Edebiyât, 2003, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.

225–243

Revising Alexander: Structure and Evolution

Ahmedı̂’s Ottoman Iskendernâme (c. 1400)
Caroline G. Sawyer

SUNY College at Old Westbury

The Iskendernâme of Tâj al-Dı̂n ibn Ibrâhı̂m Ahmedı̂ (b. c. 734/1333; d. ca.
815–16/1412–1413) presents a number of features that make it a valuable source for
scholars of Ottoman literary and cultural history and, in a broader context, for scholars of
Persian and other Middle Eastern literatures. Composed in stages between approximately
1389 and 1410 CE, it consists of up to 9000 beyts in its longer versions. It is the first
Ottoman mesnevı̂ (extended verse narrative) to focus on a historical personage; moreover,
Alexander of Macedon—“Iskandar” in Arabic—is recognized across religious and cultural
boundaries. The composition of this work thus signals a concern to establish Ottoman
Turkish sovereignty on a broader stage of world civilization, by claiming a model similarly
revered in the literature of the Byzantine, Persian, and Mongol empires.
The Iskendernâme, Ahmedı̂’s magnum opus, was composed in various stages from
around 1389 to 1410, a period in which the Ottomans experienced rapid changes of
fortune. Scholars have scarcely begun to determine the stemmata of the numerous extant
manuscripts—probably over 100—that must be presumed to derive from different stages in
the work’s composition. Indeed, although there are several worthwhile studies of distinctive
episodes of the Iskendernâme, notably of the so-called “Ottoman Chronicle” and the
romance with Gulshah, there has been no critical review of the narrative as a whole.
The present paper will attempt to make a small step, at least, in understanding the
structure and process of the Iskendernâme’s composition by comparing two manuscript
recensions of the narrative, representing what can be presumed to be early and late versions
of the composition. The later version, Ms 921 in the Istanbul University Library collection,
has been published in facsimile reproduction so that, by virtue of being the sole complete
version to circulate, it has received far more attention than any other manuscript. The
earlier manuscript discussed here, number 409 in the same collection, has not been the
subject of any significant study. Based on comparison of the narrative structure of each
manuscript, it will be argued that Ahmedı̂’s political and literary agenda emerged gradually
and in response to social changes during the time that he worked on his magnum opus.
As background for the comparison, it should be useful to consider the Iskendernâme’s
place in the larger tradition of Alexander narratives, followed by an overview of the
Iskendernâme.

ISSN 0364-6505 print; ISSN 1477-2841 online/02/020225-19 © 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd
DOI: 10.1080/0364650032000143265
226 C. G. SAWYER

GREEK NARRATIVE AND ITS TRANSMISSION INTO ISLAMIC DOMAINS

The transmission of the narrative from the Greek “romance” of Pseudo-Callisthenes into
Persian and other languages of domains east of Graeco-Roman lands has been a matter of
considerable scholarly interest. It is clear that Greek “Alexander Romance” traveled
eastward to shape traditions in Armenian, Syriac, and ultimately Persian, Arabic, and
Turkish. Evidence for the intermediate stages of transmission is so scant that there may
never be a satisfactory explanation. However the transmission occurred, the source of all
eastern versions was a recension of an ancient Greek novel entitled The Life and Deeds of
Alexander of Macedon.
Nothing is known about the author of this work, beyond a broad range of dates for his
lifetime, between 140 and 340 CE. The name derives from earlier conflation with
Callisthenes, Alexander’s biographer, whose lost writings are presumed to have served as
sources for historical accounts by Greek and Roman writers such as Arrian (c. 90–c. 180
CE), Curtius, Plutarch, and Diodorus.
Pseudo-Callisthenes’ narrative favors fantastic and dramatic elements over the historical
accounts of Alexander’s career that would have been available. Overall, the plot and
descriptions of the narrative accord with the genre of Hellenistic “novels” or “romances,”
although it is somewhat unusual among other narratives of this type in featuring a
protagonist who is a historical figure and in the absence of any significant love-interest. As
Northrop Frye has noted, the essential characteristic of the romance is not love, per se, but
a timeless and universal quality that gives a narrative the illusion, at least, of transcending
historical context (Frye, 186–203). Love stories are particularly suitable, given the virtual
universality of human affections, but adventure and conquest themes can be adapted to the
romance criteria as well.
As noted above, the author of the Greek Alexander “romance” could almost certainly
have had access to historical sources, yet opted for different sort of narrative; one that
would have more popular appeal. Literate but not scholarly, with leisure to enjoy fiction,
these audiences were generally more interested in entertainment than in edification, and it
was among them that the Alexander “romance” initially found acclaim.
It appears that Pseudo-Callisthenes made use of at least two sources that are no longer
extant (Reardon, 650–51). One was an epistolary novel—a popular genre in the Hellenistic
period—that can be presumed to have included the exchanges of letters between Alexander
and his adversaries, Darius and Poros, and his letters to his mother and tutor Aristotle that
appear in the novel transmitted to us. The other source was a history deriving from
Kleitarchos, who flourished c. 300 BCE about a generation after Alexander’s death in 323. In
addition, it is likely that Pseudo-Callisthenes drew on popular Egyptian stories for episodes
such as the fathering of Alexander by Nektanebos, king of Egypt (as well as by the god
Ammon), and for Alexander’s encounter with Sesonchosis/Sarapis just before his death.
Pseudo-Callisthenes’ narrative is formally divided into three “books,” with contents
outlined as follows:

1. Nectanebos, fleeing Egypt, goes to Macedonia and impregnates Olympias.

2. Alexander’s birth and youth, through the death of Philip.
3. Alexander goes to Africa, founding Alexandria.
4. Conquest of Tyre, battle at Issus.
5. Alexander goes to Darius disguised as his own messenger. Battle at Stranga. Darius’s
death.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 227

6. Battle with Poros.

7. Encounter with the Brahmans.
8. Encounter with Candace.
9. Encounter with the Amazons.
10. Death of Alexander in Babylon.

