Objective: This study aims to examine the transformations that shaped the production of illustrated Shahnamehs during the historical transition from the manuscript-copying tradition to the age of mechanical print. Focusing on major production centers in India and Iran, it investigates the developmental trajectory, circulation, and dissemination of illustrated lithographed editions of the Shahnameh. The importance of this inquiry lies in reassessing the role of lithography as a powerful medium in making the Shahnameh more widely accessible, and in identifying the ways in which patterns of audience engagement changed from primarily oral reception to individual reading supported by a visual discourse. In this context, lithographic publication functioned not merely as a technical innovation, but as a cultural mechanism through which the epic could reach broader social groups.
Methodology: The present research employs a descriptive-analytical method and is based on the direct examination of fifteen copies preserved in the Ganjineh Razavi Collection, published between 1262/ 1845 and 1327/ 1909. The study systematically extracts and analyzes bibliographic data, codicological and physical features, and information concerning the individuals and agents involved in the illustration programs of these editions. The examined copies were produced in the important lithographic centers of Bombay, Kanpur, Lucknow, Tehran, and Tabriz. Through the comparative study of these editions, the research seeks to clarify the relationships among place of production, artistic practice, textual transmission, and visual organization.
Findings: The findings indicate that, from the perspective of production centers, India played a pioneering role in using Turner Macan’s edition and maintained a relatively continuous quantitative presence in the production of lithographed Shahnamehs. Nevertheless, the evidence reveals a deep and sustained connection between Iranian artists—especially artists from Shiraz—and printing houses in India. This relationship complicates any simple geographical division between Indian and Iranian editions. From an artistic standpoint, the function of illustration in these works underwent a significant transformation: the image was no longer merely a courtly decorative element, as in many earlier manuscript traditions, but became an explanatory and interpretive device that facilitated public understanding of the text. As a result, a hybrid medium emerged in which text and image interacted organically, helping to sustain and transmit Iranian national identity within both national and transregional cultural settings.
Conclusion: The illustrated lithographed Shahnameh should not be regarded as a rupture from the earlier tradition of Persian painting, but rather as a creative reconfiguration of that tradition within a public and reproducible medium. The active presence of migrant artists and the cultural exchanges between India and Iran reduced the significance of geographical distinctions among editions and contributed to the formation of a transnational production network. By leaving the exclusive sphere of the court and entering the marketplace, these illustrated lithographed Shahnamehs preserved older pictorial conventions while also responding to the visual tastes of audiences largely shaped by the Qajar cultural milieu. In this sense, they constitute a fundamental bridge between the classical visual heritage and the emerging age of mass communication, and they therefore merit further study from diverse scholarly perspectives.