Kadı Burhaneddin Ahmed was a fourteenth-century statesman of Central Anatolia who served first as a judge and a vizier and then, in 1381, proclaimed himself sultan in Sivas, having the Friday sermon read and coins struck in his own name. His place in literary history has proved more lasting than his place in politics. The Turkish divan he left behind survives from fourteenth-century Anatolia and is a considerable collection for its time; its single manuscript, copied while the poet was still alive, is kept today at the British Library in London. Made up of ghazals, quatrains (rubai) and tuyughs, the divan matters both for the vocabulary of Old Anatolian Turkish and for divan poetry, which was then still taking shape; Kadı Burhaneddin is among the poets most often cited as witnesses in studies of that poetry.

Kadı Burhaneddin's tie to Amasya is indirect, and this should be said at the outset. The sources do not record that he was born, studied or lived in Amasya; he was born in Kayseri and ruled from Sivas. Amasya enters his life as the seat of a rival emirate: the city's ruler Hacı Şadgeldi and his son Ahmed Bey were among the neighbours he struggled with most throughout his reign. That struggle found its way into his divan, and the poet names Amasya in several couplets. Hüseyin Hüsameddin, in his Amasya Tarihi (History of Amasya), also places the Bezm ü Rezm, written by Kadı Burhaneddin's chancery secretary, at the head of the sources he used for the city's fourteenth-century history. Kadı Burhaneddin is treated among the Divan Poets of Amasya with this limited and indirect connection stated plainly. The details of his life are given in his biography in the Historical Figures section of our site; here the weight falls on the divan and the poetry.

Life and Ties to Amasya

Kadı Burhaneddin, whose given name was Ahmed and whose kunya was Abu'l-Abbas, was the son of Şemseddin Mehmed, the judge of Kayseri, and was born in Kayseri on 8 January 1345 (3 Ramadan 745). His family belonged to the Salur tribe of the Oghuz. He took his first lessons from his father, studied logic, jurisprudence, hadith, Qur'anic exegesis, astronomy and medicine alongside Arabic and Persian, and continued his education in Egypt, where he went with his father, and in Aleppo. On his return to Kayseri he succeeded his father as judge, married the daughter of the Eretnid ruler Gıyaseddin Mehmed Bey, and then rose to the vizierate and the regency. In 1381 he founded his own state in place of the Eretnids, and in 1398 he was taken captive by the Akkoyunlu leader Kara Yülük Osman Bey and put to death.

Amasya appears in this life as a rival centre. When, in the last years of the Eretnids, the emirs began to act on their own in their provinces, Hacı Şadgeldi held Amasya. Kadı Burhaneddin marched against him in the autumn of 1381; Şadgeldi was defeated and killed, and the proclamation of the sultanate followed immediately after this victory. Şadgeldi's son Ahmed Bey took his father's place and remained Kadı Burhaneddin's adversary to the end of the sultan's life; the ruler of Sivas led campaigns against Amasya again in 1384 and in 1394. The details of this political contest are told in the biography.

Hüsameddin's Amasya Tarihi gives small but valuable notices of how the event touched the city's learned circles. Sefer Şah Çelebi of Merzifon had studied literature and Persian in Amasya under Mevlânâ Hüsameddin Hasan el-Mevlevî and, as a madrasa teacher, had won the particular favour of Hacı Şadgeldi Paşa; after the Paşa was killed in 783 (1381) "at the hands of Kâdı Burhaneddîn, ruler of Sivas", the gossip that followed drove him to leave Amasya for Bursa, where he became a professor and later chancellor (nişancı). Pîr Hasan Çelebi, professor at the Halfetgazi madrasa, likewise moved to the land of Karaman with his teacher upon the same event and "certain compelling causes that arose". According to Hüsameddin, Keçi Bey of the Torumtay family, who had been Şadgeldi Paşa's vizier in his last years, reconciled Kadı Burhaneddin with the Paşa's son Devatdar Ahmed Paşa, who became ruler of Amasya after his father's death, and he remained Ahmed Paşa's vizier until 788 (1386). These notices show that Kadı Burhaneddin touched the life of Amasya as a ruler who altered the city's political balance before he ever did so through his verse.