There were four recensions of Pseudo-Callisthenes’ novel: -, - and - traveled

westward to influence European literature, while the  (delta) recension was received into
literatures to the east: Armenian, Syriac and Pahlavi, and then Persian, Arabic and
Turkish. By what sequence of translations the eastward transmission occurred remains
uncertain. One long-standing hypothesis, that Pseudo-Callisthenes’s Alexander romance
was translated directly from Greek into Pahlavi, has recently been criticized, on the
grounds that there is no evidence for any Greek work having been translated directly into
Pahlavi (Hanaway).
If they could be determined, the lines of transmission would be a matter of interest
beyond the study of the Alexander tradition. Reception of the Greek Alexander narrative
into Persian and thence into Arabic and Turkish entailed images of Egyptian and Indian
culture, as well as elements of Hellenistic philosophy and historiography, however
superficial. But the question of textual transmission may never be resolved, owing both to
linguistic complexity and scarcity of evidence.
Islamic tradition played an important role in reinforcing a positive view of Alexander in
domains where he might otherwise have been ignored or—in the Zoroastrian case—
despised. The Qur’ân outlines the career of a pre-Islamic ruler identified as Zu’l-Qarnayn,
the “Horned One,” in Sura 18, “The Cave,” verses 83–99, who has been identified with
Alexander of Macedon from tafsir (Qur’ân commentary) onward. A few Muslim scholars
have disputed the identification, but the occasional counter-assertion, such as Ibn
Taymiya’s, merely reinforces the sense of the assumption’s prevalence (Walbridge, 128).1
In Graeco-Roman tradition, Alexander is a major figure in world history from his own
time onward, but he is one among many such figures, historical or legendary. The Greek
historian Plutarch notes Alexander’s emulation of the demigod Achilles who preceded him
by some 1000 years. In the context of doctrinal Islam, by contrast, the Qur’ân’s
endorsement, “Verily We established him in the earth, and We gave him means of
everything” (18:83), gives Alexander a particularly distinguished role, as a figure linking
worldly and scriptural history. He is virtually unique as a pre-Islamic hero who stands
outside the canonical lineage of prophets, from Adam through Jesus and Muhammad.
Moreover, he is Greek, and the bearer of Hellenistic tradition to the east. From another
perspective, however, it seems natural that Muslim writers should have taken an interest in
Alexander’s accomplishments. His political influence was after all strongest in lands that,
over a millennium later after his lifetime, became part of the Islamic heartland, particularly
Egypt and Persia, but also Central Asia and northern India.
Another aspect of Alexander tradition that reinforced its absorption into Islamic
literature is the conqueror’s historical association with the philosopher Aristotle, whose
identity as tutor of the conqueror which was known to Muslim scholars. Ahmedı̂’s narrative
is a good example of how this association allowed a wide range of Greek and Hellenistic
elements to be drawn into Alexander’s story.2 Ms 921, and somewhat less clearly in 409,
depicts a colloquium of Alexander, various Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and
Hippocrates and the protean Muslim legendary figure, Khidr, whose formulation of God’s
unity trumps all the others’.
228 C. G. SAWYER

Alexander narratives constitute a significant body of work in Persian. Notable authored

works include those of Ferdawsi, Nizami, Jami, and Amir Khusrau Dihlavi. Popular versions
circulated widely for some four centuries after the composition of Ferdawsi’s Shâhnâma (see
Molé). The Sädd-i Iskändär of Navai is a major work in Chagatay Turkish, while Ahmedı̂’s
work stands alone among significant Alexander “romances” in Ottoman Turkish.

AHMEDÎ’S NARRATIVE: SOURCES AND OVERVIEW

Of Alexander narratives created in an Islamic context, Ferdawsi’s is the truest to Pseudo-
Callisthenes’ account. Nizâmı̂’s Iskandarnâma elaborates on the tradition in creative ways,
and Ahmedı̂ follows him in innovation. Nevertheless, most of the innovations can be seen to
derive from other sources, literary or popular. These are mainly Persian, but also Turkish (or
Turco-Persian) and perhaps also Arabic.
A number of Arab historians, such as al-Mas`ûdı̂, gave accounts of various aspects of
Alexander’s life and career, although are no important fictionalized accounts in Arabic.
Ahmedı̂ probably drew certain elements from Arabic histories, particularly concerning the
adventures in the Indian Islands, which receive little treatment in Persian sources. The
Ottoman Chronicle and probably also the “Mevlid” originated in Ahmedı̂’s local Turkish
context, while the histories, both Alexander’s and the Universal History, derive from Persian.
The Persian vocabulary of the Iskendernâme indicates an author with a fairly sophisticated
knowledge of the language, but the roughness of the style indicates that he probably did not
have much access to written versions of Persian Shahnâmas, to cite the most important
example.
In describing the earlier part of the conqueror’s career, Ahmedı̂ follows quite closely the plot
line of the Alexander episode in Ferdawsi’s Shahnâma. The lack of literary and historical
sophistication with which appropriated this material indicates that he drew most of it from
popular Iskandarnâmas deriving from the Shahnâma rather than from Ferdawsi’s version.
From one perspective, the Iskendernâme as it appears in Ms 921 is an everted Shahnâma:
an account of Alexander’s career framing a universal history, rather than the other way
around. On the other hand, the bipartite organization of Ahmedı̂’s Iskendernâme that is
apparent in Ms 921, as discussed below, suggests influence from Nizami’s Iskandarnâma,
whose two parts have different titles. The first, Khiradnâma, is more concerned with the
wordly aspects of the conqueror’s career, while the second, Sharafnâma, is more concerned
with spiritual aspects. In a general way, this bipartite structure also characterizes the narrative
of Ms 921 of the Iskendernâme.

AHMEDÎ’S INNOVATIONS
Gulshah Episode: In the long process of composing the Iskendernâme, Ahmedı̂ integrated
several innovative episodes into the framework of Alexander’s career. The first substantial
innovative episode was probably Alexander’s romance with Gulshah. Rather than having
anything to do with preceding Alexander tradition—as she almost certainly does not—the
heroine appears to be drawn from a Turco-Persian romance, Varqa-u Gulshah, that was
popular in Ahmedı̂’s time.
The content of the episode reinforces the Iskendernâme’s connections to the world of
Ferdawsi’s Shahnâma, relating that Alexander, having conquered both Iran and “Turan,”
was eager to add Zabilistân to his domains. But Rostam held sway there, so it seemed
advantageous to go to the city [sic] of Sistan to visit a local king of Rostam’s clan, Garshasp.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 229

As it happens, Alexander becomes enamored with the king’s daughter, and she with him.
After numerous separations, in which the two exchange letters (the ghazals), Garshasp
blesses the couple’s union. Nothing comes of it in the subsequent narrative, however; the
romance is an interpolated episode.
Beyond the Shahnâma associations, which would be worth investigating in further detail,
the episode resonates with a historical event that Ahmedı̂ certainly would have known
about. In 1381, the prince (bey) of Germiyan, Süleymân Shâh, wed his daughter, Devlet
Hatun, to Bâyezid [I] Yildirim, head of the rival Ottoman principality. Historians report
that the occasion was celebrated with a lavish wedding feast. The union signaled the ascent
of Ottoman power over the other Anatolian Turkish principalities. Some two decades later,
their dominion was imperiled by Timur’s invasion of Ankara (1401) and by the internecine
strife that lingered from Bayezid I’s death in 1402 until 1415.

