ottoman Turkish numerals, is located under the bird cage. When the clock strikes the hour, a bird song is produced by a cylinder with brass pins and steel springs. There is a bird in the cage that moves its wings, beak and neck at the same time as the mechanical system of clock works and springs (Meyer N/A, 26). Although the landscape paintings that surround the four sides of the clock are visible, they are not large-scale compared with the bird cage itself. These paintings illustrate seascapes with blurred brushstrokes that include meadows, mountains and sail boats.
Figure 42 Bird case clock, Topkapı Palace Museum,
Swiss, 1750, 55x31x31 cm, inv. no 53/51.
2.2.2. Floral and Geometric Motifs as Clock Decoration
As exemplified in the previous section, floral and geometric designs are common decorative elements complementing clocks decorated with landscape paintings, but there are also clocks merely ornamented with floral and geometric motifs, as these were the most widely used decorative elements both in daily-life objects and architectural decoration.
66
Figure 43 Brequet-made pocket watch,
France, 18th century, Topkapı Palace Museum, 6cm, inv. no. 53/172.
Figure 44 Courvoiser et Cié pocket watch, Switzerland and France, Topkapı Palace Museum, 5 cm, inv. no. 53/175.
The Breguet-made pocket watch from the 18th century illustrates the ornamentation of clocks with floral motifs such as tulips and roses as the most popular flowers of the era (Figure 43). A bouquet of flowers, placed in the center of the front side of the clock, is framed with a dodecagonal star, while the same types of flowers also decorate the back side of the clock inside twelve symmetric pieces united at the center. There are enameled pieces on its chain, decorated by pink flowers that harmonize with the clock. A Swiss-French co-production pocket watch, signed by Courvoiser et Cié, is also decorated by floral motifs on its enameled surface (Figure 44). The clock face and its chain are additionally decorated with a bouquet of flowers; its stays, the back cap and the handle are decorated with pearls and the plates and blocks are artistically decorated in filigree work (Meyer N/A, 42). A different example is an English-made pocket watch, produced by the Marwick-Markham Company, but similar to the previous example; it is also embellished with a bouquet of flowers on a green background at the center of a dodecagonal form (Figure 45).
67
Figure 45 Marwick-Markham pocket
watch, Recordon, Topkapı Palace Museum,
4,5 cm inv. no. 53/142.
The transition in the eclectic style of European art from the blend of Gothic,
Rococo and Neo-classical details to a new genre of the 20th century, art nouveau,
may be the inspiration to the appearance of European clocks sent to the Ottoman
court. Highly-embellished clocks with reliefs and precious stones were replaced by
plain and more simplified clocks (Figure 46).
Figure 46 Wall clock,
Germany, 20th century,
17x23x9 cm, Ali Naim Arnas
collection.
The German-made wall clock from the 20th century, with Ottoman Turkish numerals,
is framed by floral motifs, notably dominated by roses. There are two big red roses
on the top and four small-sized blue roses on its corners (Figure 47). Similarly, two
other examples are German-made porcelain clocks, which were not encountered until
the 20th century. They are more simplified and plain with less detailed floral motifs
designed by vivid and colorful brushstrokes (Figure 48).
The integration of porcelain as a newly used material in clock-making is another
significant change for 20th century clocks. Although porcelain began to appear in the
68
19th century with its introduction into the Ottoman court as a European diplomatic
gift, it became widespread from the 19th century onwards. The unqualified
production of European porcelain and the tendency of the Ottoman court to use either
Chinese or Ottoman-made porcelains, produced in Iznik workshops, provide an
explanation for this late integration of European porcelain to the service of the
Ottoman court (Sonat 2005, 13).
Figure 47 Table clock, Germany, 20th
century, 13x24x6 cm, Ali Naim Arnas
collection.
Figure 48 Wall clock, Germany, 20th
century, 15x21x10 cm, Ali Naim
Arnas collection.
2.2.3. Portrait Painting as Clock Decoration
Last but not least are clocks decorated with portraits of Ottoman sultans. The
tradition of portrait painting began in the Ottoman court during the reign of the
conqueror of Constantinople, Mehmed II, since he desired to spread and immortalize
his own image throughout the world, as European rulers practiced. His approach was
followed by other Ottoman sultans until the 19th century, which eventually gave birth
to a new genre of art (Renda 2002b, 491). Mehmed II’s interest in art, as understood
69
from his own scrap-book of pen-and-ink drawings, including studies of animals,
arabesques, profile and three-quarter face portrait busts, also led him to commission
an Italian artist, Gentile Bellini (Raby 1982, 4), to make his own portrait, although
Julian Raby claims that the invitation of Italian artists and medalists to a city of full
of Islam by an Ottoman sultan was a paradox (Raby 1982, 4).
The reformist movements of Selim III in all phases of social and cultural life,
followed by Mahmud II in the 19th century, also led to an increase of western
iconography in Ottoman imperial portraiture (Renda 2000, 449). Selim III’s
patronage resulted in the introduction of new media, new techniques and new
functions with his commissions to depict individual portraits and ceremonial scenes
in large-sized oil paintings (Renda 2000, 453). In addition to oil on canvas, portrait
medallions, known as tasvir-i hümayun (imperial portrait), also played significant
roles, particularly in terms of the recognition of Ottoman sultans by European rulers,
since their spread as portable objects was more practical, compared with large-sized
oil paintings. For instance, portrait medallions of Mahmud II, today exhibited in the
Topkapı Palace Museum, are assumed to have been produced to be worn around the
neck, attached to a uniform or framed to be hung on the wall (Figure 49-50) (Renda
2002b, 493).
Figure 49 Medallion hung around
the neck, oil on ivory, Topkapı
Palace Museum, inv. no. 2/1023.
Figure 50 Medallion with the portrait of Sultan
Mahmud II, oil or mixed media on ivory,
Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 17/221.
70
They were even given as gifts to foreign ambassadors and sent to European rulers, like Mahmud II’s portrait medallion which was sent to Prince Metternich of Austria through the Ottoman ambassador in Vienna in 1838 (Renda 2000, 449). This attempt of the Ottomans to send their imperial portrait to European rulers originated from their awareness of ‘‘the European custom of exchanging portrait among rulers as a token of diplomacy’’ (Renda 2002a, 455), which consequently brought about the spread of sultanic portraiture.
2.2.3.1. Portable Objects Decorated with Portraits
Portable objects such as jeweled boxes, vases, rings, clocks and furniture were also decorated with portrait paintings and were gifted between rulers of the Ottoman Empire and Europe in the same way. One of the well-known gifted objects was the ring sent to Selim III by the French envoy General Sebastiani on behalf of his ruler Napoleon (Figure 51) (Renda 2002a, 455). What makes this ring special is that it is decorated with a portrait of Napoleon and was given to Selim III as a diplomatic gift. Reciprocally, Selim III sent his own portrait to the envoy to hang in the summer residence in Tarabya, allotted for the French Embassy until 1911 (Figure 52) (Renda 2002a, 455). This exchange of objects, as a token of diplomacy, also led to the recognition of the other’s physical appearance, and the French ruler even ordered the Ottoman envoy Muhib Efendi to inform the sultan that his pleasant physical appearance was as beautiful as his inner beauty.
71
Figure 51 Ring with the Portrait of Napoleon Bonaparte, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 2/3699.
Figure 52 Printed portrait of Selim III, Konstantin Kapıdağlı, 1793, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. A. 3689.
As Napoleon had sent Selim III a ring designed with his own portrait, this tradition continued in later decades even though their portraits were depicted in other media. In the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace museum collections there are many examples, illustrating the depiction of portraits of foreign rulers on objects of daily use such as wooden furniture, Yıldız porcelain vases, tripods, teacups and pocket watches. For instance, the tripod in the Harem section of the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum (Figure 53), exemplified in Dolmabahçe Palace (2008, 77) is designed with Napoleon Bonaparte’s portrait at the center, surrounded by the portraits of famous women in French history such as Empress Josephine, Caroline Murat, Madame Recamier and Marie Antoinette. Similarly, the portraits of Ottoman sultans on plates (Figure 54) and teacups produced in the Yıldız Porcelain Factory (Figure 55), indicate that they were depicted on portable objects in the style of European art.
72
Figure 53 A tripod designed with Napoleon Bonaparte’s portrait, Harem Section, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum.
Figure 54 Plate bearing the portrait of Sultan Mahmud II, Garabet Atamyan, 1896, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 34/418.
Figure 55 Teacup bearing the Portrait of Murad IV, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 34/1615
2.2.3.2. Pocket Watches Decorated with the Sultans’ Portrait
Portraiture was another type of decorative element ornamenting pocket watches even though there are a few examples of pocket watches with portraits existing today. Since pocket watches have sufficient space on their surfaces to depict portraits, they were made on either the front or back covers of the watches and functioned like a medallion illustrating the portraits of rulers. For instance, an 18th century French pocket watch, marked as Romilly à Paris, has two portrait paintings
73
on both covers (Figure 56). While on the front cover there is the portrait of a knight in armor wearing a green sash, a red curtain and a classical column behind him, a portrait of a prince or a king wearing ermine over armor and a coronet on his head ornaments the back cover (Bell 2004, 154).
Figure 56 Pocket Watch, French, 18th c.,
private collection
Similarly, there are pocket watches decorated in the same manner for the Ottoman court. These pocket watches from the 18th and 19th centuries are all manipulated according to the taste of the Ottoman Empire on the front cover of the pocket watch. For instance, while the dial featured Ottoman Turkish numerals, tonal variations in colors were realistically applied to pocket watches in Rococo decoration. On the other hand, the back cover of pocket watches was either ornamented with the depiction of floral motifs, musical instruments or landscape paintings as shown in previous examples. They were variably applied to the back cover of pocket watches decorated with portrait painting, although the portrait of the same ruler was depicted on the front cover, as illustrated on pocket watches with Abdülmecid’s portrait. This means that a new essence was brought to Ottoman art with a blend of European elements and traditional style (Renda 1996, 103). For instance, while the back cover of the Swiss-made pocket watch (Figure 57) was decorated with musical instruments such as the lyre and tambourine, another pocket watch in a private collection (Figure
74
58) was designed with floral motifs. The portraits of Abdülmecid on the cover of
these pocket watches were depicted in the same way, as his military uniform, yet one
(Figure 57) was a portrait against a singled-colored background; the other was
surrounded by a curtain on the left and a column on the right. This background, as
illustrated in the paintings of the 19th century European portraits, brings to Ottoman
painting a new perspectival approach.’’
Figure 57 Pocket Watch, Switzerland,
19th century, Topkapı Palace Museum,
5 cm, inv. no. 53/184.
Figure 58 Pocket Watch, August
Courvoisier, 19th century, private
collection.
Another pocket watch with the portrait of Abdülmecid is in a private collection.
The exhibition catalogue Zamanın Görünen Yüzü (2009, 216) refers to the clock that
was made on the occasion of the accession of Sultan Abdülmecid, which was marked
by Nacib K. Djezvedjian as the Ottoman distributor of Edward Prior clocks (Figure
59). On this pocket watch, Abdülmecid was also shown in his military uniform
symmetrically encircled by a gold bronze and green Rococo-style frame. There are
soft-colored clouds in the background of the portrait, which gives depth to the
painting. The muted colors featuring the background are also applied to the back
cover of the pocket watch, illustrating a landscape with full architectural details
75
behind the cypress trees. 29 This feature also provides color harmony to the front and back sides of the pocket watch.
Figure 59 Edward Prior pocket watch with the Portrait of Abdülmecid, 19th c., England, Mehmet Bozkurt Collection.
The earliest examples of clocks decorated with portrait paintings date back to the reign of Abdülmecid. This is also parallel with the highest amount of portrait paintings and medallions of Abdülmecid, compared to other Ottoman Sultans. Many European artists, like court artists Jean Portet and the Manas brothers, produced the portraits of Abdülmecid, as can be seen in the collections. For instance, the clock in the Mehmet Bozkurt Collection, with Abdülmecid’s portrait, is painted (Figure 60) and engraved (Figure 61) by French artist Jean Portet in the same way. The sultan is wearing a navy blue cape over a jacket with gold braiding down the front and a fez with a high aigrette (Renda 2000, 510), similar to the rendition on the clock. The difference is that while the portrait on Portet’s engraving and painting is set against a plain background, the image on the clock has a background illustrating clouds, which gives perspective and movement to the painting.
29 It is impossible identify the exact region depicted in this landscape, but I assume that it is not a region on the borders of the Ottoman Empire since there is no a minaret with which we are familiar from landscape paintings either in mural paintings. However, it can be expected that it is a region from England, since this is an English-marked pocket watch made by an Armenian artist.
76
Figure 60 Portrait of Sultan
Abdülmecid, oil on canvas, ca. 1850,
Jean Portet, Topkapı Palace Museum,
inv. no 17/215.
Figure 61 Engraving of Sultan
Abdülmecid portrait, ca. 1850, Jean
Portet, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no.
A.3719.
On the other hand, the availability of a pocket watch decorated with the portrait of
Abdülaziz (Figure 62), which was made in Switzerland in the second half of the 19th
century (Çığ 1978, 3), now exhibited in the Topkapı Palace Museum, suggests that
European artists continued to produce pocket watches designed with the sultans’
portrait after the reign of Abdülmecid. The portrait painting on the watch cover
implies that it was produced either as a commission by the sultan himself or as a
diplomatic gift. As exemplified in the pocket watch with Abdülmecid’s portrait, this
is also a blend of Ottoman taste with European style. While its dial is featured with
Ottoman Turkish numerals, the portrait is encircled with an oval-shaped frame on the
edge of the front cover that is designed with blue-colored Rococo elements against
golden yellow background.
77
Figure 62 Pocket watch with the portrait of Abdülaziz, Switzerland, 2nd half of 19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, 4,7 cm, inv. no 53/241.
Unlike pocket watches decorated with the sultans’ portraits, it can be inferred that pocket watches which included portraits of European rulers were designed to represent their own cultures. This is evident in the portrait of the German King Wilhelm II on a jewel-encrusted gold pocket watch (Figure 63) (Froom 2011, 168). It is one of the precious gifts of Wilhelm II to Abdülhamid II during his visit to the Ottoman court in early November 1889 as cited by Froom (2011, 168).30 The portrait is framed by thirty-six small diamonds and four rubies symmetrically placed around four sides of the oval-shaped frame. There is also a monogram in the form of his name’s first letter, ‘‘W,’’ on the back cover, representing the rule of the emperor. Although its outer decoration does not entirely adhere to the aesthetic taste of the Ottomans, surprisingly its dial has Ottoman Turkish numerals, most probably because it would be used by Sultan Abdülhamid II.
