f) Theexhausteddancerssinkingintothespiritual‘annihilation’orfanā’ofthe
mysticalecstasyinducedbythe‘wine’.
StuartCaryWelchlikedtoemphasizethecontrastinartistictemperamentbetween
paintersofthelatefifteenth-centurySchoolofHerāt,classicalandrestrained,but
asfireunderice,andthemoreopenlyflamboyantandexpressionistmastersofthe
latefifteenth-centuryTabrīzSchool.ShāhIsmā‘īl’sconquestsby1510ADunited
bothprincelycitiesunderSafavidrule.Manuscriptssuchasthisgreat1526–7Dīvān
ofḤāfiẓbroughttogetheroneofthemostgiftedlivingHerātīmastersoftheage,
Shaykh-Zāda,andasupremeTabrīzīmaster,Sulṭān-Muḥammad,inamagnificent
combinationofpictorialartnotunworthyofthepoetthey‘illustrate’.
Anydiscussionoftheerotictheologyandmysticalsymbolismunderlyingtheillus-
trationsofḤāfiẓduringthisperiodwouldbeincompletewithoutaddressingthe
themeoftheSophianicfeminineinPersianminiaturepainting.Inrespecttoboth
metaphysicsandaesthetics,thenotionofthedivinefeminineunderpinstheentire
SufidoctrineofthetheophanyofthebelovedinḤāfiẓ’spoetry.Themostextraor-
dinarydepictionofthisfavouritethemeofPersianneo-PlatonicSufiwriters^18 is
foundinthetwopicturestowhichweshallnowturn:
a) ‘MajnūnFirstSeesLaylīintheMosque-SchoolwithinthePrayer-Niche’,by
Bihzādorhisfellow-painterQāsim‘Alī,Herāt,1494AD;illustrationtoaKhamseh
ofNiẓāmī;BritishLibrary,Or.68100,folio106verso.
b) ‘Lady Beloved within the Prayer-Niche, Holding A Sprig of Narcissi’, by
MuḥammadīofHerāt,ca.1565D;detachedalbumleaf;Soudavarcollection,on
loantotheSacklerGalleryofArt,Washington,DC.
Althoughneitherofthesethematicallyrelatedpicturesdirectly‘illustrates’the
DīvānofḤāfiẓ,bothofthemreflectindirectly–andverypertinently–thecentral
doctrines of Ḥāfiẓian love mysticism. Sixteenth-century court artists of the
Persianate world (including Turkey and India) took into their ken the entire
accepted Persian literary canon, as this had fully crystallized in the expected
curriculumofeducatedélitesbythecloseofthefifteenthcentury.Thiscanon
includedbothḤāfiẓandtheearlierpoetwhosenarrativeimageryarguablymost
profoundlyinspiredhim,Niẓāmī.AsAlessandroBausanihasfamouslyobserved,
Niẓāmī’sliterarycharacters–theLadyoftheRedPavilion,theloversLaylīand
Majnūn,thepartnersinthelovetriangleShīrīn,FarhādandKhusrawParvīz–
turnedintoquasi-PlatonicArchetypesintheperceptionsoflaterPersian,Indo-
PersianandTurkishpoetsandtheirillustrators.ToNiẓāmī’sarchetypesshouldbe
addedthepoet‘Attār’sconfigurationoftheBelovedasaByzantineprincessadored
bytheShaykhṢan‘ān.ḤāfiẓopenlycompareshimselfinoneghazaltoShaykh
San‘ān,^19 and repeatedly refers to himself as a ‘Farhād’^20 and especially as a
‘Majnūn’.^21 ItlogicallyfollowsthatwhereḤāfiẓcallshimself‘Ṣan‘ān’,‘Farhād’or
Ḥāfiẓ’s Romantic Imagery and Language of Love 221