“Universal History”

It appears the majority of manuscripts of the Iskendernâme contain a “Universal History”

(traditional history of the “world,” oriented toward succession of sovereigns in domains of
interest to an author), but it is also known that some do not.3 These sections break off at
different points in different manuscripts, the two under examination here being good
examples. From a literary point of view, it is quite striking that Alexander’s career should
be used as a framework for a chronicle, as it is not a common feature of Alexander tradition
elsewhere. It is not clear what inspired Ahmedı̂ to choose an Alexander narrative to adapt
to this purpose, but the conqueror’s reputation and the flexibility of narratives about him
made it a suitable choice.
The Universal History should also be of interest in the context of textual studies, as it is
perhaps the only component of the narrative for which precise dating might be possible. It
is obviously not possible to determine dates by evidence of what is omitted from a narrative;
that is, a manuscript could in principle be a late composition even if it omitted historical
events up to the time of its composition. The history might even have been omitted
altogether in a manuscript composed after others that included it. But where a datable
historical episode does appear (as with the Jalayirid Sultan in Ms 921, noted below), the
manuscript must antedate the event—unless the possibility is admitted that whatever is
called “Ahmedı̂’s Iskendernâme” might include insertions, at least, by subsequent writers.
It can readily be imagined that this possibility—not implausible in the popular circles that
evidently embraced the Iskendernâme would raise a host of problems for study of the
text.

The “Mevlid”

The “Mevlid,” actually an account of the Prophet Muhammad’s ascent through the Seven
Climes on the Mic raj is by all evidence one of the latest episodes that Ahmedı̂ added. Ismail
Ünver (7) states that this episode, interpolated into the Universal History at the proper
juncture (toward the end of the Sasanian Dynasty), around 1407. There is evidence to
suggest that the episode was composed in response to a particular debate that took place in
the first decade of the 1400s. Around 1400, a shaykh from Damascus, probably
Muhammad ibn al-Jazari (d. 1429) visited Bursa, where Ahmedı̂ was living around that
230 C. G. SAWYER

time. The sheikh, who had composed an Arabic Mevlid, appears to have provoked great
controversy over the question of Muhammad’s place among the other prophets.
A notable outcome of the debate was the Mevlid that Suleiman Celebi (d. 1422), imam of
the Great Mosque (Ulucami) in Bursa, composed in 1409. His composition, whose actual title
is Vesilet ul-Necat, concerns much more than the Prophet’s birth, having six parts: Munecat,
Viladet, Risalet, Mirac, Rihlet, Dua. Ahmedı̂’s composition is less elaborate, but it is quite
likely the first Mevlid in Turkish literature, preceding Suleiman Celebi’s by 2 years.
Another distinctive element in Ahmedı̂’s narrative is his emphasis on Alexander’s
seafaring adventures, particularly in view of the known Persian sources making little
reference to them. Even in Pseudo-Callisthenes’ narrative, seafaring themes are scarcely
highlighted, with only the diving-bell episode in Book II. Seafaring is more prominent in Ms
921 than in the earlier Ms 409, so it will be discussed in connection with the former.

ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY MS 921

Study of Ahmedı̂’s Iskendernâme, his master work, has been hindered by the lack of any
print version of the text. In view of this situation, Ismail Ünver’s Ahmedı̂—Iskendernâme—
Inceleme, Tipkibasim has become a vital resource, as the only complete version of the text
in general circulation. Along with a photo reproduction of a well-chosen manuscript, TY
921 of the Istanbul University Library, Ünver’s edition provides commentary, bibliography,
and a list of section headings, transliterated from the original Persian.
Ms 921 in the Istanbul University Library collection comprises 8754 bayts written in a
fairly clear hand, with vocalization indicated. The scribe signed and dated the manuscript,
Nebi bin Resul bin Yakub, 14 Ramadan 847 A.H./3 January 1444 CE, making it the oldest
known manuscript housed in Turkey. Ms 921, which is not illustrated, contains 75 double-
sided pages, each with 31 rows in double columns.
The language of the Iskendernâme has not been sufficiently studied. The lack of sound
linguistic information has, of course, hindered translation of the text, not to mention
production of a critical edition. Some scholars have asserted that the meter is bahr-i ramal
(fâ`ilâtun fâ`ilâtun fâ`ilâtun), but careful reading shows that it is syllabic. Most masra’s
have 11 syllables; a few have 10. (In the few places where spoken language would articulate
12 syllables, they resolve into 11 by elision, sometimes of a very clumsy sort.) Here, for
example, is a transliteration of the opening bayts.

1. Zikr-i bismillah-i Rahmani’r-Rahim

Kamu nesne bize gidür iy Hakim
2. Her Kimun kim yoldasi tevfik ola
Her ne söz kim söyleye tahkik ola

Leaving aside the first misra’ as a formulaic opening, the second can plausibly conform to
bahr-i ramal. But the meter cannot be forced onto the next bayt. Likewise, it fails with so
many others in the text as to fall from consideration as a general rule.

***
For the purposes of overview and comparison, the episodes Ms 921’s narrative can be
divided into 16 more or less coherent sections:
 REVISING ALEXANDER 231

1. Praise of God and Prophet; Alexander’s beginnings, from birth to accession to throne.
Bayts 1–585 Sections 1–37
2. Discussions of God’s nature by Greek sages and by Hizir.
Bayts 586–917 Sections 38–53
3. Alexander’s dream of world conquest interpreted by Aristotle; battles with Darab.
Bayts 918–1330 Sections 54–64
4. Romance of Alexander and Gulshah.
Bayts 1331–1933 Sections 65–71
5. Alexander’s adventures in India and surrounding islands.
Bayts 1934–3926 Sections 72–189
6. Various battles: against Gog and Magog (Juj-u Majuj), Russians, Jinn.
Bayts 3927–4246 Sections 190–199
7. Journey to Egypt.
Bayts 4247–4443 Sections 200–209
8. Visit to Candace (Qaydafa).
Bayts 4444–4802 Sections 210–224
9. Search for “realms beyond,” initiated by sea exploration.
Bayts 4803–5010 Sections 225–229
10. “Universal History”: sovereigns from Gayumars through Darab and Alexander (words
of Aristotle).
Bayts 5011–5784 Sections 230–266
11. History: Alexander to the Prophet Muhammad: principally Sasanians (words of
Hizir).
Bayts 5785–5964 Sections 267–284
12. Birth of Muhammad and account of Miraj (“Mevlid”).
Bayts 5965–6617 Sections 285–312
13. History after Muhammad: Azerm Dukht, Yazdigird, al-Rashidun, through Sultan
b.Uveys (Ahmad).
Bayts 6618–7536 Sections 313–394
14. History: “Ottoman Chronicle” through Emı̂r Süleymân.
Bayts 7537–7870 Sections 395–408
15. Final adventures, including Alexander’s journey to Hijaz (Hajj pilgrimage; visit to tomb
of Zu’l-Qarnayn); settling in Egypt; journey through the Land of Darkness in search of
the Water of Life; meeting with Talking Tree.
Bayts 7871–8541 Sections 409–435
16. Illness and death of Alexander; eulogies by his mother Rukiya and retinue of Greek
philosophers.
Bayts 8542–8754 Sections 436–458