30 Other than this pocket watch, Wilhelm II also presented a large Rococo clock decorated with figures costing 1800 marks, which is still in existence today. He also gifted a Mauser rifle, perhaps as a symbol of German technological and military progress and arms sales, and two nine-armed candelabra worth 1100 marks.
78
Figure 63 Pocket watch with the portrait of Wilhelm II, A. Lange and Sohne
Glashutte, Germany, 1889, 5 cm, Topkapı Palace Museum, inv. no. 53/190.
79
CHAPTER III
CLOCK PRODUCTION IN THE OTTOMAN MARKET
Compared with Ottoman-made clocks, the number of European-made clocks exhibited in the clock collections of the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums is higher. This is because a large number of clocks were sent to the Ottoman court or bought by the Ottomans from European merchants. There appear to be more clocks dating from the 18th and 19th centuries than from the early Ottoman period; futhermore, museums’ clock sections mostly include clocks made for the Turkish Market rather than those gifted to the Ottoman court. This implies that the number of clocks in existence today, as a consequence of the visits of European envoys, are more connected to the intense diplomatic relations of the Ottomans with European countries.
European-made clocks that were made to be sent to the Ottoman Empire as diplomatic gifts or to be sold in the Turkish Market have some common characteristics. Firstly, although Europeans were accustomed to the use of Latin numerals, they produced clock dials with Ottoman Turkish numerals so that the Ottomans could adjust them to fit their daily life. However, a few clocks, dialed with Roman and Latin numerals, were sent to the Ottoman Empire, and even a clock that
80
displayed ‘‘the time la turque and la franque side by side’’ (Georgeon 2011, 189) was produced, particularly beginning in the 19th century. This is because the reform process, undertaken by the Ottoman state with the Tanzimat (1839-1876), was concerned with the use of European time in the Ottoman Empire in addition to the reforms in the military, administration and economy etc (Georgeon 2011, 181).
Secondly, European artistic taste is also observable in the details of European clocks produced for the Ottomans that illicited a blend of European art with the taste of Ottoman culture. Although some scholars assert that European-made clocks seem too extravagant and flamboyant, each clock, produced by European clock-makers, not only reflected a blend of Ottoman and European art, but also exemplifies the cultural interaction of Ottoman aesthetic taste with European art. Particularly, highly-ornamented European clocks adorned with precious stones – gold, silver, onyx, mica, opal, aventurine, diamond, crystal, ruby, mother of pearl, turquoise, amethyst and pearl – draw attention not only by their embellished appearance, but with their commercial value. For instance, an Austrian-made table clock, made on the order of the Ottoman palace by the clock-maker Joseph Derschinger from Wien around the 1720s, is ornamented with precious stones on its cube-shaped golden case (Figure 64). Each side of the clock is adorned with enamels, diamonds, rubies and crystals. The clock mechanism on the top of the case boasts an engraving, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals, and the clock case stands on four oval feet. This is the earliest example of Austrian clocks existing today, although it is known that the earliest one, no longer in existence today, was sent by the Emperor Rudolph II to Sultan Murad III (Çakmut 2009, 40).
81
Figure 64 Table clock, Austria, 1720s, Topkapı Palace Museum, 8x8x8 cm, inv. no. 53/194.
The ornamentation of clocks with precious stones originated with the interest of sultans in valuable materials. This is also exemplified in the clocks made by the clock-makers of the Ottoman Empire. For example, a weight-driven wall clock from the 1770s is a highly-embellished Ottoman-made clock with rubies, diamonds and enamels (Figure 65). The upper part of the clock is crowned with a star and a crescent, representative of the Ottoman Empire, and framed by a gilded dial adorned with small diamond pieces. As is apparent in this clock decorated with rumi and palmette motifs on the clock surface, Ottoman clocks, different from their European counterparts produced for the Turkish Market, are generally adorned with traditional motifs, such as saz yolu, golden horn, carnation, tulip, rumi, hatai, palmettes and leaf motifs.
82
Figure 65 Wall clock, Ottoman
Topkapı Palace Museum, 20x7x7 cm
inv. no. 53/171.
Similarly, a round, plate-like wall clock, signed by the Ottoman clock-maker Şahin, is decorated in rumi style in addition to its ornamentation with precious stones such as rubies, emerald and turquoise (Figure 66). This clock, as among the earliest surviving examples of Ottoman clocks made in the mid-17th century, is dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals on a turquoise background and surrounded by an outermost circle ornamented with twelve floral motifs signifying each timepiece. Every flower has a ruby encircled with six emeralds and there are twelve single rubies in the shape of a tulip among the flowers. The innermost area is designed with a blend of rubies and emeralds. The outmost edge covering the clock is again ornamented with numerous small ruby pieces.
Similar to this clock, another round, plate-like wall clock, is dialed with silver-made Ottoman Turkish numerals (Figure 67). As mentioned in the exhibition catalogue Anatolian Civilizations III (1983), its dial is decorated with pierced floral scrolls and its back is also engraved in the same style, but diversely contains the name of the clock-maker, Bulugat. It features a winding branch that emerges from an adorned root: the smaller branches connected to the main branch feature small leaves and flowers in the style of rumi, arabesques. The flowers are depicted from various
83
angles and highly emphasized blossoms are drawn with lattice etching. There are also small red flower details among numerals around the outermost circle, which again demostrates the common use of floral motifs. Another example is a wall clock dating back to the 1680s, which is engraved with floral scrolls, but alternatively is signed by an Ottoman clock-maker “Âmel Abdulrahman” (Made by Abdurrahman) on the back cover of the clock in Ottoman Turkish (Figure 68).
Figure 66 Wall clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, 23 cm
inv. no. 53/85
Figure 67 Wall clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, 18 cm, inv. no. 53/86
Similarly, a table clock from the 17th century is shaped as a dodecagon, which is covered with a single dome on its upper part (Figure 69). The inscription ‘‘Âmel-i Mustafa Aksarayi, 1099’’ on its dial indicates that it was made by Mustafa Aksarayi in 1687. The clock, as such in the previous example, is adorned with pierced floral scrolls suggestive of the rumi style, yet made of silver and brass.
84
Figure 68 Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, 11x7x7 cm
inv. no.53/221
Figure 69 Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, 13x11 cm inv. no 53/54
3.1. Ottoman Clocks with Painted Decoration
The clocks in the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums demonstate that there is a particular group of clocks and watches ornamented with painted decoration. Those clocks illustrate that Ottoman clock-makers preferred to decorate clocks with painted floral and geometrical motifs on their cover. Their appearance, different than those made by the Europeans for the Ottomans, is less decorative and austere. For instance, this typical mosque wall clock made in the Ottoman workshops to be hung in mosques dates back to around 1790s (Figure 70). The clock’s wooden inner and outer mechanism has three dials on its front face. The first and second outermost circle of the dial features the names of the months and zodiac signs whereas the third outermost circle displays the days of the month. The front surface of the clock is adorned with bouquets of flowers painted using the Edirnekâri technique (oil-on-wood painting) on a green background. The dial with Ottoman Turkish numerals is
85
on a brown circular shape at the center. There is also a pediment, including an Ottoman Turkish inscription that explains the services of timepiece to the mosque and its congregation in keeping time for prayers.31
Figure 70 Wall clock, Ottoman,
Topkapı Palace Museum, 30x31x6 cm
inv. no. 53/235
Another example is a table clock made for Sultan Ahmed III, signed by the Ottoman clock-maker Edirneli Ibrahim in 1725. The clock’s wooden case has Ottoman Turkish numerals on its dial, and is lacquered and has glass shutters on both the front and back cover (Figure 71). Even though the clock’s working system displays the influence of English wall clocks, its decoration fully reflects an Ottoman artistic style. As in the precious mosque clock, this one is also adorned with a bouquet of flowers containing roses, tulips, and carnations rendered in polychrome pigments and gold on a dark green background. However, the most popular flower of the 18th century, the tulip, symmetrically decorates the back cover of the clock and specifically distinguishes the clock as in the characteristic of the 18th century. The pediment above the dial features the name of the clock-maker, “Saatçi Edirneli Ibrahim” (Clock-maker Edirneli Ibrahim), and is inscribed in Ottoman Turkish. On
31 “İşbu saat üzerinedir. Numayan olduğu vech üzere mezkur olan ma‘ariflerden ez-cümle saat meşhude ve daireteyn ruz-ü şeb eyyam visal ve daire-i eyyam sebu‘ ve vakt-ü halde elzem olan münebbihe araste tanzim ile olduğu gibi dahi emr u derecat, saireyi müştemil kemal-i itina ile tanzim ve deva-I evkatı müstakim izal ile i‘mal evkatı cami‘”
86
the corners of the dial there is also an Arabic inscription, “Accilu bisse lati kabl mevt,” which is translated as “Perform your prayers at the prescribed time.”
Figure 71 Table clock, Ottoman, Topkapı Palace Museum, 38x26x16 cm inv. no. 53/233
Another Ottoman-made clock, dating back to 1809, is in the shape of a Mevlevi headdress as an Islamic symbol (Figure 72). The clock is dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals on a hollow circle. Below the circular dial there are symmetrically depicted two tulip forms, engraved on the gilded wooden pedestal and its four feet. The pedestal is surrounded by small turquoise beads ornamented in equal intervals. Above the headdress there is an inscription in Ottoman Turkish indicating the year the clock was made and the name of its timekeeper, “Muvakkit Sultan Mahmud Ahmed Gülşeni’ül- Mevlevi ve sene 1224” (“Member of the Mevlevi Order and Timekeeper to Sultan Mahmud Ahmed Gülşeni, in the year 1224 (1804)”). This inscription also suggests that the clock was shaped as a Mevlevi headress since the clock-maker himself was also from the Mevlevi order.
87
Figure 72 Table clock, Ottoman,
Topkapı Palace Museum, 1809,
22 cm, inv. no. 53/239.
3.2. An Ottoman Clock in London Exposition
Until now it has been observed that the European clocks were integrated into Ottoman life rather than the other way around. The popularity of European clocks in every segment of Ottoman life led to an increase in the number of European clocks in the Ottoman Empire. Archival documents indicate that Ottoman clock-makers were even sent to Europe to learn the working systems and clock mechanics. For instance, Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi was one of the Ottoman clock-makers sent to France in the reign of Sultan Mahmud II (r. 1808-1839). His expenses were covered by the sultan, and he was sent to learn European clock-making, particularly the working mechanism of skeleton clocks,32 which was a newly invented French type of clock of the 18th century (B.O.A, AMD. 33/80).33
According to Milli Saraylar Saat Müzesi catalogue (N/A, 94), Ahmed Eflaki Dede Efendi, known as the best of the Ottoman clock-makers, produced nine clocks throughout his lifetime. This number of clocks was not low for a clock-maker since clock-making was a very time-consuming craft. Some of his clocks, which have remained to our day, are exhibited in the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums.
32 Different from others, skeleton clocks display both their inner and outer mechanisms. Clock-makers cover the clock mechanism with a lantern for protection, so that it is not damaged by dust.
33 See Appendix II.
88
His last clock, produced in 1861, is in the form of a skeleton clock and is exhibited in the Dolmabahçe Museum’s clock collection (Figure 73). The clock resembles the architectural form of a mosque. The clock face, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals on a white enamel background, is in the shape of the mosque dome, whereas the tower on the top of clock face with an Ottoman flag on its crescent and star bears resemblance to a mosque minaret. As Ottoman clock-makers signed their clocks on the front face, the signature of Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi can also be read on the dial and includes its place of production, Istanbul. Another clock produced by Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi is a skeleton table clock exhibited in the Topkapı Palace Museum, which similarly features a black wooden pedestal and is made of brass (Figure 74). The inscription, ‘‘Muvakkit-i Cennet Mekan Sultan Mahmud Han- Ahmet Eflaki Dede el Mevlevi–Asitane’’ (Ahmed Eflaki Dede, member of the Mevlevi order, Timekeeper to Sultan Mahmud Han, May He Dwell in Paradise-Asitane), on the pedestal above the dial, is signed by Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi in the nesih calligraphy style.
Figure 73 Skeleton Table Clock, Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi, 1861, Dolmabahçe Palace Museum,
28x80 cm, inv. no. 47/221.
Figure 74 Skeleton Table clock, Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi, 19th c., Topkapı Palace Museum, 46x26x20 cm, inv. no. 53/52.
89
According to archival documents, one of his sketelon clocks was among the products sent to the first international exposition, the London Exposition, in 1851. The clock was exhibited in the Ottoman Pavilion among many domestic products sent to London such as silk and cotton fabrics, rugs and carpets, swords, daggers, precious stones, cereal products, dried fruits and vegetables, glasswares and so on (Acar 2011). According to Şinasi Acar (2011), archival documents also indicate that Ahmed Eflaki Dede Efendi’s clocks, which he manufactured himself in Paris, were exhibited in the Sergi-yi Umumi-yi Osmani in Atmeydanı during the reign of Abdülaziz (r. 1861-1876) (Acar 2011).34
3.3. An Ottoman Gift:
A Dagger Decorated with an English-made Clock on its Hilt
All clocks mentioned throughout this study arrived in the Turkish Museums either as a diplomatic gift, or as a product for sale in the Turkish Market. However, there are also return gifts sent by the Ottoman Sultans to fellow rulers that have been housed in Turkish museums, although one would expect them to be under the hegemony of those fellow rulers. One of them is a dagger (Figure 75),35 adapted with an English-made clock on its hilt, which is today exhibited in the Treasury Section of the Topkapı Palace Museum.36 According to the palace chronicler Izzi
34 ‘‘İngiltere Ekspozisyonu’na konulmak için, yukarıda sözü edilen saatle birlikte Eflaki Ahmed Dede Efendi’nin Londra’ya gönderilmesi ve bir müddet orada durduktan sonra ba‘zı sanayi tahsili zımnında Paris’e geçmesinin, kendisinin yetiştirilmesi açısından,çok yararlı olacağı, bu süre içinde kendisine 1200 guruş, ayrıca Londra’da ikamet sırasında öteki sergi memurları gibi yatacak ve yemek giderlerinin Şehbender (konsolos) Mösyö Zohrap tarafından karşılanması hususları, Sadaret’çe de uygun görülmüş ve 24.5.1851’de padişah tarafından onaylanmıştır. (B.O.A. İ. DH. 14106, A.MKT.MHM. 32/100).’’
35 Another object adorned with a clock is an arrow box which was also among the gifts sent by Mahmud I to Nadir Shah. The clock is attached to the box on the ruby lid of the arrow box and functions like in the dagger, but today it is no longer in existence. See Appendix III.
