In this artwork, how is the Interpretations of iconography discussed?
The interpretation of the iconography of the Baptistery of St. Louis has been controversial since the nineteenth century. Most researchers, including DS Rice, agree that some of the scenes depicted specific events, while some elements, such as genuflection, have no equivalent in other Islamic art and might be purely decorative. However, Rachel Ward argues against this interpretation by pointing out that Mamluks do not have a tradition of portraiture or 'history painting' in their metal art, and that such representation would be inconceivable without an inscription that identifies the scene. She also believes that looking to date the basin based on the costumes represented is absurd, as Mamluk artists worked more abstractly rather than direct representation.
S. Makariou considers R. Ward's hypotheses valid, while other researchers disagree. D. Rice argues, based on the difference in clothing and physical characters of the external friezes, contrasts with the traditional Mamluk costume, that two the basin depicts two distinct groups: panels E1 and E3 depict Turkish emirs and panels E2 and E4 depict Arab servants. Among the emirs, one could be Salar because of his coat of arms, but because of some of the figures around him, like the huntsman (fahhad), the cheetah, and  the falconer (bâzyâr) all associated with emirship. The medallions with the scenes of throne might have no particular meaning; on the other hand, there would be narrative continuity between the battle scenes, the severed head being that of the character struck in the previous banner.In 1984 E. Knauer, in an article devoted to the representation of the Mongols in the painting of trecento, proposes that the baptistery was "a testimony of the lively exchanges between Berke Khan and Baybars I, which culminate with the circumcision of the son of Baybars on September 3, 1264, in the presence of the representative [of the Golden Horde]. E. Knauer supports his point by looking at the unusual character of the double coat of arms; he identifies the lion-shaped one at Baybars, and evokes the idea that the tamga-shaped one would be that of the young circumcised, Berke. He mostly identifies hats as Mongol hats, and believes that their physical type would be that of the Caucasian emirates.Doris Behrens-Abouseif, in 1989, questions these assumptions. She insists that the types identified as servants by Rice are sometimes associated with aristocratic privilege. For her, each rider in the medallions represents an aspect of the furusiyya, an equestrian art highly valued in the Mamluk period; the entire Baptistery would be an evocation of tournaments (maydân) taking place during ceremonies at the time of Sultan Baybars.
Islamic art