What this summary cannot convey is the persistence of Ahmedı̂’s tendency to digress—at
least from the perspective of Aristotelian expectations. The lines of narrative coherence that
232 C. G. SAWYER

become evident in the summary—landscape cleared of the trees of digression, as it were—

are among the features that are worthy of recognition. At this overview level, the narrative
can be seen as a kind of Bildungsroman, whose integrating theme is the hero’s pursuit of true
knowledge, of which worldly conquest is only an initial stage.
The three distinctive episodes of the Iskendernâme that were discussed in the overview of
the narrative, above, are all present in Ms 921. Of these, only the Universal history is
integrated into the narrative. For the pre-Islamic history even this, admittedly, makes for
tedious reading, whether one is waiting for relevance to the Alexander story or looking for
insight into the posterity of the Shâhnâma. The rough style is virtually unrelieved by the
polished or piquant phrases that lighten the reading elsewhere.
The sea-exploration episode, number 9 on the list above, which stands almost exactly at
the midpoint of the text, is pivotal in the narrative. The content of the episode has echoes
of Pseudo-Callisthenes’ romance, but neither Ferdawsi nor Nizami mentions Alexander’s
adventures by sea, so it is not clear what Ahmedı̂’s direct inspiration might have been. The
episode marks a shift in Alexander’s pursuits, from worldly to spiritual quest. In general,
after the seafaring episode, the narrative presents a more idealized image of Alexander and,
in later versions, the mystico-allegorical character of the narrative is much more
pronounced there. The latter half of the work presents most of the conceptually and
culturally substantial material in the work: the Universal History, from the Shâhnâma
material through the Ottoman Chronicle; the final episodes including the Water of Life and
the journey to the Hijaz, and the eulogies. Thus it appears that Ahmedı̂ added the seafaring
adventure with the intention of symbolizing transformation necessary for higher insight,
including historical awareness.
In the first half of the narrative, Ahmedı̂’s hero resists the awareness of the insufficiency
of worldly dominion. Aristotle tries to convince him that he should “put aside the blessings
and look at the Beneficent One” (verse 1887). Iskandar does not listen, believing his
“vizir’s” words to be nonsense: “Because he did not accept the words of his vizir/He
regarded them as stuff and nonsense” (4888). Believing that his advisor must be wrong and
that he can extend his power even further in the world, Alexander sets out in a boat to
explore the “Bahr-i Muhı̂t”—the ocean encircling the perimeter of the earth. At the limit of
his journey, he encounters is an alter-Alexander who is making the same search. The lesson
seems to be that earthly searching cannot provide the answers to the deepest questions. In
a fairly lengthy commentary on this episode, Ahmedı̂ refers repeatedly to the symbolism of
seafaring for the search for mystic knowledge, as in these verses:

4985. The sea on which the king [Alexander] sailed his ship is clearly that of mystic
knowledge (macrifat).
4986. Within it are many wonders, you can be sure—but it has no shores.
4987. On this sea, Rasulullah (Muhammad) is the far-seeing captain.
4988. The three translators (who accompanied Alexander) are Intellect, Reason, and
Thought (caql, cilm, fikr).
4989. The boat that sails over this boundless sea is Muhammad’s revelation.

Having made this voyage to the extremities of the world and been turned back, Alexander
begins to pursue spiritual and philosophical objectives, expressed in distinctly Islamic terms.
Beginning in bayt 5011, Alexander asks his “vizier” to tell him who the sovereigns were
who ruled before him. Although Ahmedı̂ was doubtless familiar with the Islamic account of
human history, from Adam through Jesus and Muhammad, he opted for the legendary
 REVISING ALEXANDER 233

Persian account. This choice may have been a factor in diminishing Ahmedı̂’s reputation
among subsequent Ottoman literati. Yet it indicates the status that Persian cultural forms
had in the enterprise of legitimizing sovereigns, as one also sees in the cases Mahmûd of
Ghazna, Timûr, and Ottoman sovereigns well down the line from Ahmedı̂’s patrons.
The history with which Aristotle obliges his student is basically a recapitulation of
Ferdawsi’s Shâhnâma, beginning with Gayumars and continuing through Hushang,
Jamshid, Zahhak, Faridun and subsequent champions involved in the struggle to against
Zahhak. Unlike Ferdawsi’s version, it mentions the Prophet Idris, a minor figure in Islam’s
conception of ancient history. Ahmedı̂’s history is no match for the sophistication of
Ferdawsi’s. Information is in summary form, and there is scant indication of literary or
cultural awareness. The introduction of Zoroastrianism (verses 5602–5609) to Gushtasp,
involves the necessity of explaining to the “fire-worshipper” the superiority of the Prophet
Abraham’s message. The last of the legendary sovereigns is Humay, daughter of Bahman.
Consistent with Ferdawsi’s account, the only sovereigns mentioned from the historical
Achaemenid Dynasty are Darius I and II. With them, history prior to Alexander
concludes.
When Alexander next inquires about future sovereigns, Aristotle defers to a higher
authority, saying that his own worldly wisdom is not adequate for the task of predicting the
future. He answers Alexander:

5795 Hizir it is; Hizir, who has this knowledge.

5796 It is he who can solve this difficulty.

As noted above, Hizir played a small yet significant role earlier in the narrative, trumping
the Greek philosophers’ discourses on God’s unity in bayts 608–680. From this juncture in
the Chronicle onward, Hizir replaces Aristotle, the “vizier,” as Alexander’s guide and
spiritual adviser. The story of Hizir, Alexander and the Water of Life, which Ahmedı̂
recounts in bayts 8315–8376, is standard in Alexander narratives in the Islamic world. But
Hizir’s role in telling what is, from the narrative’s perspective, future history is original with
Ahmedı̂. This enhanced role for Hizir, unique to Ahmedı̂’s version, brings further elements
of Turkish popular and mystical tradition into the narrative, as well as reinforcing its
Islamic aspect.
The sections pertaining to caliphs and sovereigns after Muhammad are of particular
interest from a historiographic point of view. The concluding section, the “Ottoman
Chronicle” (“Tevarih-i muluk-i Al-i Osman”) is the only one of these to have received
significant scholarly attention, almost entirely by Ottoman historians. Another episode,
concerning Ilkhanid successor dynasties, is at least as interesting in connection with the
dating of the manuscript, however. In section 394, bayts 7533–7536, describe the defeat of
the Jalayirid Sultan Ahmad by Karakoyunlu Kara Yusuf at Tabriz, an event that took place
in 1410.

***
The late addition of the “Mevlid” in ms 921 reflects political concerns entailing tensions
that Ahmedı̂ can resolve only incompletely. Where Ms 409 inserts formulaic praise of the
Prophet and describes the Seven Heavens in connection with Alexander, as discussed below,
Ms 921 attempts to establish a more strictly Islamic vision of the ascent, although it remains
encompassed by Alexander’s story. Questions about the Prophet’s status among other
234 C. G. SAWYER

prophets were of concern in religious circles, particularly with regard to whether he was
first among equals or held a unique status.
Ahmedı̂ seems to have been particularly sensitive to the issue of antecedence, which also
had bearing on the history he composed of his Ottoman patrons. Fearing, perhaps, that the
lately added accounts of the Prophet and the Ottomans’ account would be perceived as
overshadowed by the Alexander narrative he had begun with, he wrote (Ms 921):

7546 Now that I have mentioned that cruel people [the Mongols], let me describe the
people of justice.
7547 I will recall those governors (beys) who were Muslims and thoroughly just, to a
man.
7548 Everything they did contrasted with the unbelievers’ ways: what they ate and wore
was canonically lawful (halal).
7549 I speak of them in the ultimate chapter of my book, so that it will be completed and
perfected by them.
7550 Let me present you with this Gazavetname [account of the gazis’ deeds]. Listen to it
without objection.
7551 Don’t ask, “Why do you mention the gazis last? Why do they come at the end?”
7552 Any thinking person knows that what comes last is best.
7553 When God blessed the human being with strength, mind, life, and body
7554 Mind was certainly superior to the other three qualities, and of course it was the
last.
7555 The Messenger, last of the prophets, was the seal and the noblest of all.
7556 The Koran was the last of the four Books, superseding all the rest.
7557 The human being, superior to any other creation, was created last.

ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY MS 409

In the summer of 1999, working on a grant from the Institute of Turkish Studies, I had the
opportunity to complete a preliminary examination of another Iskendernâme manuscript in
the Istanbul University Library collection. Dated 894/1488–1498, Ms 409 is a bound
volume with space for 15 beyts on each of it its 193 pages; about 5500 bayts. There are
several illuminations, a number of them in poor condition. Several of these, in turn, give
evidence of intentional defacement, perhaps for sectarian reasons, as faces illustrated on
pages describing religious figures seem especially to be targeted. As in Ms 921 (and other
versions), the headings are in Persian.

Ms. 409 Headings: English Translation

1. [Blank]
2. In praise of the Creator, greatest in blessings and most perfect in life.
3. Introduction to the book.
4. Opening of the story.
5. Beginning of the story of Alexander and description of spring.
6. Philip receives the good news of his son’s birth.
7. On the meaning of this episode.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 235

8. Alexander seeks advice from the Greek sages.

9. Khidr’s reply and rebuttal to [the sages’] arguments.
10. Khidr’s proof of the unity of God, great and glorious is His Name.
11. Khidr’s proof of the unity of God.
12. Alexander seeks advice from the sages.
13. Plato’s advice.
14. Hippocrates’ advice.
15. Socrates’ advice.
16. Alexander accepts the sages’ authority.
17. Illustration that conveys an excerpt of the story of Alexander and the sages.
18. Address, or, “The Essence of the Faculty of Speech.”
19. Opening of the story.
20. Aristotle’s reply and his interpretation of Alexander’s dream.
21. Darius sends a messenger to Alexander; Alexander replies.
22. Darius sends a second messenger to Alexander.
23. On the meaning of the episode.
24. Alexander battles and defeats Darius.
25. Meaning of the episode.
26. Alexander sets out for Sistan.
27. Opening of the story.
28. Description of Zarasp’s daughter [Gulshah].
29. Alexander returns from Sistan, despondent in his love for Gulshah.
30. Ghazal.
31. Masnavi.
32. Gulshah sends a reply.
33. Ghazal.
34. Masnavi.
35. Aristotle is sent to Sistan.
36. Alexander returns to Sistan with an army.
37. Alexander sends a letter to Gulshah.
38. Ghazal.
39. Masnavi.
40. Gulshah send a letter in reply.
41. Ghazal.
42. Masnavi
43. Alexander asks Aristotle a question; Aristotle replies.
44. Alexander decides to conquer the lands of Hindustan.
45. Kayd of Hind submits to Alexander.
46. Description of Kayd of Hind’s sage.
47. Description of Kayd of Hind’s physician.
48. Description of Kayd of Hind’s goblet.
49. Description of Kayd of Hind’s daughter.
50. The mihrab approaches the [Puli?]
51. Kayd sends a gift to Alexander.
52. The mysteries that were [vāti’—discussed?] between Alexander and the sage of
Hind.
53. About the mysteries and [Tarsi’?] of their meaning.
54. Alexander asks about the pleasures of the goblet.
236 C. G. SAWYER