36 An arrow and bow boxes are also among the gifts sent to Nadir Shah which are today exhibited in the Treasury section of the Topkapı Palace Museum. See Appendix III.
90
Süleyman Efendi, gifts, sent by Mahmud I to the Iranian ruler Nadir Shah in 1747, were brought back to the Ottoman Empire since Nadir Shah was assassinated in a civil uprising at the time when the gifts were sent to him (Özdemir 1993, 177-179). Although it is a dagger, as usual, decorated with precious stones, it is a highly-valued distinguished one compared with other similar examples.37 As described by İzzi Süleyman Efendi:
A gold dagger with a watch with an emerald lid set in the pommel, three large emeralds on the hilt, both hilt and scabbard studded with one large, twelve ordinary and one hundred twenty-four small diamonds, a single pierced emerald forming the extremity of the scabbard, fretwork mounts and an engraved gold enameled hilt. The value is estimated at 20,000 guruş. The finial consists of gold filigree with one diamond, one ruby and one pearl. The case is covered with dark red striped velvet (Özdemir 1993, 87).
Figure 75 Dagger with a Watch Set, England, 1747, Topkapı Palace Museum.
37 Nowadays, this dagger is known as ‘‘Topkapı dagger’’ after its theft became the theme of an American film made by Jules Dassin in 1964.
91
Apart from its physical value, what separates this dagger from others is that it has a watch set on the top of its hilt. Similar to the pistol-shaped clock, this clock was used as a decorative element to increase the value of the material as well as to make it look more elegant. Likewise, a cage-shaped clock, which will be introduced in Chapter 3, illustrates that a clock attached to its base, in whatever form it may be, serves as a decorative element and increases the object’s overall value and popularity. Additionally, the clock on top of the dagger’s hilt is an object of decoration increasing its value. Kemal Özdemir asserts that since the sultans were tired of carrying clocks in their sashes, they began to have clocks set in the hilts of their daggers or in the center of their jeweled sashes (Özdemir 1993, 83). However, not every segment of society was able to acquire this utilitarian object since the hierarchal order was a determinant, as D’Ohsson explains as well: Daggers of ordinary people are so simple, if someone is well off, the grip of the daggers is silver. The daggers of wealthy people, particularly people living in the palace, are ornamented with gold and diamonds (D’Ohsson 85).
The Ottoman Turkish numerals featured on this George Clarke-made clock38 suggest that it came into the Ottoman court either as an English gift or as an object produced by the English for the Turkish market. Later, it was sent to the shah by the sultan as a diplomatic gift since the Ottomans were aware of the Iranian interest in English-made objects, especially after they established a commercial network with the East India Company in 1618. According to the Calendar State Papers (1617-1621, cited in Kurz 2005, 56), the commissions of the Shah to the officials of the company in London to produce English-made globes, celestial globes, clocks and
38 Another George Clarke brand clock is exhibited in the clock section of the Dolmabahçe Palace Museum. It is a lantern clock produced in England the first half of the 18th century. The clock is made of brass, the dial is silver and its weight is 3.7 kg. Inv. No. 94/220.
92
pocket watches, binoculars and paintings may have been the incentive for sending a dagger with a watch set included among the other gifts for Nadir Shah. In this way, many clocks were sent to Iran. Furthermore, an English clock-maker went to Iran and designed a square clock for the Isfahan market during the reign of Shah Abbas (r. 1587-1629) (Kurz 2005, 56).
The examples display the fact that the quality and quantity of gifts were representatives of the prestige, power and etiquette of the ruler. That is why the Sultan sent a large amount of gifts to the Shah, including an osprey, sword, velvet, arrow and bow box, comb, chain watch, pocket watches, an arrow box with a clock on its top, eyeglasses, binoculars, rifles, horse equipment, baldachin, sable, cushion and prayer rug, in addition to the dagger with a watch set attahced (Appendix III). Gül İrepoğlu also states that, if a jeweled dagger is gifted to someone, it displays the respect and consideration towards the receiver (İrepoğlu 2002, 157). The dagger given to Nadir Shah is also highly embellished, with three large cabochon emeralds in the hilt, small pieces of diamonds on its cover and an attached English-made watch surmounting the pommel, which indicates high-quality craftsmanship of Ottoman goldsmiths in jewelry-making as a cultural heritage of the Seljuks to the Ottomans (Savaşcın 1990, 136). Evliya Çelebi states that during and after the reign of Süleyman I, Istanbul became the center of jewelry-making, many workshops were organized with the participation of goldsmiths coming out of Istanbul, and even Selim I and Süleyman I attempted to learn the art of jewelry-making (Çelebi 1969, 266). The pinning of Ottoman-made jewels by the English Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603) in her coronation also proves the circulation of the Ottoman jewelry fashion in foreign countries (Yaman 2008, 59). This increasing reputation of Ottoman jewelry is also through the common use of jewels in the decoration of daily-life objects such
93
as mirrors, trays, daggers, pitchers, sabers, arrows and bow boxes. For instance, the dagger, presented by Hatice Turhan Valide Sultan to his son Mehmed IV in the opening ceremony of the Yeni Mosque in 1664, displays how the splendid Ottoman style of jewelry-making with its solid emerald hilt and gold scabbard with a polychrome enamel flower in the center, encrusted with diamonds above and below, while diamond dragon heads on either side create additional movement (İrepoğlu 2002, 154-155).
Another decorative element applied to this dagger and its watch set is painted decoration. The dagger’s front cover is decorated with a full fruit basket at the center while the back cover is embellished with a sequence of five fruit baskets framed with Rococo motifs. Natural models of fruits, flowers, trees, roses, and tulips in pots, vases and baskets happened to be the most popular decorative motifs and patterns of the 18th century Ottoman art. This Ottoman art novelty also permeated to the façade and interior decoration of buildings as in the Tophane Fountain, built during the reign of Mahmud I (1730-1754). The fountain decoration is described by the British traveler Julia Pardoe: ‘‘Its rich and elegant arabesques are beyond all praise; and when the sun is shining on them, almost look like jewels (Hamadeh 2008, 199).’’
94
Figure 76 Detail from the Privacy Chamber of Ahmed III, 18th c., Topkapı Palace Museum.
Figure 77 Detail from the Bereketzade Fountain, 18th c., Istanbul.
Figure 78 Detail from the dagger gifted from Mahmud I to Nadir Shah, 1747, Topkapı Palace Museum.
Likewise, the use of floral and fruit motifs embellishing the interior wall decoration of the Privy Chamber of Ahmed III (Yemiş Odası) (Figure 76) and the façade decoration of the Bereketzade Fountain (Figure 77) are highlighted examples of the era displaying the novelty of 18th century Ottoman art. However, there are two basic differences between the dagger and examples of 18th century Ottoman art: Firstly, whereas the basket depicted on the dagger is fully filled with diverse fruits, the ones depicted on the buildings include one single type of fruit in the baskets (Figure 78). Secondly, the back cover of the dagger is divided equally into frames, and each frame is ornamented with the same fruit basket as on the front cover of the dagger (Figure 79). This sort of framing and division is similarly observed in daggers made in Iran (Figure 80-81). Regarding this similarity with and its difference from Ottoman art objects, the dagger, which addresses Iranian artistic taste, was possibly ornamented by an Iranian craftsman in an Ottoman workshop. This can be concluded since in the 18th century artisans working in jewelry-making were exceptional, because they included a number of Muslim and non-Muslim people, originating from different societies (Yaman 2008, 60).
95
Figure 79 Back side of the dagger sent to Nadir Shah, 1747, Topkapı Palace Museum.
Figure 80 Dagger curved watered steel dagger and sheath, the blade chiseled and inlaid with gold, with a pale green jade hilt pique with gold floral decoration, the sheath lacquered wooden, Iran, the dagger 17th c., the sheath 19th c., Victoria&Albert Museum.
Figure 81 Dagger with jewel-encrusted handle and enamelled sheath, Iran, late 18th c., Victoria and Albert Museum.
96
All in all, the desire of the Shah to acquire exotic objects, realized by the Sultan due to the Shah’s commissions to England, led the Sultan to send this dagger, reflecting not only Iranian artistic taste, but also the exoticism of the West with the watch set on its hilt. Therefore, beyond the physical value of the dagger, it has cultural significance as an intermediary in the cultural encounter of the Ottoman Empire with the West and the East thanks to the gift-giving tradition in diplomacy.
97
CONCLUSION
Zygulski Zdzislaw (1991, 177) states that ‘‘it is a norm that a great state, an empire, should utilize art for its specific purposes. So, it was everywhere: in ancient China, Egypt and Mesopotamia, in Rome and Byzantium, in the Austria of the Hapsburgs, and the France of Louis XIV and of Napoleon.’’ It is the purpose of this study, as Zdzislaw astutely asserts, that the ‘‘clock’’ as an art object, does not serve only as a product of decorative arts, but also as a diplomatic gift that functioned as a part of diplomatic relations between Europe and the Ottoman Empire. Consequently, clocks began to carry a new meaning as an object of commercial networking between them. The fundamental aim of this study is to explore how the clock, as an art object, gained economic and political significance, since it functioned as a European diplomatic gift given to the Ottoman court until the second half of the 18th century and was then transformed into an object of politics and economy in the 19th century.
Architectural monuments, animals, paintings, textiles and many other objects, listed throughout this study, were also among the gifts given to the Ottoman court. However, clocks are distinctive not only because of their high value due to their decoration with precious stones, but also their decoration on their surfaces reflecting the cultural encounters of the Ottoman Empire with Europe. Once the Europeans became aware of the Ottoman interest in clocks after they had been sent as gifts, they continued to produce clocks in order to gain a commercial network with the Ottomans. The commission of clocks by Ottoman sultans also triggered the introduction of more European clocks into Ottoman life, which was instrumental for
98
the establishment of a clock industry by European clock-makers within the borders of the Ottoman Empire.
A lesser-known fact is that although the clock gained its popularity with the production of highly-decorated European mechanical clocks, clock-making dates back to the early Islamic period because the meaning of clocks in terms of time-keeping was significant within the Islamic tradition in order to set prayer times. Avner Wishnitzer asserts that ‘‘Up until the end of the 18th century the ways Ottomans used clocks conformed to the inner logic of their temporal culture. However, this began to change during the 19th century, as the Ottoman Empire was increasingly assimilated into the European-dominated global economy and the project of modern state-building began to gather momentum.’’ 39 Especially with the invention of mechanical clocks by the Europeans in the 14th century, the clock was considered by the Europeans as one of their most important technological innovations. As a symbolic diplomatic gift, the clock thus became a representative object of European culture and that is why the number of Ottoman-made clocks was not as high as those produced by the Europeans even though Ottoman clock-makers also attempted to produce clocks suited for the regulations of their own cultures.
All clocks illustrated in this study suggest that ones produced by Europeans and the Ottomans had differences originating not only from what they depicted on their surface as decoration, but also which painting technique and material was used in their production. While the Europeans preferred to use a variety of materials like porcelain, enameled wooden case and metal, Ottoman-made clocks were made of metal and wood with decoration in the Edirnekâri technique. Secondly, the Ottomans
39 For more information see Avner Wishnitzer, Reading Clocks Alla Turca: Time and Society in the Late Ottoman History, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.
99
mainly preferred to make table clocks, wall clocks and skeleton clocks, whereas the Europeans were more diversified in their production: table clocks, carriage clocks, skeleton clocks, pocket watches, wall clocks, long-case clocks, writing-drawer shaped clocks, book-shaped clocks, pistol-shaped clocks and so on. The diversity of European clocks implies that, while the Ottomans’ purpose of clock-making was functional for the display of prayer time, the Europeans produced clocks not only for their functional role, but also for their desire to use them as decorative objects. Last but not least, the painted decoration choices on the encasings present another difference between European and Ottoman clocks. The Ottomans decorated clocks with floral motifs such as lily, rose, carnation, granadilla, tulip and simple geometric designs, suns, stars and crescents, lavishly applied with precious stones such as green jade as the symbol of paradise and blue turquoises as the symbol of heaven, emeralds, rubies, almandines, carnelians and pearls (Zdzislaw 1991, 178). In contrast, the European clocks were additionally ornamented with landscape and portrait paintings, enframed with floral motifs and geometric designs. Experts interpret this stylistic difference in their ornamentation, in addition to difference in the clock form, as the more naïve and simple Ottoman clocks compared with their European counterparts, even though the Europeans consciously produced highly-decorated clocks for the Ottomans to give a flamboyant impression. Apart from all these differences between the European and Ottoman-made clocks, their common feature is that there is no information in any source and on the surface of the clocks pointing to the artist responsible for the clock decoration. Whereas, clocks made for the Ottoman court include the signature of the clock-maker either on the surface of the front or back covers, together with the year in which they were produced. However, it is not stated on any clock or a written document by whom they were
100
painted and decorated. Furthermore, all clocks illustrated in this thesis display that clocks, produced either to gift a high-level Ottoman officer or to make a commercial network with the Ottoman Empire, were decorated with landscape, portrait, floral and geometric paintings. This means that it is not possible to come across with an undecorated clock in Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace museum clock collections and private collections which is a differentiating feature of these clock collections.
Another point that emerges from the present research is the evaluation of the difference between clocks sent by the Europeans as gifts and those produced for the Ottoman market. It is observed that the Europeans struggled to attract the attention of the Ottomans to European clocks and that is why the Europeans were sending highly valuable clocks as gifts. This led to the Ottoman admiration of European clocks and a consequent increase in the amount of European clocks on the Ottoman market. Nevertheless, even after the clock was integrated into commercial relations with the Ottomans for general consumption, the Europeans did not change the style and technique of those sent as diplomatic gifts. This was most likely being aware of the Ottoman taste; the Europeans did not attempt to move too far from the locus of Ottoman desire.
In summary, all these facts imply that clocks, as the object of diplomatic gift, gained a new significance with their introduction as an object for the Ottoman market. However, my opinion is that neither European nor Ottoman clocks influenced each other. For the Europeans, this was due to the Europeans’ awareness of Ottoman taste. They were even producing clocks that referred to the identity of the Ottoman owners to attract their attention. For example, if the owner was to be a scientist, the clock was decorated with a globe, telescope, compass and quadrant; if it was made for a military officer, it was designed with a gun, cannonball and flag
101
(Yıldız 2006, 936). On the other hand, although technical developments in the European clock industry influenced Ottoman-made clocks’ mechanical system, the Ottomans did not follow the European approach in their decoration and instead adhered to their own tradition. This may be associated with clocks’ significance in terms of Islamic religion, as the objects of displaying prayer times since the clock was primarily used in mosques.