Another link with Hüsameddin's work is a matter of sources. In the introduction to the Amasya Tarihi, where the works written before his own on the scholars and poets of Amasya are listed, the Bezm ü Rezm comes first. Hüsameddin presents it as "a precious work" written in Persian by Azîz b. Erdeşîr el-Esterâbâdî, "chancery secretary of Kadı Burhân, ruler of Sivas", gathering the history of Sivas, Amasya and their dependencies between the years 768 and 798, and notes that copies are held in the Ayasofya and Yerebatan libraries in Istanbul. This chronicle, which tells at length of Kadı Burhaneddin's youth, education, private and political life, is also the principal source for the poet's biography.

Works

Kadı Burhaneddin's literary fame rests on his Turkish divan. Besides it there are Arabic works that show the scholar in him: İksîrü's-saâdât fî esrâri'l-ibâdât, on the inner wisdom of acts of worship, and Tercîhu't-Tavzîh, a gloss on Taftazani's et-Telvîh. Three of his Arabic poems appear at the end of the İksîrü's-saâdât. He is also known to have written Persian poems; Aynî's İkdü'l-cümân is cited as the source for this. These poems have not come down to us as a separate collection.

The only known copy of the divan is held at the British Library under the shelfmark Or. 4126. Some sources place it in the British Museum; the manuscript was moved from the museum to the library and kept its number. It reached London among the books of Thomas Fiott Hughes, who worked at the British Embassy in Istanbul. It was copied in 796 (1393-94), that is, in the poet's lifetime, by Halil b. Ahmed, one of Kadı Burhaneddin's calligraphers. It is written in a vocalised Seljuk naskh, its opening is illuminated and its pages are ruled; it comprises 305 folios in all. Some corrections in the margins are thought to be in the poet's own hand. On the first leaf is a tughra believed to belong to Mustafa III. This detail suggests that the manuscript may at one time have been in an Ottoman palace library; this, however, is an inference, and the sources contain no explicit statement to that effect.

The number of poems in the divan is given differently in different sources. The TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi article speaks of more than 1,300 ghazals, twenty rubais and 115 tuyughs. The introduction to the Turkish Language Association's (TDK) facsimile of 1944 counts about 1,500 ghazals, 20 rubais and 119 tuyughs; Ali Alparslan gives 1,268 ghazals, 45 incomplete ghazals, 3 couplets, 20 rubais and 116 tuyughs. According to the introduction of the TDK's 2020 facsimile, the divan holds 1,294 ghazals, 19 rubais and 117 tuyughs; this count includes a ghazal found among the tuyughs and a ghazal of the poet's preserved in the anthology of parallel poems Câmiü'n-nezâir, and it notes that 27 ghazals and one rubai are duplicates. Part of the difference comes from how repeated poems and incomplete ghazals are counted. The divan is not arranged in the classical order; the poems are set down without regard to alphabetical sequence, most probably in the order in which they were written. The poet used no pen name and wrote no kasides. Alparslan notes that in one of the ghazals (ghazal no. 69) he found the poet's own name, Ahmed.

The publication history of the divan is long and laborious. The first study came in 1895 from the Russian Turkologist P. Melioransky, who translated twenty rubais and twelve tuyughs into Russian. E. J. W. Gibb dwelt on the poet's literary personality in his history of Ottoman poetry and gave examples; F. F. Godsell published four ghazals and all the rubais and tuyughs in Istanbul in 1338 (1922), together with Cenab Şahabeddin's essay "Kadı Burhaneddin: Hayatı ve Sanatı". In 1934 the Turkish Language Association applied to the Ministry of Education for photographs of the manuscript, and the facsimile appeared only after long delays. The date of this edition is given in the sources in two ways, as 1943 and as 1944. The facsimile was planned in two volumes, with the transcribed text and a glossary to follow in a separate volume, but only the first volume was ever published. In this edition some pages came out black, the marginal notes were lost because the pages were cropped along the ruled frames before printing, and the manuscript was reduced to nearly half its real size.