55. Alexander asks about the order of the world and of the human being.
56. Alexander asks the sage of Hind about the elements and natural dispositions.
57. Alexander asks about the humors whose creation was the basis.
58. Alexander asks how many temperaments there are.
59. Alexander asks how many kinds of [blank] there are.
60. Alexander asks how many states of sensation and spirit there are.
61. About the natural spirit.
62. About the mental faculty.
63. About the judging faculty (?).
64. About the seasonal faculty (?).
65. About the faculty of memory.
66. About the possessive faculty (?).
67. Description of Alexander’s judgment.
68. Description of Alexander’s treaty.
69. Description of Alexander’s hunting expedition in the mountains of Hindustan.
70. On the meaning of the episode.
71. About Alexander’s war with Fur of Hind.
72. Description of spring [in ghazal form].
73. The war between Zu’l Qarnayn and Fur of Hind.
74. On the meaning of the episode.
75. [Blank]
76. Beginning of the discussion.
77. On the meaning of the episode.
78. About the types of virtues.
79. About knowledge and justice.
80. About the types of courage.
81. About the types of virtues [sic].
82. About the types of virtues of justice.
83. About Alexander’s journey to the sea and the wonders he saw there.
84. About Alexander’s seeing the wonders of the island of Rayij and the types thereof.
85. About the island of Ramina.
86. Praise of the Padishah of Islam.
87. On the meaning of the episode.
88. Story of Alexander’s dealings with the Jinn.
89. Beginning of the story.
90. Alexander returns to Egypt and sees its wonders.
91. Beginning of the story.
92. Description of the [kabz-i marmaan?] that he saw in Egypt.
93. Seeing the River Nile and the wonders of Egypt.
94. Description of edible oil (?).
95. Alexander builds Alexandria.
96. About Alexandria and its wonders.
97. On the meaning of the episode.
98. Conclusion of the story.
99. Story of Alexander.
100. Description of the visit and shortage of money (??).
101. On the meaning of the episode.
102. Description of Mercury.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 237

103. Description of Venus.

104. Description of Mars.
105. Description of Jupiter.
106. Description of Saturn.
107. Religious sermon (?).
108. Beginning of the story of Alexander and Candace.
109. Conclusion of the story.
110. Alexander’s desire for wisdom beyond the seven climes that are described.
111. Description of the seven climes and their limits.
112. Second clime.
113. Third clime.
114. Fourth clime.
115. Fifth clime.
116. Sixth clime.
117. Seventh clime.
118. The vizier gives Alexander advice.
119. Alexander’s war with Russia and [Harar?].
120. Alexander reaches Khorasan.
121. Alexander organizes the city of Sarandil [sic].
122. Alexander goes to Salamatan [sic] and sees a spring.
123. Alexander comes upon Javadi Yaran (?), a diamond mine. Cf. sects 184 and 185 of Ms
921?
124. Alexander makes a correct assessment of his own weaknesses.
125. Alexander investigates the situation of the sultans and [their] histories.
126. Opening of the story and the history of kings.
127. Kingship of Gayumars—30 years.
128. Kingship of Hushang—40 years.
129. Kingship of Tahmuras—30 years.
130. Kingship of Jamshid—750 years.
131. [Blank]
132. Kingship of Zahhak, the Persian—3000 years.
133. Kingship of Faridun—500 years.
134. Birth of Abraham (Ibrahim-i Halil, ‘alayhi salawatu wa’s-sallam).
135. Kingship of Manouchehr—120 years.
136. Kingship of Nuzar, son of Manouchehr—30 years.
137. Kingship of Afrasyab in Iran—12 years.
138. Afrasyab is defeated by Rostam and flees from Turan.
139. Kingship of Kaykubad—100 years.
140. Kingship of Kavus—100 years.
141. Conclusion of the story of Kavus and [sending of Asad Ta’ala?] destruction of the
palace.
142. Situation of Seyavash.
143. Kingship of Kay Khosrau—60 years.
144. Kingship of Arasp [sic]—120 years.
145. Kingship of Gushtasp.
146. Kingship of Bahman—102 years.
147. Kingship of Bahman [sic]—30 years.
148. Kingship of Darius [Dara]—12 years; the end.
238 C. G. SAWYER

149. Darius goes to Rum and asks for Philip’s daughter.

150. Kingship of Darius, son of Darius; the end.
151. On the faithlessness of the world.
152. Zu’l-Qarnayn asks about the kings of the future.
153. Situation and histories of these kings.
154. Rule of Ardashir the Sasanian.
155. Kingship of Bahram Gur—23 years.
156. Kingship of Yazdigird, son of Bahram—23 years.
157. Kingship of Talash [sic; compare Balash, section 282 of Ms 921]—42 years.
158. Kingship of Nushirvan—47 years.
159. Emergence of Prophet Muhammad Mustafa, ‘alayhi wa’s-sallam.
160. Kingship of Hormuz, son of Yazdigird—11 years.
161. Kingship of Firuz.
162. [AQ1]Caliphate of [Abu Bakr from text; name effaced in heading]—2 years, 3 months
and 12 days.
162. Caliphate of [cUsman—from text; name effaced in heading]—20 years.
163. Caliphate of [Marwan—from text; name effaced in heading].
164. Caliphate of cAbd ul-Malik, son of Marwan.
165. Exodus [khuruj] of ‘Abd ul-Rahman ibn Ashtat.
166. Exodus of [erased] ibn ‘Abd ul-Malik.
167. Caliphate of Sulayman—30 years, as God knows.
168. Caliphate of [Valid bin Yazid—per text; name effaced in heading].
169. Caliphate of [Ibrahim bin Valid—per text; name effaced in heading].
170. Caliphate of [?].
171. Emergence of Abu Muslim of Marv.
172. Conquest of the continent [“clime”] of China.
173. The cAbbasid Caliphate.
174. Caliphate of Abu Ja’far.
175. Defeat of Shukr cAbdallah.
176. Caliphate of Mahdi bin Ja’far.
177. Caliphate of Hadi son of Mahdi.
178. Caliphate of [?].
179. Caliphate of Amin Harun.
180. Caliphate of Mu’tasim.
181. Beginning of the story.
182. On the meaning of the episode.
183. Alexander goes to the Hijaz.
184. It is [of the?] sons of [Ibrahim?] Halil, ‘alayhi as-sallim.
185. [Blank]
186. Story of Alexander Zu’l-Qarnayn.
187. Alexander Zu’l Qarnayn observes the tomb of the previous Alexander.
188. Alexander goes into the darkness.
189. About the island of [?].
190. Alexander asks about the nature of the sea.
191. Alexander asks about the wonders of the sea.
192. Alexander goes to the islands of Hind.
193. Alexander reaches the kingdom of Java.
194. Alexander sees a crystal palace.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 239

195. Alexander reaches Tamghaj and subjects him.

196. Alexander asks a question of Bahram.
197. Bahram replies to Alexander.
198. About the dwelling-place of creatures.
199. About the Sea of Uqarus [?].
200. On wisdom and glory [?].
201. Conclusion of the story.
202. Alexander travels around the lands of China.
203. Alexander Zu’l-Qarnayn reaches the east.
204. Description of a stone that made the Jinn vulnerable to conquest.
205. Description of a spring that was found in the lands of the east.
206. Description of mines [?].
207. Alexander reaches Kashmir and battles with Tarkhan.
208. Alexander treats the people of Kashmir warmly and invites them to Islam.
209. About the Island of Vaq-Vaq.
210. Alexander reaches the city of Jin and Majin [sic; “Juj-u Majuj”?].
211. On the meaning of the episode.