All these facts suggest that in contrast to Ottoman art and architecture, which interacted with European art and architecture especially with the appearance of a new genre of the 18th and 19th centuries, generally called ‘‘eclectic,’’ there is no affinity in the traditional appearance of Ottoman clocks with European ones, except in the adaptation of the European technical and mechanical working systems. This implies that Ottoman clock-making did not abandon its own style and persist in the ‘‘appropriation’’40 (Nelson 2003, 160-173) of 18th and 19th century European art and architecture.
All in all, this study has investigated various examples of European and Ottoman made clocks, but within the limits of this thesis, only a selection of clocks is covered. However, this does not imply that the clocks mentioned throughout this thesis cannot lead to a broader conclusion about the European clocks sent to the Ottomans and the ones produced by the Ottomans themselves. This is because each clock, specifically selected, is representative of its own category enabling the study of their artistic style, type and usage. This will pave a way for future studies about clocks regarding their categorization and will lead to analyze similarities and differences among clocks in terms of their artistic style, type and usage. Last but not
40 According to the definition of Robert Nelson, ‘‘appropriation’’ is applied to the preexisting element ‘‘to make its own.”
102
least, this study will enlighten future research about objects, as the illustrative of a certain time period and region, since as proven by exemplified clocks; objects have not only a functional role, but also a representative position in terms of diplomacy, commerce, culture and art.
103
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. Primary Sources
Anafarta, Nigar. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu ile Lehistan (Polonya) arasındaki
Münasebetlerle ilgili Tarihi Belgeler, 1979.
B.O.A, AMD. 33/80.
B.O.A. İ. DH. 14106, A.MKT.MHM. 32/100.
Britten, F.J. Old Clocks and Watches&Their Makers. London: B.T.Batsford, 94
High Holborn, 1904.
Brown, Horatio F. ‘‘Venetian Diplomacy at the Sublime Porte in the Sixteenth
Century,’’ Studies in the History of Venice. Vol. 2. London, 1907, 1-38.
Busbecq, Ogier Ghiselin. Turkish Letters. London: Sickle Moon Books, 2001.
Buvat, Jean. Journal de la Regence (1715-1723). Paris, 1865.
Çelebi, Evliya. Evliya Çelebi Seyahatnamesi. Istanbul: Zuhuri Danışman Yayınevi, 1969.
Dolmabahçe Palace, Ankara: TBMM Basımevi, 2008.
Meyer, Wolfgang. Catalogue of Clocks and Watches in the Topkapı Palace Museum. Istanbul, N/A.
Mouradgea d'Ohsson, Ignatius XVIII. yüzyıl Türkiyesi’nde Örf ve Adetler, 1740
-1807. Istanbul: Kervan Kitapçılık, 143-145.
Salomons, David Lionel. ‘‘The Firm of Brequet,’’ Breguet. London: Kent and
Sussex Company, 1921, 7-16.
104
Schweigger, Salomon. Ein newe Reyßbeschreibung auß Teustschland Nach
Constantinopel und Jerusalem (11578-1581). Nürnberg 1608, reprint: Graz (Akademische Druckund Verlagsanstalt) 1964.
TSM, D. 2400/8 Y.1b.
TSM, D. 3360/D. 2423/5 Y. 1b.
TSM E. 11976/3.
Yirmisekiz Mehmed Çelebi'nin Fransa Seyahatnamesi. Istanbul: Tarih Mecmuası
Yayınları, 1970.
II. Secondary Sources
Acar, Özgen. ‘‘Galata’da İsviçreli Saatçiler,’’ Antik Dekor. Vol. 110, January 2009,
142-147.
Acar, Şinasi. Saatçi Eflaki Dede, 2011. Available from: http://www.toprakisveren.org.tr/2011-90-sinasiacar.pdf
Virginia Aksan, Ahmed Resmi Efendi (1700-1783), Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, 1997.
Arslan, Necla. Gravür ve Seyahatnamelerde İstanbul. İstanbul: İstanbul Büyükşehir
Belediyesi Kültür İşleri Daire Başkanlığı Yayınları, 1992.
Bann, Stephen. ‘‘Meaning/Interpretation,’’ Critical Terms for Art History. Eds.
Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2003, 87-100.
Bell, C. Jeanenne. Collector’s Encyclopedia Pendant and Pocket Watches 1500-
1950. Kentucky: Collectors Book, 2004.
Breguet ve Osmanlı İmparatorluğu (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: Topkapı Palace
Museum, 2010.
105
Carrier, James. “Gifts, Commodities, and Social Relations: A Maussian View of
Exchange” Spinger. Vol.6 no.1, March, 1991, 119-136.
Çakmut, Feza.‘‘İsviçre Cep Saatleri,’’ Antik Dekor. Vol. 81, February, 2004, 76-84.
---. ‘‘Zamana Değer Katan Saatler,’’ Antik Dekor. Vol. 78, September-November,
2003, 72-82.
---. ‘‘Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Saatleri,’’ Zamanın Görünen Yüzü: Saatler (exhibition
catalogue). Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2009.
Çam, Nusret. Osmanlı Güneş Saatleri, Kültür Bakanlığı, Ankara, 1990.
Çığ, Kemal. ‘‘Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Saat Seksiyonu,’’ Sanat Dünyamız. Vol. 12.
Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, January, 1978, 2-8.
Dopierala, Kazimierz.‘‘Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Polonyalılar,’’ Savaş ve
Barış:15.-19. yy. Osmanlı-Lehistan İlişkileri (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, Polonya Kültür ve Sanat Bakanlığı, 1999.
François Georgeon, ‘‘Changes of Time: An Aspect of Ottoman Modernization’’
Lectures, New Perspectives of Turkey, 2011, 181-195.
Froom, Aimée E. ‘‘The Sultan and the Kaiser: Gift Exchange between Abdülhamid
II and Wilhelm II,’’ Gifts of the Sultan: The Arts of Giving at the Islamic
Court. Ed. Linda Komaroff (exhibition catalogue). New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2011, 167-169.
Ginzburg, Carlo. The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-century
Miller. John Hopkins University Press, 1992.
Gregoire, Helene Desmet. Büyük Divan XVIII. Yüzyıl Fransa’sında Türkler ve Türk
Dünyası.Tr. Mehmet Ali Kılıçbay. Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık, 1991.
Göçek, Fatma Müge. East Encounters West: France and the Ottoman Empire in the
Eighteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
Güllüoğlu, Abdullah. The First Ottoman Delegation to Prussia in 1763-1764 and Its
Depiction in a Costume Album from Berlin. Fashioning the Self in
106
Transcultural Settings: The Uses and Significance of Dress in Self-Narratives. Ed. Claudia Ulbirch and Richard Wittmann Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, Unpublished article, 2014.
Hamadeh, Shirine. The City’s Pleasures: Istanbul in the Eighteenth century, Seattle
& London: University of Washington Press, 2008.
Hitzel, Frédérich. Diplomatik Armağanlar: Osmanlı İmparatorluğu ve Batı Avrupa
Ülkeleri Arasında Modern Çağda Yapılan Kültürel Değiş Tokuş. Harp ve
Sulh: Avrupalılar ve Osmanlılar. Ed. Dejanirah Couto. Tr. Şinasi Tekeli. Istanbul: Kitap Yayınevi, 2010.
İhsanoğlu, Ekmeleddin. ‘‘Science in the Ottoman Empire,’’ Ottoman Civilization.
Eds. Halil İnalcık, Günsel Renda, İstanbul, 2002, 318-343.
İrepoğlu, Gül. Ottoman Imperial Jewelry: Reading History Through Jewelry.
Istanbul: Bilkent Kültür Girişimi Yayınları, 2012.
---. Lale: Doğada, Tarihte, Sanatta. Istanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2013.
Kurz, Otto. Sultan için Bir Saat: Yakındoğu’da Avrupa Saat ve Saatçileri. Tr. Ali
Özdamar. Istanbul: Kitapyayınevi, 2005.
Majda, Tadeusz. ‘‘Polonya Koleksiyonlarında Osmanlı Sanatı,’’ Savaş ve Barış:15.
-19. yy. Osmanlı-Lehistan İlişkileri (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: T.C.
Kültür Bakanlığı, Polonya Kültür ve Sanat Bakanlığı, 1999.
---. 7th International Congress of Turkish Art. Warsaw: Polish Scientific Publisher,
1990.
Mauss, Marcel. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Tr. W. D. Halls. London&New York: Routledge Classics, 1966.
---. Sosyoloji ve Antropoloji. Ankara: Doğu-Batı Yayınları, 1995.
Milli Saraylar Saat Müzesi Kataloğu. Ankara: TBMM Basımevi, N/A.
Naksali, Emine Gürsoy. Hediyelik Kelimeler, Hediye Kitabı. Eds. Emine Gürsoy,
107
Aylin Koç. Istanbul: Kitapevi, 2007.
Necipoğlu, Gülru. Architecture, Ceremonial and Power: The Topkapı Palace in the
Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries. MA, London (The MIT Press), 1991.
---. ‘‘Süleyman the Magnificent and the Representation of Power in the Context of
Ottoman-Hapsburg-Papal Rivalry,’’ The Art Bulletin. 71, 1989, 401-427.
Nelson, Robert S. “Appropriation,” Critical Terms for Art History. Eds. Robert S.
Nelson and Richard Shiff. Chicago&London: University of Chicago Press,
2003, 160-173.
Ortaylı, İlber. ‘‘Gifts and the Topkapı Palace,’’ Gifts of the Sultan: The Arts of
Giving at the Islamic Court. Ed. Linda Komaroff (exhibition catalogue). London&New Haven:Yale University Press, 2011, 167-169.
Önder, Mehmet. Yurt dışı Müzelerinde Türk Eserleri. Istanbul: Başbakanlık
Basımevi, 1989.
Özdemir, Kemal. Ottoman Clocks and Watches. Istanbul: Creative Yayıncılık, 1993.
Piwocka, Magdalena. ‘‘Polonya Koleksiyonlarındaki Osmanlı Çadırları,’’ Savaş ve
Barış:15.-19. yy. Osmanlı-Lehistan İlişkileri (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: T.C. Kültür Bakanlığı, Polonya Kültür ve Sanat Bakanlığı, 1999, 53.
Raby, Julian, ‘‘A Study of Paradox: Mehmed the Conquerer as a Patron of the Arts,’’
Oxford Art Journal. Vol 5, 1, 1982, 3-8.
Reindl-Kiel, Hedda. ‘‘Dogs, Elephants, Lions, a Ram and a Rhino on Diplomatic
Mission,’’ Animals as Gifts to the Ottoman Court. Animals and People in the Ottoman Empire. Ed. Suraiya Faroqhi. Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık, 2005a, 271-286.
---. “Ottoman-European Cultural Exchange: East is East and West is West, and
Sometimes the Twain Did Meet Diplomatic Gift Exchange in the Ottoman
Empire,” Frontiers of Ottoman Studies. Eds. Colin Imber, Keiko Kiyotaki and Rhoads Murphey. London: I.B. Tauris, 2005b, 113-123.
Renda, Günsel, “Searching for New Media in 18th Century Ottoman Painting: Some Archival Sources as Documents,” Arts, Women and Scholars: Studies in
Ottoman Society and Culture, Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Hans Georg Majer.
Eds. Sabine Prator and Christoph K. Neumann. Istanbul: Simurg Kitapçılık,
108
2002a, 451-479.
---. “Selim III's Portraits and the European Connection,” Art Turc / Turkish Art. 10th
International Congress of Turkish Art, Geneva 17-23 September 1995. Eds. Francois Déroche, Charles Genequand, Günsel Renda, and Michael Rogers. Genève: Fondation Max van Berchem, 1999, 567-578.
---. “Osmanlılarda Portreli Nişanlar,” Uluslararası Sanat Tarihi Sempozyumu. Prof.
Dr. Gönül Öney'e Armağan, İzmir 10-13 October 2001. İzmir: Ege
Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sanat Tarihi Bölümü, 2002b, 491-502.
---. “Propagating the Imperial Image: Tasvir-i Humayun,” The Sultan’s Portrait:
Picturing the House of Osman. Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür
Yayınları, 2000, 442-542.
Qaddumi, Ghada Hijjawi. Book of Gifts and Rarities (Kitab al-Hadaya wa al-Tuhaf).
Cambridge&Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Sajdi, Dana. ‘‘Decline, its Discontents and Ottoman Cultural History: By Way of
Introduction,’’ Ottoman Tulips, Ottoman Coffee: Leisure and Lifestyle in the Eighteenth Century. London&New York: Tauris Academic Studies, 2007, 1-40.
Savaşcın, Yılmaz. ‘‘Osmanlı Kuyumculuğu II,’’ Antik-Dekor. Vol.8, 1990, 136-139.
Segal, Sam. ‘‘Tulips portrayed. The Tulip Trade in the 17th Century,’’ Tulip: A
Symbol of Two Nations. Eds. Michiel Roding, Hans Theunissen, Utrecht/Istanbul: Turco-Dutch Friendship Association, 1993, 29-31.
Sherry, F. John. ‘‘Gift Giving in Anthropological Perspective,’’ Journal of Consumer
Research. Vol. 10, 2 September, 1983, 157-168.
Sonat, Göksen. ‘‘Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi’ndeki Osmanlı Zevkiyle Yapılmış Avrupa
Porselenleri,’’ Osmanlı Sarayı’nda Avrupa Porselenleri. Istanbul: Sakıp
Sabancı Museum, 2005, 13-19.
Timothy, James Clark. ‘‘On the Social History of Art,’’ Image of the People:
Gustave Courbet and the 1848 Revolution. Princeton& New Jersey, 1982, 9- 20.
109
Topkapı Palace Clock Collection, Exceptional Timepieces at the Seraglio (exhibition
catalogue). Istanbul: T.C. Ministry of Culture and Tourism General Directorate of Monuments and Museums Topkapı Palace Museum, February, 2013.
Toros, Taha. Turco-Polish Relations in History. Istanbul, 1983.
The Anatolian Civilizations III: Seljuk/Ottoman, exhibition catalogue, Istanbul:
Topkapı Palace Museum, 1983.
Tuncer, Hadiye. Osmanlı Diplomasisi ve Sefaretnameler. Istanbul: Kaynak
Yayınları, 2010.
Unat, Faik Reşit. Osmanlı Sefirleri ve Sefaretnameleri. Ankara: Tarih Kurumu
Yayınları, 1968.
Uzak Komşu Yakın Anılar: Türkiye-Polonya İlişkilerinin 600 Yılı, (exhibition
catalogue), Istanbul: Sakıp Sabancı Museum, 2014.
