Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:01:15.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes on Three Turkish Manuscripts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

C. S. Mundy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I. ′ÖMER B. MEZÎD: Mecmû‘atu’n-nazdir (S.O.A.S., 27,689), ff. 309, size 7 ½ in. by 5 ½ in., thick paper in library cloth, binding. The MS. has been considerably cut down, and the first leaf is missing. An odd leaf, formerly one of the end blanks, upon which verses have been written, has been bound in separately at the beginning. The first few leaves are defective, but have been carefully repaired, and nothing of importance is missing; in the main the MS. is in extremely good condition. It is undated, but belongs to the fifteenth century. Among the chronograms there is a verse which suggests that the compilation was made in 840/1436. The hand is a bold clear early Turkish neskh, black, with titles and ruled border in red. The harekes are carefully marked throughout. There are only eleven lines to a page, the area within the ruling being about 6 ¼ in. by 4 ¼ in., sometimes slightly more.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 3-4 , October 1948 , pp. 533 - 541
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1948

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 534 note 1 The most considerable difference is in 56, itdi, where the MS. has att.–I would like to add that I was unaware of the disappearance of this important MS. till I saw the matter mentioned in Dr. Mansuroghlu's article.

page 535 note 1 I have written this word with a circumflex, in order to represent the spelling. It may be either the Turkish dilsüz (= dilsiz) or the Persian dilsûz.

page 535 note 2 This is the name in the poem: in the heading it is Hüseyn-i Hüyi.

page 537 note 1 It is as follows:–

page 538 note 1 Changing pronunciation has caused this in its turn to give way to both in the gen. and the 2nd pers. pronom. endings. Thus in a modern lithographed tale we have thy eyebrow. In the version of the Bible of 1891 is used for the pron. ending added to nouns, but this is probably a conservative spelling.