COMPARISON OF MANUSCRIPTS

Ms 409 and Ms 921 share the following episodes: Alexander’s requesting and receiving
counsel from the Greek philosophers, Aristotle’s interpretation of Alexander’s dream,
Hizir’s discourse on tawhid, the romance of Alexander and Gulshah, a chronicle of the
sovereigns of the world beginning with Gayumars and onward through legendary and
historical Persian kings, and Alexander’s journey to the Hijaz and the Land of Darkness.
Alexander’s visit to Candace (Kaydafa) is also present in both, but it is much shorter in Ms
409. Both manuscripts describe Alexander’s adventures in India and surrounding islands,
Egypt, Russia, and China, but some specific episodes differ, and they are organized
differently in the two narratives.
Once the manuscripts of the Iskendernâme are more completely sorted, the presentation
of the Gulshah romance may provide a clue for dating Ms 409, although at this point it is
difficult to make use of the evidence. In an article on this episode, Robert Dankoff has
proposed that the Gulshah episode was one of the first that Ahmedı̂ added after the initial
composition. Based on study of manuscripts in connection with this episode, Dankoff
hypothesizes four stages in the Iskendernâme’s composition.4

1. The Gulshah episode does not appear.

2. It appears without ghazals and without concluding remarks.
3. It appears with four ghazals and concluding remarks (551 verses total).
4. Two more ghazals added to the four, total of 605 verses.

Because Ms 409 has four ghazals, it would belong in the third stage, but the dating cannot
be established yet.
Ms 409 differs significantly from Ms 921 in lacking a Mavlid and in the termination of
the succession of sovereigns with Caliph al-Mu’tasim. There seem to be few, if any, allusions
to contemporary political dynamics, apart from the Gulshah episode, if is that read in light
of Bayezid I’s marriage to Devlet Hatun. There is no sea episode, but only a description of
240 C. G. SAWYER

the “Seven Climes” (haft iklim) that Alexander has conquered. This description occurs
about halfway through the narrative, after the conqueror has inquired about realms that
might lie beyond these domains. Ms 921 also includes many more of the hero’s adventures
in the “Indian” islands, most of them identifiable with areas around Sumatra. While
fantastic elements predominate in these later-added episodes, their details show awareness
of serious Arab geographies, and they provide evidence of increased interest in long-distance
trade goods such as camphor and sandalwood.
Ms 409 takes up the adventures to India and the Indian islands in two different places.
They begin at the same point as in Ms 921, between the Gulshah romance and Alexander’s
battles elsewhere. But, whereas 921 completes them before moving on, Ms 409 resumes
accounts of Indian Island adventures at the end of the narrative. The death-scene and
eulogies form the conventional conclusion for Alexander narratives from Pseudo-
Callisthenes onward, and Ms 921 is no exception. The absence of any fitting conclusion—
even reference to the protagonist’s death—in Ms 409 is something of a mystery, raising the
question as to whether the composition (or the copying) was complete.
Presentation of the Indian adventures differs substantially between the two versions. The
section on the Indian adventures is the only place where Ms 409 includes a significant
episode that does not appear in Ms 921: the encounter of Alexander with the Indian leader
Kayd. His short account of Alexander’s career, composed around 880 CE, describes the
conqueror’s encounter with Kayhan, a wise king of India. Al-Mas`ûdı̂ related this incident,
changing the Indian king’s name to Kand, and Ferdawsi changed it to Kayd. Further,
consistent with the emphasis on body/soul dichotomy and “allegorization” that develops
later in its narrative, Ms 921 makes much more of a point of discussing the (human) body
as well as the soul in the course of Alexander’s discussion with the Indian sage (Sections
105–109).
After the first sequence of Indian adventures, Ms 409 presents a fairly brief Praise of the
Prophet, in some 30 lines. Ms 921 has a brief praise of God’s unity at this point in the
narrative (Section 180), with the Prophet coming to the fore in the long “Mevlid” at the
appropriate stage of the Universal History’s chronology. By contrast, Ms 409 makes only
brief mention of him at that point.
The place of Mevlid is somewhat awkward in Ms 921, interrupting the chronological
account with over 600 bayts, mostly devoted to the least historical aspect of the Prophet’s
career, the Mi craj. There, though, there are at least thematic links to the spiritualized or
“allegorical” aspects of Alexander’s adventures that the narrative emphasizes elsewhere. In
Ms 409, the praise of the Prophet, interpolated between two series of worldly adventures,
is much more formulaic, lacking narrative or thematic connections.
As for the various battles described in what was noted above as Section 6 of Ms 921,
there are only two in Ms 409, quite briefly described, and once again split into different
parts of the narrative. One, Alexander’s battle against the Jinn, occurs at the same juncture
as in Ms 921. But it describes the battle with the Russians later, after the Candace episode,
at the end of the “search for realms beyond”; Section 9 in Ms 921.
The “search for realms beyond” in Ms 409 is attenuated by comparison with Ms 921. In
place of the adventure in which Alexander measures the sea and voyages so far upon it that
he meets his mirror-image, as it were, coming toward him, Ms 409 gives a more
conventional description of the Seven Climes. Cosmologically, this description takes the
place of the Prophet’s ascent through the Seven Heavens on the Mi craj. Aside from the
absence of the “Mevlid” in Ms 409, the history sections of both manuscripts are similar,
although not identical, through the Caliph Mu’tasim (r. 833–842 CE). At that point, Ms
 REVISING ALEXANDER 241

409 breaks off, barely a century into the Abbasid Caliphate, and there are some differences
in the rulers who are named. The Ottoman Chronicle is absent in Ms 409, of course, as
noted above.
Absent, too, is the emphasis that Ms 921 places on Alexander’s Hajj when visiting the
Hijaz, among other adventures including the search for the Water of Life. Ms 409’s heading
for one of these episodes, “Zu’l-Qarnayn visits the tomb of a past Alexander,” suggests that
the heading-writer, at least, missed the important conflation of identities: not between two
Alexanders, but between the first and second Zu’l-Qarnayn, as Ms 921 duly
acknowledges.
The shorter, early manuscript presents the narrative with relatively little mystical
allegorization, scant reference to doctrinal Islam, and virtually no political references. Ms
921 appears to be much better constructed in terms of narrative flow. The sequence of
pivotal episodes correlates with the hero’s progress from concrete/worldly to abstract/
spiritual values, acquiring knowledge that audiences would have recognized as most directly
useful—the Universal History, culminating in the Ottoman Chronicle—at the peak of his
career.