Ülkmen, Perran. ‘‘Saatçiliğimiz,’’ Türk Etnoğrafya Dergisi. IV, 14-19.
Whitehead, John. ‘‘Royal Riches and Parisian Trinkets, The Embassy of Said
Mehemet Pasha to France in 1741-42 and its Exchange of Gifts,’’ The Court
Historian. Vol.14, 2, Dec., 2009, 161-175.
Wishnitzer, Avner. Reading Clocks Alla Turca: Time and Society in the Late
Ottoman History, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.
Yaman, Bahattin. Osmanlı Saray Sanatkarları: 18. Yüzyıl’da Ehl-i Hıref. Istanbul:
Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları, 2008.
Yenişehirlioğlu, Filiz. ‘‘İkonografi, İkonoloji ve Osmanlı Sanatı,’’ Sanat Tarihinde
İkonografik Araştırmalar. Ankara: Hacettepe University, 1993, 579-593.
Yıldız, Netice. Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda İngiliz Saatleri ve Topkapı Sarayı
Koleksiyonu, Belleten, LXX 259, December 2006, 919-960.
Zaman Makineleri: A.Naim Arnas Collection (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul:Yapı
110
Kredi Yayınları, 2013.
Zamanın Görünen Yüzü: Saatler (exhibition catalogue). Istanbul: Yapı Kredi
Yayınları, 2009.
Zygulski, Zdzislam, Jr. Ottoman Art in the Service of Empire. New York&London:
New York University Press, 1991.
1001 Inventions: Muslim Heritage in Our World. Ed. Salim TS Al-Hassani,
Manchester, Foundation of Science, Technology and Civilization, 2006.
111
APPENDICES
A. Table of Gifts
Table I41
Gifts of Mehmed Efendi to the French King
Gift Number
Arab horses harnessed with ermine fur
2
Arc with quiver and 60 arrows
1
Saber encrusted with precious stones
1
Pieces of very fine muslin
8
Ermine fur coat
1
Bottles of Mecca balm
6
Gifts of Mehmed Efendi to the Regent
Richly harnessed horse
1
Pieces of brocade from Greece
6
Pieces of Indian cloth
4
Ermine coat
1
Hankerchiefs
4
Bottles of Mecca balm
6
Gifts of Mehmed Efendi to the Minister of Foreign Relations
Ermine fur coat
1
Gifts of the French King to Mehmed Efendi
Damaskin gun of gold
1
Pairs of gold pistols
2
Diamond studded belt for saber
1
Pieces of velvet with gold flowers
2
Carpets of la Savonnerie
4
Large mirrors by Colet
2
Commodes by Cresson
2
Nécessaire by Colet
1
Bureaus
2
Bookcase furnished with glass and a chest
1
Clocks
6
Watches
6
Snuff boxes
6
Other pieces of jewelry
-
Gifts of the King to the Steward
Clock by Turret
1
Gifts of the King to the Master of Ceremonies
Gold watch
1
41Fatma Müge Göçek. East Encounters West: France and the Ottoman Empire in the Eighteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
112
Gifts of the King to the Physician
Gold watch
1
Table II
Gifts of Mehmed Said to the King
Gift Number
Mace with a gold shaft decorated with diamonds
1
Armor enriched with pearls
1
Harness and velvet saddle enriched with diamonds for war horse
1
Large silver bowl for the horse to drink from
1
Thick silver chains with rings to tie the horse up
1
Gold and silver tissued straps
2
Breast strap with a gold buckle
1
Stirrups enriched with diamonds
2
Headstall with gold enameled diamonds
1
Sabers in silver with damask
6
Small velvet embroidered cushion
1
Gold pistols with precious stones
2
Pistols with fur covers
2
Cartridge pouch with diamonds
1
Powder flask with diamonds
1
Green velvet quivers with diamonds
2
Gilded silver guns
4
Gun with gold texture
1
Dagger with diamonds
1
Silver dagger with diamonds
1
Gold fiber enameled dagger
1
Indian dagger with a jade handle
1
Indian dagger, silver engraved in relief
1
Turkish knife with damask cover
1
Turkish knife with ivory handle
1
A pair of solid gold stirrups in theTurkish style
1
Tent, made of Persiangold cloth lined with satin
1
Gifts of the King to Mahmud I
Silver chandeliers by Ballin
-
Round table for twelve people
1
Saucer
12
Turkish style spoons
12
Tea service
1
Hand-wash basin and a pitcher by Germain
1
Great mirrors
2
Carpets of la Savonnerie
-
113
Great organ
1
Furniture with inlaid work
-
Microscope by M. Lebas
1
Telescope
1
Binoculars with gold mounts
2
Instruments for surgery, clock-making, mathematics and gun-smithing
-
Large nécessarie in marquetry and gilt bronze, each filled with silver fittings for coffee, sorbet and jam
2
Set of candelabra with candleholder in the center
8
Marquetry armoire
1
Some scarlet cloth
-
Cushions of gold and silver cloth
54
Lyon silk
-
Gilt braid and fringers
-
Opera glass
-
Gold snuff-boxes
4
Rock crystal chandelier
1
Ring with a large diamond which is a polite way of giving money. Normally the King also gives gold boxes with his portrait surrounded by diamonds, which they quickly traded in for pastes. However, since according to Islamic rules human image was not appropriate, the box was not given to the Ottoman ambassador (Whitehead 2009, 165).
1
Braizers (Whitehead 2009,166)42
2
Gifts of the French King to Grandvizier
Divan made of eighteen large cushions
1
Scarlet cloth and fringes
-
Silver ewer and basin by Germain
-
Gifts of the French King to Foreign Minister (Reis’ül-Küttab)
A set of gold-mounted flasks
1
A table veneered with mother-of-pearl and gold
1
Pen with a diamond
1
A piece of scarlet cloth
1
Tea sets
2
A piece of scarlet cloth
1
Gifts of the King to the Said Efendi’s son
Large box containing a tea and coffee service of yellow-ground Meissen porcelain
1
42 One of the braziers is in the Topkapı Palace Museum. The existing braizer is signed by Jean-Claude Duplessis who was the chief designer at the yougn porcelain factory at Vincennes-Serves. Whitehead states that it shares the general principles of Duplessis’ modelling of the Rococo porcelain.
114
Japanese lacquer
-
Gilt-bronze clock with red lacquer sides
1
Table III43
Gifts of the Polish King to the Ottoman Sultan (17th c.)
TSMA- E.3957/8
Gift Number
Packs of sable
5
Silver basin and kettle
1
Small silver basin and kettle
1
Big standing clock
1
Small amber clock
1
Silver large cups with covers
2
Medium sized silver lamp-holders
2
Small sized silver lamp-holders
2
Small silver drinking vessel
1
Small bowl with 2 sets of tools
1
Rifles with cock
2
Saxson dog leashes
5
Leashes
2
Presents sent by the King of Poland to the Sultan (17th c.)
TSMA- E. 11976/3
Ornamental silver mirror
1
Ornamental golden amber bowl and kettle
1
Ebony trunk inlaid with silver containing cups of different colors
1
Big standing clock
1
Amber clock
1
Sheath for bows
1
Box of chess
1
Golden ebony case
1
Black sables
2000
Black foxes
14
Different dog leashes
-
Hawks
-
Stone-grey falcons
-
Gift sent by Auguste III King of Poland, through his emissary (Joseph Sierakowski) to Sultan Mahmud I (October 1732/ 1145)
TSMA- D.2376/5, Y.1b
43 Nigar Anafarta, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu ile Lehistan (Polonya) arasındaki Münasebetlerle ilgili Belgeler, 1979.
115
Black trunk containing gold inlaid porcelain pieces
1
Medium sized mirrors
2
Presents sent by Augustus III, King of Poland, to Sultan Osman III and presented by his envoy, the Minister of Lithuania Jan Mniszech (May 1756)
TSMA- D. 2400/8 Y.1b
Silver tray
1
Chair of ebony
1
Porcelain clock
1
Porcelain kettles
3
Porcelain cups
12
Porcelain bowl
1
Porcelain medicine boxes
2
Porcelain dish
1
Presents brought to Sultan Abdülhamid I by Polish Envoy Karol Boskamb Lassopolski (April, 1777)
TSMA- E. 2422/3
Pair of golden candlesticks
1
Golden chest pen and ink-case
1
Ornamental chest clock
1
Pairs of velvet pillows (mitilli pesend)
6
Velvet piece for 3 mats (mitilli pesend)
1
Saxony basin and 1 kettle
1
(April 14, 1777) Presents brought by the Polish envoy Karol Boskamp Lassopolski to Sultan Abdulhamid I
TSMA- E. 3961/10
Pairs of pillows from gold-laced embroidered velvet and from the same velvet a big mat
6
Pair of gold candlesticks with a big gold pen and ink-case
1
Saxony made, flower imbedded 1 kettle and 1 basin
1
Chest clock
1
Presents brought by the Polish envoy Karol Boskamp Lassopolski to Sultan Abdülhamid I (1771)
TSMA- E. 3957/6
Mirror
1
Clock
1
Door curtain
1
Amber-framed mirrors made in Poland
2
Amber chairs made in Poland
2
Rolls of Chinese cloth
6
Presents to the Sultan from the Polish envoy (orta elçi) (18th c.)
TSMA No: E. 11976/4
116
Big hanging clock with an outer envelope of blue gilded mother-of-pearl and the top decorated with war weapons in six different colors
1
Chest containing a tea and coffee set of gold gilded
1
Saxony-made silver flower tray
1
Artistically made clock with an amber case
1
Saxony made bowl, kettle and jar
1
Good quality woolen cloth, heavy velvet , heavy satin and other materials
-
Presents brought back by Numan Bey from the King of Poland to Sultan Abdülhamid I, from Poland where Numan Bey had been sent as envoy (June, 1778)
TSMA- D. 2423/5 Y. 1b
Round and oval plates of various sizes
73
Round and oval lattice-covered plates
16
Fruit trays
16
Salt-shakers
12
Oval and round plates
35
Jars
8
Presents to the Sultan from the Polish Ambassador (18th c.)
TSMA- E. 3957/7
Silver bowls
2
Silver spigots
2
Big silver candlesticks with scissors and hood
2
Fruit bowl adorned with silver network
1
Silver hanging coffee-trays with chain
2
Silver soup bowls with lid
2
Silver pans
12
Silver barber basins and kettle with ewer in two boxes
2
Silver framed mirrors
2
Silver candleships with 5 candles each
2
Silver candlesticks with 3 candles each
2
Silver candlesticks with 2 candles each
2
Leather covered trunk containing one silver coffee brewer
1
Silver tea brewers
2
Silver tea and sugar bowls
3
Silver spoons
2
Silver flower vases
6
Silver cup holders
6
117
Table IV44
Gifts sent to Austria by the Ottomans
Gift Number
Camels
-
Hinnies
-
Turkish and Arabian horses
-
Leopards
-
Harness and saddles
-
Palanquin and Tent
-
Turkish and Iranian textiles and carpets
-
Textiles embroidered with gold
-
Cotton cloth
-
Sable fur
-
Caftans
-
Embroidered shirts
-
Napkins
-
Embroidered textiles
-
Small bags for musk
-
Gifts sent to the Ottomans by Austria
2000 gold duka
2000
Telescope
1
Gold chain and medallion
1
Basin with likeable materials
-
Jars
-
Silver drinking vessel
1
Other silver materials
-
Wollen textiles
-
Gifts, sent to Vienna by the ambassador Ibrahim Pasha after the peace treaty of Passarowitz in 171845
Istanbul baldachin
-
Tent
1
Iranian mat
2
Cushion
2
Istanbul pillow
4
Diamond
71
Gold pistol
3
Osprey
1
Diamond
494
Ruby
160
44 Helene Desmet Gregoire, Büyük Divan XVIII. Yüzyıl Fransa’sında Türkler ve Türk Dünyası. (Le Divan Magique, D’Orient Turc en France au XVIII Siécle, Paris: 1980) Tr. Mehmet Ali Kılıçbay. Istanbul: Eren Yayıncılık, 1991, 186.
45 These gifts suggest how much the Ottomans gave weight to diplomatic gift-giving although they were under oppressive circumstances on those days (Unat 1968, 26-27).
118
B. CATALOGUE OF CLOCKS
Chapter I
Figure
Type
Origin
Year
Size
Collection
Inv. no
Description
Photo
12
Scale model of Watch Tower
Swiss
19th c.
90x50x30 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/64
This is a clock made in the shape of the watch tower in Izmir, commissioned by Grand vizier Küçük Said Pasha in 1901 for the 25th anniversary of Sultan Abdülhamid II’s accession to the throne.
13
Table Clock
Russian
mid- 19th c.
28 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/258
The griffin, or gryphon – a legendary creature with the body of a lion and the head and wings of an eagle – is a gifted clock to Sultan Abdülmecid II by the Russian Tsar Nicholas II on the purpose of the 25th Anniversary of the Sultan’s accession to the throne. It is featured with the monogram of Tsar Nicholas II- ‘‘N.II. XXV. Abd.’’ – a tughra of Sultan Abdülmecid II set with brilliants. The clock signed by the clock-maker J.H. Moser Co. Paris is made of light-colored jade, known as balgami stone. The gryphon carries a sword and shield encircled with a line rubies and emeralds on the gold background embellished with the jeweler Fabergé.
119
14
Pocket
Watch
Swiss
circa
mid-
19th c.
3 cm
Private
Collection
-
The gold pocket watch was made by Piguet. It is dialed with
Romen numerals on a white enamel background. The front
cover is decorated with the portrait of a European lady framed
with an engraved medallion.
15
Brooch
Watch
-
circa
mid-
19th c.
3 cm
Private
collection
-
This is an Avance Retard enamel, golden brooch watch,
produced for the Ottoman market. It features with an Ottoman
Turkish dial. Its front cover is decorated with a landscape
painting in an engraved flower-shaped frame.
16
Pistol
Shaped
Clock
Swiss 19th c.
height
11 cm
Topkapı
Palace
Museum
53/122
It is featured with colored enamel on gold. Its case is
decorated with pearls and rabbit figures made of golden
plates. The white enamel dial features Ottoman Turkish
numerals. The clock is in the shape of a pistol, but
functionally it sprays perfume when the trigger is pulled.
120
Chapter II
2.2.1. - Landscape Painting as Clock Decoration
Figure
Type
Origin
Year
Size
Collection
Inv. no
Description
Photo
17
Table Clock
French
1810
29,5x33,5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/106
This table clock is one of the seven ‘‘Pendule Sympathique’’ clocks made by Brequet exclusively for the palaces. It was sold for 35,000 French Francs to the French Foreign Ministry and later gifted to Mahmud II by Napoleon I.
The Ottoman Turkish dialed clock has a golden case and works with a synchronized system with a pocket watch. It was featured with a chronometer escapement, adjusted by the main clock at midnight.
The silver clock is placed amidst four gold-gilded columns standing on four feet and all sides of the clock are covered with glass. While upper parts of the clock are symmetrically ornamented with seven emeralds, its lower part is decorated with the same number of rubies. The pedestal of the clock is featured with the depiction of the panoramic view of the Bosphorus from four different angles: the Seraglio Point, Rumelian and Anatolian Fortresses, entrance to the Bosphorus and the Old Beşiktaş Palace. Yet, the artist of these panoramic views is not known.
121
24
Table
Clock
French
19th c.
27x35x17
cm
Ali Naim
Arnas
collection
-
This is a porcelain clock with a landscape painting on the
front side under the enameled dial, featured with Ottoman
Turkish numerals. The painting is placed under the dial
amidst two twisted columns on the front surface. The
painting most probably illustrates a shore in Tarabya. There
are village houses, a fountain and figures hanging around the
shore. The clock case is also painted with the bouquets of
flowers, framed with golden-gilded circle on a blue
background.
25
Table
Clock
French
19th c.
26x46x14
cm
Ali Naim
Arnas
collection
-
This table clock, made from gold plated zinc with
porcelain clock face, has dialed with Ottoman Turkish
numerals on its middle part. The clock stands on four feet
decorated with Rococo motifs.
On its lower and upper part there are blue-framed
landscape paintings, illustrating village houses in the midst
of trees near a lake. The region, depicted in this painting, is
not recognized, but it could be an imaginary painting by
being inspired from the paintings made before.
26
Pocket
Watch
French
1790s
dial
diameter
4,5 cm
Topkapı
Palace
Museum
53/130
This pocket watch was made by the French clock-maker
Le Roy. It has a verge with fuse and link chain winding by
key.
There is a seascape painting on its face, framed with
flower-shaped red octagonal form. The painting illustrates
two sailing boats on the sea, two churches near waterfalls
122
and village houses on the shore. These suggest that the region, depicted on this painting, is a place out of the Ottoman territories.
27
Pocket Watch
French
1820
-
Private collection
-
The pocket watch, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is made for the Ottoman Empire. The front cover is decorated with a seascape view, framed with dodecagon form. It illustrates a sailing boat near the shore with towers in the midst of trees on the shore. The view of village houses is also seen from a distance on the left shore. On the back over of the watch is decorated with a bouquet of white flowers on a red background.
28
Pocket Watch
French
1830
-
Private collection
-
The pocket watch, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is made for the Ottoman Empire. The front cover is decorated with a seascape view, framed with star-shaped hexagonal form. It illustrates two large-sized boats sailing on the sea, viewed from the midst of trees at the center of the painting. The rest of the pocket watch is decorated with Rococo motifs on a pink background.
123
29
Pocket Watch
French
18th c.
dial diameter
63 mm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/82
This ‘‘Brequet et Fils’’ (Brequet and his Sons) hallmarked watch has two cases. The pocket watch stands on a golden-gilded pedestal, decorated with a musical instrument, lyre, at the center of its front cover. The pedestal is also ornamented with reliefs on the four sides of the watch. The pocket watch is dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals on its white enamel, framed with a tiny band, ornamented with small floral motifs on a red background. The back cover of the pocket watch is decorated with an Istanbul scene, framed with a blue-colored hexagonal enameled star.
30
Pocket Watch
Geneva
circa 1830
48 mm
Private collection
-
This is a pocket watch produced around 1830s for the Ottoman Market. It illustrates a view of the Bosphorus and a village in the background with a sunset behind mountains. The landscapes are framed with a dodecagon forms, surrounded with floral motifs of blue enamel background. There is a chain of five gold enamel which links Brequet-type gold and enamel chain. The watch is dialed with the Ottoman Turkish numerals.
31
Pocket Watch
French
18th c.
4,9 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/154
This golden enameled pocket watch has double case with its key chain. It is featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals on its white enameled dial, and its back cover and key chain are ornamented with white floral motifs on a black background. The painting on the back cover illustrates the capsizing of a sailboat in the dark blue sea view, framed with a dodecagon circular form.
124
32
Pocket
Watch
French
circa 1800
dial diameter
5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/178
The pocket watch, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals on its white enamel dial, is framed with eleven sets of triple leaves embroidered with diamonds on the top of each set. Its fob chain is also designed with five sets of golden leaves and five pink enamel flowers with a piece of diamond at their center. On the back cover of the pocket watch musical instruments- mandolin, drum, harp and tambourine- is depicted at the center of dodecagon-form inverted star which is encircled with different types of colors flowers on a golden background.
33
Pocket Watch
Swiss
-
French
19th c.
5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/157
This is an ‘‘August Courvoisier et Cié’’ golden pocket watch with a double cap, made with the co-production of French and Swiss clock-makers. The front cover of the watch is decorated with enameled musical instruments - guitar, lute, harp, tambourine and trumpet whereas the lid of the back cover illustrates a view of Istanbul, including the Golden Horn, harbor, mosques and old village houses. The outermost part of paintings in both sides, framed with dodecagon form, is ornamented with the design of flowers and leaves. The white enamel dial, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is also embroidered with flower bouquets, giving the shape of crescent at the center. The inner cap is engraved with the name of the clock-maker in Ottoman Turkish.
125
34
Pocket Watch
English
18th c.
5,5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/152
This golden-gilded clock, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is signed as Perigal-Royal Exchange. There is painting on a gold enameled cover, depicting a sea view pointing out the Galata Tower on the left and a huge-sized sailing boat at the center with a small boat on its front side. The painting is surrounded with small pieces of rubies and the outermost part of the pocket watch is adorned with floral and geometrical motifs on a dark green background whereas the back cover of the watch is ornamented with the bouquets of flowers.
35
Automata Bracket Clock
19th c.
170x70x50 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/346
This automata bracket clock, made by the Recordon Company in London, is made of wood, featured with floral ornamentation on a red background. There are three dials on its front side, covered with glass. The white enamel dial features Ottoman Turkish numerals. The clock strikes on the hour and every quarter hour with various bells thanks to a reed organ that can play eight musical compositions. There is also a painting depicting landscape, viewed from a courtyard. When the organ is operated, the ship in the painting, being visible from a window begins to move and the moon passes through its various phases on the middle side of the clock.
126
36
Automata Clock
English
18th c.
45x90 cm
Dolmabahçe Palace Museum
11/550
This is an automata clock, made by the famous clock-maker George Prior (1782-1830) in the first half of 18th century. This wooden case clock, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals, is assumed to be produced for the Turkish market. The painting under the dial, illustrates a scene out of the Ottoman Empire. There are animal figures, curled crystals in the shape of waterfall and small boats and sails. When the organ inside the clock starts playing music in hourly or every three hour, animal figures, sailing boats and waterfall start moving. Since the clock is mechanically over-equipped, it is assumed among one of the most supreme clocks of its era.
37
Bracket Clock
English
1770
29x51 cm
Dolmabahçe Palace Museum
49/16
This bracket clock, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals on white enamel dial, was produced by a famous English company Markwick-Markham. The golden-gilded wooden case clock is wound up every 15 days.
There is a painting on the clock face, illustrating a landscape, a forest and a river seen behind trees.
38
Pendant Watch
English
1654
diameter
7,8 cm
inner case
5,2 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/199
This is a pendant clock, dating back to 1654, as the oldest English-made clock existing in the collections of Turkish museums. It is a gift from England to the daughter of Ahmed III, Fatma Sultan. It was was transferred to the palace treasury in 1733 from the estate of Fatma Sultan.
127
intermediary case
6,2 cm
outer case
7 cm
It has a yellow metal dial, featured with Ottoman Turkish numerals and signed by ‘‘Bird’’ on the back cover of the clock mechanism. Each side of the clock is decorated with paintings in the style of Turkish miniatures, according to Wolfgang Meyer. They illustrate the ship of a commander of Naval Forces (Kaptanpaşa Baştarde Gemisi), a horse carriage and interior hunting scenes. There are human figures wearing Ottoman headgears, depicted on the horseback.
While the inner surface of three leaves of this tulip-formed clock is covered with paintings, its outer surface is covered with green enamel and features an Ottoman Turkish inscription in verse, ‘‘Saatlerden biri Fakir İbrahim için çalıyor, senesi 1063’’ (One of the clocks chimes for Fakir İbrahim in the year 1063).
128
41
Tulip-shaped
clock
Geneva
c.1820
-
Private collection
-
It is a gold and enamel form watch designed as a scarlet tulip. It is produced for the use of women. It is hung around the neck.
42
Cage-shaped clock
Swiss
1750
55x31
x31
cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/51
This is a Swiss-made musical hanging bird case clock, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals. The white enamel dial of the clock is preserved under the cage. The clock strikes the hour and a bird song is produced by a cylinder with brass pins and by steel springs. There is a bird in the cage moving its wings, beak and neck at the same time when the mechanical system of clock works and springs. The landscape paintings, surrounding in the four sides of the clock decorated the cage although they are not in a large-scale. They illustrate seascapes, including meadows, mountains and sailing boats, with blurred brushstrokes.
129
46 Wolfgang Meyer, Catalogue of Clocks and Watches in the Topkapı Palace Museum, Istanbul, no date, 42.
2.2.2. - Floral and Geometric Motifs as Clock Decoration
Figure
Type
Origin
Year
Size
Collection
Inv. no
Description
Photo
43
Pocket Watch
French
18th c.
6 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/172
This Breguet-made pocket watch has double case decorated with floral motifs - tulips and roses – on the front and back cover. The bouquet of flowers is centered on an inverted dodecagon star on the front side whereas a rose window form, divided into twelve symmetric pieces, is decorated with flowers on the back cover. There are also two-single enameled pieces on its chain, ornamented with pink flowers.
44
Pocket Watch
Swiss
-
French
1st half of the 19th c.
5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/175
This is a golden pocket watch, made with the Swiss-French co-production, signed by Courvoiser et Cié. The clock face and its chain are decorated with a bouquet of flowers. Its stays, the back cap and the handle are also embroidered with pearls and the plates and blocks are artistically decorated in filigree work.46
130
45
Pocket
Watch
English
4,5 cm
Topkapı
Palace
Museum
53/142
This English-made pocket watch is produced by one of the
most famous clock company, Marwick-Markham. The
golden watch is embellished with a bouquet of flowers on a
green background at the center of a dodecagon form.
46
Wall
Clock
German
20th c.
17x23x9
cm
Ali Naim
Arnas
collection
-
The wooden case wall clock, dialed with Ottoman Turkish
numerals, has a pendulum, chains and weights. It is
decorated with simple floral motifs, especially with roses.
There are two big red roses on the top and four small-sized
blue roses on the four corners.
47
Table
Clock
German
20th c.
13x24x6
cm
Ali Naim
Arnas
collection
-
This is a porcelain table clock, featured with Ottoman
Turkish numerals. It has a simple design with its ovalshaped
case and paper clock face. Different types of flowers
ornaments the face of the clock, painted with simple, but
vividly colored brushstrokes. It stylistically reflects the
features of art nouveau of the 20th century European art.
131
48
Wall Clock
German
20th c.
15x21x10 cm
Ali Naim Arnas collection
-
This is a porcelain and wooden case wall clock, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals. It has a pendulum, chains and weights. The porcelain is decorated with art nuoveau style of the 20th century. There are two flowers painted on the top of clock with simple brushstrokes. The enameled dial is surrounded with geometrical design, painted with vivid colors.
132
2.2.3. - Portrait Painting as Clock Decoration
Figure
Type
Origin
Year
Size
Collection
Inv. no
Description
Photo
56
Pocket Watch
French
18th c.
-
Private collection
-
This French-made pocket watch is marked as Romilly a Paris. It has two portrait paintings on its both cover. While on the front cover there is the portrait of a knight in armor wearing a green sash, a red curtain and a classical column behind him, a portrait of a prince or a king wearing ermine over armor and a coronet on his head ornaments the back cover.
57
Pocket Watch
Swiss
19th c.
5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/184
This is a double cap pocket watch, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals. It was specially made for Sultan Abdülmecid during his reign. The front cover of is decorated with the portrait of Abdülmecid with his military uniform on a one-colored background. It is painted in the form of a medallion and its surrounding is designed with Rococo motifs on a yellow background. At the center of the back cover, there is a hexagonal form in the shape of a flower which is designed with musical instruments - lyre and tambourine and surrounded with flora motifs on a yellow background.
133
58
Pocket
Watch
Swiss
19th c.
-
Private
collection
-
This golden pocket watch, featured with Ottoman
Turkish numerals on a white enamel dial, was made
for Sultan Abdülmecid by Auguste Courvoisier. The
portrait of Abdülmecid is depicted on the front cover
in the form of an egg-shaped medallion. He is
portrayed with his military uniform and a red curtain
and a part of a column is painted on the background.
The back cover illustrates a globe, binoculars and a
book signed by Abdülmecid, symbolizing ‘‘Hatt-ı
Hümayun’’ (Imperial Edict).
59
Pocket
Watch
English
19th c.
-
Mehmet
Bozkurt
Collection
-
This pocket watch, dialed with Ottoman Turkish
numerals, was made on the occasion of the accession
of Sultan Abdülmecid, marked by Nacib K.
Djezvedjian as the Ottoman distributor of Edward
Prior clocks.
The front cover of the watch illustrates the portrait
of Abdülmecid in the shape of a medallion.
Abdülmecid was also depicted with his military
uniform symmetrically encircled with a gold bronze
and green Rococo-style frame. There are mutedcolored
clouds on the background which is also
adapted to the back cover of the pocket watch,
illustrating scenery of a city behind cypresses.
134
62
Pocket Watch
Swiss
2nd half of 19th c.
4,7 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/241
This pocket watch, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals, has double caps. The front lid cover illustrates the portrait of Sultan Abdülaziz, circled with an egg-shaped frame. The portrait is surrounded with blue-colored Rococo style elements on golden yellow background. The back cover is designed with a landscape, illustrating a fountain and a mosque near shore in the egg-shaped frame.
63
Pocket Watch
German
1889
5 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/190
This pocket watch, dialed with Latin numerals, marked as ‘‘A. Lange und Sihne-Dresden.’’ It is a gift of Emperor Wilhelm II to Sultan Abdülhamid II during his first visit to the Ottoman Empire in November 1889. On the front side there is the portrait of Wilhelm I, framed with thirty-six small diamonds and four rubies, symmetrically placed around four side of the oval-shaped frame. There is also a monogram in the form of his name’s first letter ‘‘W’’ on the back cover of the pocket watch, representing the rule of the Emperor.