***
Although it was copied some 45 years earlier, Ms 409 must derive from a significantly
earlier stage of the Ìskendernâme’s composition than Ms 921. It is almost impossible to
imagine that Ahmedı̂ would add a chronicle covering sovereigns up to his own time and
then remove it, particularly in light of the historical evidence for his switch of allegiance and
location to Ottoman patronage prior to the composition of Ms 921. It is also most unlikely
that the Mavlid would be removed once included. The shorter length of Ms 409 cannot be
construed as evidence of editing. It must be an earlier draft whose elaboration and
development we see in the more organized and complete composition of Ms 921.
The supersession of the Ottomans over other Anatolian principalities led Ahmedı̂ to
transfer his allegiance to their courts and, presumably, to seek favor there with a narrative
he had begun to write for other patrons.5 The later composition, created under Ottoman
patronage, reflects heightened awareness of the costs of political power as well as greater
ambitions. As an example, in Ms 409 there seems to be nothing comparable to these verses
from Ms 921, which evidently refer to the bitter strife among Bayezid I’s sons following his
death in 1402:

5047. When Salm and Tur were in the world, what peace or pleasure was there for Iraj?
5048. How could Joseph enjoy the gardens when his brothers were in Canaan?
5049. The enmity of brothers is a terrible thing. The treachery of a brother strikes at a
brother’s heart.

CONCLUSION

Numerous passages of Ms 409 duplicate the text of 921 more or less verbatim, but the
organization is much more fragmentary. In episodes following the early stages of
Alexander’s career, conception of narrative continuity is almost absent. In narrative
structure, the two manuscripts are so different that one of two possibilities must apply. Over
the two decades that Ahmedı̂ worked on it, the composition may have evolved from a
242 C. G. SAWYER

fragmented conception, based almost entirely on popular narratives transmitted orally, to

one where a core plot based on written Alexander traditions binds new material together
more or less adeptly.
This political agenda underlies the worldly/spiritual dynamic throughout the Iskender-
nâme in later versions such as Ms 921. As he worked with the material he received, Ahmedı̂
seems to have focused increasingly on the creation of a narrative to serve his patrons’ need
for historical and political legitimacy as well as advancing literary expression to the best of
his ability. Relying on the prestige of Persian literary tradition and Hellenistic subject matter,
the Iskendernâme makes a bid for production of court literature on an institutionalized and
centralized scale.
In order to achieve their goals—worldly empire conjoined with Islamic caliphate—the
Ottomans had laid claim to a history that made those objectives look like manifest destiny.
But what sources could they draw upon? They possessed some literary culture, but their
heroes were gazi warriors like Sari Saltuk and Battal Gazi and Sufi leaders like Haci Bektas
and Ahmad Yasavi. On the other hand, as relative newcomers to Islam, it was difficult for
early Ottoman sovereigns to claim the caliphate either through descent from the Prophet or
a prominent role in the early Islamic community.
In the Iskendernâme Ahmedı̂ uses Alexander, with all the literary and historical
associations that figure brings, to bridge the gap between worldly and secular authority, in
order to establish his Ottoman patrons’ claims to both. It is a real achievement, so striking
that the positive figure of Alexander stands out amidst the confusion of values. There, on
one hand, is the recognizable figure of the Hellenistic conqueror; there is also Alexander
who emerges as at least more interesting, if not greater, than Muhammad, who merely
ascended the Seven Heavens. On the other hand, this Alexander has made himself a virtual
Muslim by traveling to the Hijaz and visiting the two Holy Cities of Islam, constituting a
precedent for the patrons’ aspiration to take Al-Madinatayn, and thus the caliphate.

Notes

1. In keeping with this identification, in many places Ahmedı̂ uses the title “Zu’l-Qarnayn” synonymously with
“Iskandar.” But the late composition, Ms 921 acknowledges the skeptics’ position in portraying Alexander’s visit
to the tomb of Zu’l-Qarnayn, in the Hijaz.
2. In connection with Alexander of Macedon’s association with philosophy, Walbridge, 162–164, notes the
possibility of conflation with Alexander of Aphrodisias.
3. The most useful survey of manuscripts to date appears in Nihad Sami Banarli, “Ahmedi ve Dasitan-i Tevarih-i
Al-i Osman,” Türkiyat Mecmuasi 6 (1936), 108–111.
4. Robert Dankoff, “The Romance of Iskender and Gulsah,” 95–103.
5. On patronage, see Kortantamer, 105–126; Banarli, 56–60.

Works Cited

Bagci, Serpil (1989). Miniaturlu Ahmedi Iskendernameleri: ikonografik bir deneme. Dissertation, Hacetepe
University.
Banarli, Nihad Sami (1936). Ahmedi ve Dasitan-i Tevarih-i Al-i Osman. Turkiyat Mecmuasi, 6, 49–176.
Dankoff, Robert (1987). The Romance of Iskender and Gulsah. Ed. Sabri Skural, Turkic Culture: Continuity and
Change. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Frye, Northrop (1957). Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hanaway, William. Eskendername. Encyclopaedia Iranica.
Kortantamer, Tunca (1973). Leben und Weltbild des altosmanischen Dichters Ahmedi. Freiburg i. Br.: Schwarz.
Molé, Marjan (1953). “L’épopée iranienne après Firdosi.” La nouvelle Clio, 5, 377–93.
 REVISING ALEXANDER 243

Reardon, B.J. (1989) Collected Ancient Greek Novels. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Silay, Kemal (1992). Ahmedi’s History of the Ottoman Dynasty. Journal of Turkish Studies, 16, 129–200.
Southgate, Minoo (1978). Iskandarnamah: A Persian Medieval Alexander Romance. New York: Columbia
University Press.
Taeschner, Franz (1956). Der Ahidschuk von Tebriz und seine Erwaehnung im Iskendername des Ahmedi
(Festschrift Jan Rypka). Charisteria Orientalia, Praha.
Ünver, Ismail (1983). Ahmedı̂—Iskendernâme—Inceleme, Tipkibasim. Ankara: Türk Târı̂hi Kurumu Basimevi.
Walbridge, John (2000). Leaven of the Ancients: Suhrawardi and the Heritage of the Greeks. SUNY Series in Islam.
Albana: SUNY Press.