135
Chapter III
Figure
Type
Origin
Year
Size
Collection
Inv. no
Description
Photo
64
Table Clock
Austrian
c.1720
8x8x8 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/194
This is an Austrian-made table clock, made for the order of the Ottoman palace by a clock-maker Joseph Dershinger from Wien around 1720s. It is ornamented with precious stones on its cube-shaped golden case. Each side of the clock is embroidered with enamels, diamonds, rubies and crystals. The clock mechanism on the top of the case is featured with an engraving, dialed with the Ottoman Turkish numerals and the clock case stands on four oval-formed feet. It is known as the earliest example of Austrian clocks existing today.
65
Wall Clock
Ottoman
c.1770
20x7x7 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/171
It is a weight-driven wall clock from the 1770s It is highly-embellished with rubies, diamonds and enamels. The upper part of the clock is crowned with a star and a crescent, representing the Ottoman Empire and the surrounding of gold-gilded dial is adorned with small pieces of diamonds.
136
66
Plate
Wall Clock
Ottoman
mid-17th c.
23 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/85
This round, plate-like wall clock, signed by Ottoman clock-maker Şahin, is among the earliest surviving examples of Ottoman clocks made in the mid-17th century. The clock face is totally ornamented with precious stones which again displays how much the precious stones were valuable in Ottoman culture. It is adorned with rubies, emerald and turquoise. The dial has Ottoman Turkish numerals on turquoise background and it is surrounded by the outermost circle ornamented with twelve flower-shaped motifs signifying each timepiece. Every flower has a ruby circled with six emeralds and there are twelve single rubies in the shape of tulip among the flowers. The innermost is designed with the blend of rubies and emeralds. The outmost edge covering the clock is again ornamented with numerous small pieces of rubies.
67
Plate
Wall Clock
Ottoman
mid-17th c.
18 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/86
This round, plate-like wall clock is also among the earliest surviving examples of Ottoman clocks produced in the mid-17th century. The frame and dial are made of silver and the dial features Ottoman Turkish numerals. The clock features a winding branch that emerges from an adorned root, the smaller branches connected to the main branch feature small leaves and flowers. The flowers have been depicted from various angels and the highly emphasized flower heads are drawn with lattice etching. There are also small red flower details among Ottoman Turkish numerals around the outermost circle.
137
68
Wall Clock
Ottoman
c. 1680
11x7x7cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/221
This Ottoman-made wall clock dates back to 1680s. It is in the shape of lantern placed on a mantel made by the clock-maker Abdurrahman which is inferred from the sign of the clock-maker “Âmel Abdulrahman” (made by Abdurrahman) on the back cover of the clock in Ottoman Turkish. Its dial has Ottoman Turkish numerals on a silver hollow circle. The case is gold gilded and adorned with floral engravings.
69
Table Clock
Ottoman
1687
-
1688
13x11cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/54
This is an Ottoman-made table clock dating back to the 17th century. It is made of silver and brass. It is shaped like a mosque domed with twelve corners and stood by three feet. The circular dial covered with glass features Ottoman Turkish numerals and the innermost is designed with engraved floral motifs. The dodecagon surface of the clock is also adorned with highly-emphasized flower heads and leaves depicted from various angels. The maker of this clock is known as Mustafa Aksarayi since his name is signed on the dial. “Âmel-i Mustafa Aksarayi, 1099.” (Made by Mustafa Aksarayi, 1099 (1687/1688).
138
70
Mosque
Wall Clock
Ottoman
c.1780
30x31x6
cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/235
This is a typical clock, made in the Ottoman workshops to be hung out mosques. Its inner and outer mechanisms are made from wood. There are three dials on the clock face. The first and second outermost circle of the dial features the names of the months and zodiac signs. The third outermost circle is divided into twelve and each division is divided into thirty-one to feature the days of the month. The front surface of the clock is adorned with bouquets of flowers painted in the style of Edinekâri (oil-on-wood painting) on a green background. There is a pediment inscribed in Ottoman Turkish, explaining the services of timepiece to the mosque and its congregation in keeping time for prayers:
“İşbu saat üzerinedir. Numayan olduğu vech üzere mezkur olan ma‘ariflerden ez-cümle saat meşhude ve daireteyn ruz-ü şeb eyyam visal ve daire-i eyyam sebu‘ ve vakt-ü halde elzem olan münebbihe araste tanzim ile olduğu gibi dahi emr u derecat, saireyi müştemil kemal-i itina ile tanzim ve deva-I evkatı müstakim izal ile i‘mal evkatı cami‘”
71
Table Clock
Ottoman
1725
38x26x16
cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/233
This table clock is signed by the Ottoman clock-maker Edirneli İbrahim in 1725 for Sultan Ahmed III. The working system of the clock displays the influence of English wall clocks in the production of Ottoman-made clocks. The wooden case of the clock has Ottoman Turkish numerals on its dial and it is lacquered and the glass shutters on both the front and back open. The clock has small windows on its sides. As in the precious mosque clock, this was also painted with the bouquet of flowers. Additionally, tulips as the most
139
popular flower of the 18th century in the Ottoman Empire is symmetrically depicted on the back side of the clock and other parts of the clock in the bouquets which suggests the integration of the Ottoman artistic taste not only paintings, but also clocks. The pediment above the dial features the name of the clock-maker “Saatçi Edirneli İbrahim” (Clock-maker Ibrahim from Edirne) inscribed in Ottoman Turkish. On the corners of the dial feature there is an Arabic inscription, “Accilu bisse lati kabl mevt” translated as “Perform your prayers at the prescribed time.”
72
Table Clock
Ottoman
1809
22 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/239
This Ottoman-made table clock, dating back to 1809, is shaped like a Mevlevi headdress. The dial has Ottoman Turkish numerals on a hollow circle. Below the circular dial there are symmetrically depicted two tulip forms engraved on the gilded wooden pedestal standing on four feet. The pedestal is surrounded by small turquoise beads ornamented with equal intervals. Above the headdress shaped additional part there is an Ottoman Turkish inscription which indicates the year made by the clock-maker and gives the name of timekeeper. “Muvakkit Sultan Mahmud Ahmed Gülseni’ül- Mevlevi ve sene 1224.” (“Member of the Mevlevi Order and Timekeeper to Sultan Mahmud Ahmed Gülseni, in the year 1224 (1804)”).
140
73
Skeleton Table
Clock
Ottoman
1861
28x80 cm
Dolmabahçe Palace Museum
47/221
This brass and wood made skeleton clock reminds the architectural form of a mosque. The clock face, dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals on a white enamel background, is in the shape of the dome of a mosque whereas the tower on the top of clock face with an Ottoman flag on its crescent and star can be attributed as a minaret of a mosque. As the Ottoman clock-makers signed the clocks on the front face of their clocks, the sign of Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi is also read on the dial with the place where it was produced, Istanbul.
74
Skeleton Table
Clock
Ottoman
19th c.
46x26x20 cm
Pedestal
20x40x28 cm
Topkapı Palace Museum
53/52
This skeleton table clock features a black wood pedestal and is made of brass. The clock is dialed with Ottoman Turkish numerals. The inscription ‘‘Muvakkit-i Cennet Mekan Sultan Mahmud Han- Ahmet Eflaki Dede el Mevlevi–Asitane’’ (‘‘Ahmed Eflaki Dede, member of the Mevlevi order, Timekeeper to Sultan Mahmud Han, May He Dwell in Paradise-Asitane’’) on the pedestal above the dial is signed by Ahmet Eflaki Dede Efendi in the calligraphy style of nesih.
141
75
Dagger with a Watch set
English
1747
-
Topkapı Palace Museum
-
-
It is an English-made clock on the hilt of the dagger. It is a gift sent by Mahmud I to Iranian ruler Nadir Shah in 1747, but it was brought back to the Ottoman Empire since Nadir Shah was assassinated in a civil uprising when the gifts were sent to him. The dagger is highly-embellished with three large cabochon emeralds into the hilt, small pieces of diamonds on its cover and with an attached English-made watch surmounting the pommel. The front cover of dagger is decorated with a full of fruit basket at the center while the back cover is embellished with a sequence of five fruit baskets framed with Rococo motifs.
142
C. TYPES OF CLOCKS
Automatic clock:
It is a mechanical clock automatically working.
Bracket clock:
It is an antique portable table clock.
Form-shaped clock:
It is a clock either shaped in the form of an object or a clock attached to an object as a part of it. Hence, they are used not only as a clock displaying time, but also as a decorative object. It has many types such as pistol-shaped clock, book-shaped clock, tulip-shaped clock, cage-shaped clock.
Longcase clock:
It is a long, free-standing clock.
Pocket Watch:
It is a small-sized pocket watch carried mostly by men in their pockets. Most of them also have a long chain which prevents pocket watch from being dropped.
Table clock:
It is a clock used by standing on table. It is mostly used for decorative purposes and their sizes are changeable.
Wall clock:
It is a clock hanging on a wall.
143
D. EUROPEAN AND OTTOMAN CLOCK-MAKERS WORKING FOR THE
OTTOMAN EMPIRE47
Abraham-Louis Breguet:
Born in Switzerland in 1747, but originally from France, and died in Paris in 1823. He learned clock-making from the second husband of his mother, Joseph Tattetten. He worked in Versailles as an apprentice and developed himself as a professional clock-maker. He set up an agency in Galata at the end of 1811 and produced a large quantity of clocks for high-ranking people under the service of the Ottoman court.
Brequet also charged a clock-maker, Le Roy, as his sales representative since he was a competent, talented, faithful and honest person, according to Brequet. Le Roy was also a French clock-maker. In addition to his work as a sales representative, he also sold clocks that he made.
George Prior (1782-1830) / Edward Prior (1800-1868):
Famous English clock-makers who produced pocket watches for exportation to the Ottoman Empire during the 18th and 19th centuries. Their exceptional clocks are preserved in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and in the British Museum in London, in addition to the ones in the Topkapı Palace Museum.
Marwick-Markham:
An 18th century English clock company originating from the collaboration of Robert Markham and his son-in-law James Markwick. Although the company started to work under Robert Markham, it mostly carried on a business in London under the name of Markham-Markwick.
Ahmed Eflaki Dede Efendi:
One of the Ottoman clock-makers sent to France in the reign of Sultan Mahmud II in the 19th century. Known as the best of the Ottoman clock-makers, he produced nine clocks throughout his lifetime. Some of his clocks, which have remained to our day, are exhibited in the Topkapı and Dolmabahçe Palace Museums. His last clock, produced in 1861, is in the form of a skeleton clock and is exhibited in the Dolmabahçe Museum clocks collection. One of his skeleton clocks was among the products sent to the first international exposition, the London Exposition, in 1851.
Şahin (1650) / Mustafa Aksarayî (1680) / Edirneli Ibrahim (1700) / Abdurrahman (1780):
The earliest source about Ottoman clocks and clock-makers give little information about the lives of these Ottoman clock-makers (Meyer N/A). Their clocks, which have their signatures and production dates, provide the only information about them.
47 This list does not include all European clock-makers producing clocks for the Ottoman Empire. It just addresses the clock-makers mentioned throughout this research.
144
E. TRANSCRIPTION OF PRIMARY SOURCES
Appendix I48
BOA.MKT.MHM. 50/3
A clock gift to the Ottoman Sultan by an English console (1269/1853)
Kayseriye’de mukim İngiliz Konsolu tarafından…olan …mukâbil göndermek olmak bir aded altun saatin...kabul-i istidadını...bir kıt’a tahrirat...olmak ve…malum olduktan sonra âtiye-i…hazret-i tacir…‘arz u takdimlerle meşmul…şevket-i ifâzen…buyurulsun ve mezkur saatin kabul olmasının…sudur buyurulan emr ü ferman hümayun-ı hazret-i şehriyarı iktiza-ı âliyesinde bulunmak olduğu hal…
Muhadene
48 Transcriptions done by the author.
145
Appendix II
BOA, AMD. 33/80
The document about Ahmed Eflaki Dede Efendi who was sent to France to be trained.
146
Appendix III49
TSMA- D 9571/1
Devlet-i aliye ebediyyü’l- istikrar ile devlet-i behiyye Nadirriye El-Fuhar beninde ya a‘vn mülk-i ‘alam müceddiden suret-yab hüsn-i hitam olan bünyan misalce hayr-ı ihcamın takid-i erkan ve kavami içün a’zab-ı dirin selatin pişin ve resm-i kadim müluk ‘adil … üzere Sultan Elbir’in ve hakanü’l-Buharin sani İskender zi’l-karmin hademü’l-haminü’ş-şerifin şevketlü kerametlü muhabbetlü kudretlü ‘azametlü padişah-ı İslampenah ve şehinşah mu‘adelet destgah ‘abdullah devlete ve… hazretlerinin taraf-ı hümayun-ı mülukhane ve canib-i şevketmakrun hasrunalerinden büyük elçi nasib ve ta‘yin buyurulan hala Sivas Valisi vezir-i mekrum sa‘adetlü El-hac Ahmed Paşa cenablarının yadlarıyla ‘ali hazret-i lal-i nezret şehr-i yar kamer … nazır reşid bihayü’d-dünya ve’d-din cemalü’l-İslam ve’l-müslimin hala calis çarbaliş kesri ve hem ferman-ı ferma-i memalik-i ‘Acem felekcah elka an Nadir Şah etemullah merame ve mutah hazretlerinin kabl-i eşref şahı vusubü’l-taf mu’alla cahilerine irsal ve ihda buyurulan hedaya-i fahra padişahı ve tahf nadiren hilafetine henk-i ecnas ve mikdar ve evsaf ve kıym bi-hacet asarını mütezzimin sanbat ve tahrir olunan defterdir.
Ortası bir kebir har köşe zümrüd ve zümrüd üsti bir la‘l ve etrafı ve bacası yirmi kebir ve sa’ir vasat ve sagir yüz otuz sekiz elmas ile murassa‘ zemini kakma taşhaneleri müştik zahri kalemkari altun zincirli altun sorguç. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş otuz bin. Şeridli kadife zarflı diba kese derunundadır.
Tuti buruni kabzalı siyah sagir kınlı kabzası iki la‘l ve sa’ir kabza ve balcığı ve agızlığı ve iki bendi ve dibliği dörd kebir ve on üç kebirce ve dört yüz otuz dokuz vasat ve vasatca şark elmas ile murassa‘ zahri kalemkari ve iki kemerbend gülleri ve atmış ‘aded kemer yaftaları iki yüz altı elmas ile mürsi‘ altun suya ve tokalı altun kılıç. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş atmış bin. Şeridli kadife zarflı diba kise derunundadır.
Altı ‘aded düğmesi ile otuz altı kebir cebe elmas ve sekiz yüz on vasat ve sagir şark elmas ile murassa‘ altı çift altun … incu ilik ve püskülli beyaz İstanbul dibasına kablu sert temettur erkan. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş otuz bin. Frengi diba boğca diba derunundadır.
Tepesi zümrüd kabaklı sa‘at ve kabzasında üç kebir zümrüd kabza ve kını bir kebir on iki vasat ve sa’ir ve vasatca ve sagir yüz yirmi dört elmas ile mürsi‘ kuyruğu bir delikli zümrüd taşhaneleri müştebik zemini kum kakma kalemkari zahri kalemkar ve altun münkar-i selimi kabzalı altun hançer. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş yirmi bin. Tepesi bir elmas ve bir delikli la‘l ve bir inculi altun Avrupa kösteklidir. Şeridli göz kadife zarflı diba keselidir.
Zümrüdi yeşil kadife üzere kebir ve vasat ve sagir altun paftaları üç kebir ve sa’ir ve vasat ve sagirdir. Dört yüz yetmiş sekiz elmas ve iki kebirce ve yirmi iki vasat ve sagir
49 Transcription done by the author.
147
zümrüd ve yetmiş kırmızı yakud ve le‘ylli ve yetmiş aded altun kenar suyi paftaları yüz kırk elmas otuz beş zümrüd ve otuz beş kırmızı yakud ile mürsi‘ yaylık ve yeşil kadife üzere kebir ve vasat ve sagir altun yaftaları iki yüz otuz vasat ve sagir elmas ve on dört zümrüd ve otuz dokuz kırmızı yakut ve le‘ylli ve elli sekiz ‘aded kenar suyu paftaları yüz on altı elmas ve yirmi dokuz zümrüd ve yirmi dokuz kırmızı yakut ile mürsi‘ dibliği bir zümrüd on iki elmas sekiz yakutlu okluk ve üç kat altun ve beş kırmızı yakut ve elli ‘aded kemerbend paftaları yüz elli elmas ile mürsi altun suya ve toka ve cengalli tirkeş. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... guruş otuz bin. Şeridli el kadife zarflı diba keselidir.
Sarı İstanbul dibası üzere beş l‘al ve yüz yirmi zümrüd ve sa’ir açev ve sırma ile … işleme dört açev püskülli tevehhüt. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş iki bin.
İki başı dört elmaslı münekkaş ve müzehhib ‘amel pervane keman. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... guruş yüz.
Gözleri şirmahi yaşları münekkaş altun varaklı … temzili …deste bir. Ber vech … Guruş elli. Beyaz atlas üzeredir. Duri … işleme kabur. Ber vech… Guruş yüz.
Orta göyneği bir kebir elmas ve iki yan yaftaları ile yüz iki vasat ve sa’ir sagir ve hurda bin yüz iki şark elmas ile mürsi‘ üç yaftalı altun kuşak. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... Guruş yirmi beş bin. Ma‘… som … şeridli al kadife zarflıdır.
Ortası kebir sarı yakut kapaklı sa‘at deruni yirmi dört elmas biruni üç kebir ve sa’ir sagir doksan üç elmas bir gök beş kırmızı yakut ile mürsi taşhaneleri müştebil zemini küme kakma altun tenezu kutusu. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech…guruş altı bin. Derununa nişan-ı hümayun ile meskun tenezu vaz‘ olmuşdur.
Zarfını ve zahri vasat ve sagir yetmiş altı elmas sekiz damla gök yakud on l‘al ile mürsi‘ som tarak ma‘ atlas üzere…yakut zincir gülli sim çenberli tarak. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech…guruş üç bin.
Göğüs tahtası on iki ve basma düğmesi bir sagir beş hurda elmas ve zahri ortası vasat ve sa‘ir sagir seksen sekiz elmas ile mürsi‘ saniyeli basma ve kendinden çalargar freng altun koyun sa‘ati ma‘ altun çenberli necef mahfaza. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech...guruş altı bin. Yüz elli dört elmaslı, çenberü on elmaslı mukatahi vardır ve siyah zarflıdır.
Zarfının ortası yergülü ve sa‘ir vasat ve vustaca ve sagir atmış elmas ile mürsi‘ bir Şişhane zümrüd ve beş l‘al ve iki zümrüd avizeli on beş elmas ve iki l‘al ve kebir açev köstekli basma altun koyun sa‘ati. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... Guruş dört bin.
Zarfı vasat ve sagir elli elmas ile mürsi‘ on iki elmas üç yakud bir tahta zümrüdlü altun püskülli basma altun koyun sa‘ati. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech…guruş üç bin.
Ortaları iki vasat Şişhane ve altı sagir l‘al tarafını yirmi iki elmas ile mürsi‘ altunlı zarflı çenberi sekiz elmaslı bika gözlük. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... Guruş bin. Yeşil atlas üzere… işleme kasalı zümrüdü yeşil kadife zarflıdır.
Tarafını atmış elmas ile mürsi‘ zemini zerandud taşhaneleri müteşebik zarflı altun çenberli gözlük. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş bin.
148
Deruni iki kıt‘a bika gözlükli sim çenberli sedef zarf. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... guruş elli.
Zemini zümrüdli ağazlıkları som şair mahi atmış sekiz elmas ile mürsi‘ kabza dürbin. Kıt‘a bir... guruş bin beş yüz.
Yüz otuz sekiz elmas ve yüz otuz sekiz zümrüd ile yorma resm otuz sekiz kırmızı yakut ile mürsi‘ kabza dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... guruş bin beş yüz.
Kayağının bir tarafı bir l‘al ve bir tarafı gök yakut on iki l‘al otuz bir elmas bir yakut ve iki çenberi elli iki elmas ile mürsi‘ lair mahi üzere altun kakma kabza dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... guruş bin.
TSMA- D 9571/2
Üst boğumu kırk sekiz elmas otuz yakut altı zümrüd ve iki çenberi kırk dört yakut ile mürsi‘ zemini ... üzere mütebeşik ağızlıkları altun dört boğma dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech … guruş bin beş yüz.
Çenberleri altun üst boğma Şişhane sedef ağızlıkları altun beş boğma kebir dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... Guruş üç yüz.
Üst boğma bika ağızlıkları altun bel boğma kebir dürbin kıt‘a bir. Ber vech... Guruş iki yüz elli.
Üst boğma bika üzere altun kakma ağızlıkları altun dört boğma dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... guruş yüz elli.
Üst boğma ‘arvesin nakışlı…ağırlıkları altun dört boğma dürbin. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş yüz elli.
Bika üzere saraya müşbik altun kakma iki altun kollu kebir çekmece. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş beş bin.
Çenberi ve uç bilezikleri ve kasılması ve iğneliği ve korkuluğu ve taban gülleri ve çenberleri üç yüz doksan sekiz vasat ve sagir elmas ile mürsi‘ iğnelik zinciri bir zümrüd daireli temürü ve çakmağı üzere altun kakma İstanbulkari Şişhane siyah kundaklı boylu tüfenk. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… Guruş on beş bin.
Zerneşan sedefkari kundaklı temuri üzere altun kakma ‘amel Muhammed ser tüfengi mercan ve sim donanmalı İstanbulkari Şişhane çakmaklı boylu tüfeng. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech…guruş üç yüz.
Beyaz som kundaklı ‘amel ‘Ali temurları üzere altun kakma sim donanmalı Istanbulkari Şişhane çakmaklı boylu tüfeng. Kıt‘a iki. Ber vech … guruş altı yüz.
Yeşil som kundaklı ‘Amel Hacı Muhammed temurları üzere altun kakma mercan ve sim donanımlı Istanbulkari Şişhane çakmaklı boylu tüfeng. Kıt‘a iki. Ber vech ... guruş altı yüz.
Zernişan bika kundaklı temurları üzere altun kakma ‘amel Muhammed mercan ve sim donanmalı İstanbulkari Şişhane çakmaklı boylu tüfeng. Kıt‘a iki. Ber vech… guruş altı yüz.
Siyah kundaklı sim ve mercan donanmalı çakmaklı Cezayirkari tüfeng. Kıt‘a iki. Ber
149
vech … guruş altı yüz.
Kabza tebaları birer zümrüd ve kabza ve gülleri ve korkuluk çenberi ve çubuklukları yüz doksan bir elmas ve yedişer zümrüd ve yedişer kırmızı yakut ile mürsi temürleri ve çakmakları altun kakma İstanbulkari siyah kundaklı peştuv ma‘ ortaları ikişer kebirce dörder vasatca zümrüd ve sa‘ir kırk ikişer sagir zümrüd ve atmış ikişer yakut ve iki yüz elli dörder elmas ile mürsi‘ taşhaneleri müşbik altun güz kadife kaplu peştüv kaburi haft...guruş on iki bin beş yüz.
Ortası bir kırmızı yakut etrafı dört vasat ve sa‘ir vasatça sagir yirmi altı elmas sekiz kırmızı yakut ili zümrüd ile mürsi‘ zemini kum kakma taşhaneleri eyvan münkari müşbik zahri kalemlari altun at sorgucu. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... guruş iki bin. Ma‘ ton şeridli kadife zarflıdır.
Başlık bacasında bir kebir zümrüd ve iki vasatca l‘al ve kırk sekiz elmas ve güllerinde birer l‘al ve kırk elmas ve onluk ile ekselik kulları iki yüz yetmiş dört elmas ve yolları ve zincir yaftaları yüz on beş elmas ve ekse gülleri yirmi bir elmas ve kuladası ve yollari yetmiş sekiz elmas ile mürsi‘ sinebendinin orta göğü bir kebir elmas ve sa‘ir vasat ve sagir üç yüz yetmiş bir elmas ve üç sina bendi kulları vasat ve sagir beş yüz beş elmas ile mürsi‘ zemini kum kakma taşhaneleri ve müştebikleri kırmızı ve yeşil ve laciverdi ve beyaz münkari altun kemer raht. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş yetmiş bin.
Ortası bir vasat damla zümrüd ve sa‘ir iki zümrüd dokuz yakut ve yedi vasat ve seksen dokuz sagir elmas ile mürsi‘ zemini kum kakma taşhaneleri ve müştebikleri kırmızı ve yeşil ve laciverdi ve beyaz münkari altun burisalıklı deşme kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş üç bin beş yüz.
Kabza tebası bir l‘al ve üç gök yakut kabza ve bi’l-hakkı ve ağırlığı ve bendleri ve dibliği ma‘ üç l‘al ve yakut ve bend ortaları iki ve dibliği bir zümrüd ve sa‘ir iki yüz on bir elmas ile mürsi‘ taşhaneleri müştik zemini kum kakma kabza ve zahri kırmızı ve yeşil ve laciverd ve münkari mor kabza kınlı altun garada. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... guruş altı bin.
Ortaları sekiz vasat ve sa‘ir vasat ve sagir yetmiş iki zümrüd ve yüz iki elmas ve yüz yetmiş iki l‘al ve yakut ile mürsi‘ zemini kum kakma taşhaneleri müşbetikleri altun kırmızı ve yeşil ve laciverdi ve beyaz münkari altun yaldızlı sim rikab. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech ... guruş bin beş yüz.
Ön kaşının ortasına bir kebir şeş köşe zümrüd ve etrafına yetmiş bir elmas ve yetmiş üç l‘al ve yakut ve ard kaşının üç kebir güllerinde kırk sekiz elmas otuz dokuz zümrüd ve yetmiş iki yakut ve iki vasat güllerinde otuz zümrüd ve kırk iki yakut ve sekiz sagir güllerinde kırk sekiz elmas sekiz zümrüd ve kırk sekiz yakut ve iki sagir güllerinde iki zümrüd ve on iki yakut ile mürsi‘ taşhaneleri müştebik münkari altun el kadife eğer. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech…guruş dört bin.
Mor kadife üzere yetmiş ili l‘al ve altun dört zümrüd ve sa‘ir açev ve sarma ile yeşil işleme turuncu atlas astarlı beyaz som saçaklı zinpus. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech… guruş on bin.
El çuka üzere zerruzi yeşil işleme sarı atlas astarlı yapok. Kıt‘a bir. Ber vech …guruş bin.
Göz kadife üzere sırma işleme tegelti. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş elli.
Kenar suyu ve üç gülli sırma işleme kırmızı saye çuka tevellük. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş elli.
150
Som gülli kırmızı saye çuka eğer haşası. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş elli.
Sim bolar. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş yüz.
Sim keham. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş elli.
Som dokuz kolanlı ma‘ dize gelen koskun. Kıt‘a bir. Guruş elli.
Cebkari altun ağır diba donluk on guruş iki bin beş yüz.
Cebkari altun ustuka donluk on guruş iki bin beş yüz.
Venedikkari altun ağır diba donluk on guruş sekiz yüz.
Altun İstanbulkari putdari donluk on guruş bin iki yüz
Altun İstanbulkari ağır Rami diba donluk on guruş bin iki yüz.
İstanbulkari nev-zuhur çiçekli ve taraklı diba donluk on guruş bin iki yüz.
İstanbulkari şukufe nev-zuhur diba donluk on guruş yedi yüz.
TSMA- D 9571/3
İstanbulkari nev-zuhur tel çekme boruncek donluk on guruş bin iki yüz.
Altun şalı ve çukalı sof donluk yirmi guruş altı yüz.
Elvan muclu sof donluk yirmi guruş yedi yüz.
İstanbulkari metella kadife yasdık çift altı guruş üç yüz.
Bursakari metella kadife yasdık çift altı guruş üç yüz.
Freng bend metella kadife yasdık çift on iki guruş bin sekiz yüz.
Şamkari som ağır kese kıt‘a yirmi guruş üç bin.
Altun Sakızkari metella seccade kıt‘a on guruş dört yüz.
Münfeş Uşşaki seccade guruş beş yüz.
Elvan çuka peştuv 3 zıra‘.
Duk‘a elvan çuka peştuv 3 zıra‘.
El-saye çuka peştuv 4 zıra‘ 100 guruş sekiz yüz.
‘Aladane temur çift 20 guruş dört bin iki yüz elli.
Sene
1160
Hükm
151
TSMA- D 9571/1
152
TSMA- D 9571/2
153
TSMA- D 9571/3