Muharrem Ergin first published a grammatical study of the divan in 1951 and then prepared a transcription of the text, printed in 1980 by the Faculty of Letters of Istanbul University. In his preface Ergin openly admits that, beyond the table of corrections, overlooked errors and unresolved or even misread words may remain. Ali Alparslan's Kadı Burhaneddin Divanı'ndan Seçmeler (1977), number 73 in the Ministry of Culture's series of 1000 Basic Works, presents 100 ghazals, 7 rubais and 18 tuyughs with explanations; the poems are ordered by their final letters, and the page numbers of the divan are shown in brackets. Alparslan was helped in this work by Ali Nihad Tarlan, Abdülbaki Gölpınarlı and Orhan Şaik Gökyay, and the book was reprinted in 2000. In 2000 Hatice Tören re-read the ghazals of the first hundred pages of the divan and proposed nearly sixty new readings. A series of master's theses prepared in Istanbul between 1985 and 1987 also compiled a page-by-page grammatical index of the divan.

In recent years the manuscript itself has been reached again. Hatice Özdil produced a new facsimile in 2019, published by Bitlis Eren University, based on a digital copy she obtained after long correspondence. According to this edition the ghazals occupy folios 1b-291b, the rubais 292a-299b and the tuyughs 294a-305a; despite large mud stains on pages 67b and 68a, the writing is more legible than in the old edition. The TDK also issued a colour facsimile in 2020 that is clear and readable, but in it both sides of folio 171 are repeated in place of folio 172, so that one folio is missing. Writing in the journal Türk Dili in 2024, Salim Küçük argues that a new and complete transcribed text of the divan, drawing on all these studies, should be prepared without delay. The full text of Ergin's edition is not available in open access online; the poems below are taken from scholarly studies that quote the divan.

Literary Persona

Because Kadı Burhaneddin lived outside the Ottoman lands, he did not enter the Ottoman tezkires, the biographical dictionaries of poets. Tezkire writers such as Sehî, Latîfî, Âşık Çelebi and Kınalızâde say nothing of him; Taşköprizâde, Hoca Sâdeddin Efendi and Kâtib Çelebi merely state that he was a well-known poet. Ottoman historians mention him mostly for his political role. His literary personality has therefore become known less through the verdicts of the tezkires than through the studies of the divan carried out since the end of the nineteenth century. The Bezm ü Rezm also records the books the poet read; as the TDV article relates on its authority, the poet told how his inner eye was opened after reading a copy of the Fusûsü'l-hikem written in Ibn Arabi's own hand, and he showed great respect to the Sufis.

In Hatice Tören's assessment, Kadı Burhaneddin wrote love poems in a lyricism all his own; in his deeply felt poems he recalls Fuzûlî, and in colour, brilliance and sincerity he recalls Bâkî. His most original trait is his very frequent use of the beloved's features of beauty, such as the hair, brow, lashes, eyes, face and mouth; he opens nearly every poem with them. Among the figures of rhetoric he favours simile, double meaning (tevriye) and paronomasia (cinas). He works into his verse terms ranging from Iranian mythology to astrology, from grammar to music and Sufism, but gives little room to religious themes. In his Sufi ghazals he uses terms such as gayb, şühûd, cezbe, tecellî and cem aptly; Ali Nihad Tarlan wrote Sufi commentaries on four of these ghazals. He is said to have been influenced by Anvari, Hafiz of Shiraz and Omar Khayyam.

The traces of a life spent in struggle also show in his poems. He wrote couplets with a warlike, bold and at times harsh tone, and brought the rulers and cities of his own day into his verse. Nevzat Özkan's study of the place names in the divan is notable in this respect: alongside the place names that belong to the imaginary world of divan poetry, the poet also names the cities in which he lived, which he besieged and over which he fought. He associates Kayseri with Baghdad and Sivas with Shiraz; Amasya, Niksar, Tokat, Turhal, Simâlu and Erzincan enter his couplets as places marked by his political life; Timur and Toktamış are named outright. Mehmet Kırbıyık's work on matters of war and Fatih Bakırcı's on elements of archery also address this side of the divan.

It is often said that Kadı Burhaneddin did not handle the aruz metre well. Tören sees this as a general failing of the Turkish poets of the period and reminds us that a poet whose identity as soldier and statesman came first could write poetry only when time allowed. Salim Küçük likewise notes that, besides the metrical faults that came from writing in Turkish, his frequent recourse to rhetorical figures, his wordplay and his difficult couplets make the divan hard to understand. Ahmet Kavaklıyazı explains the same difficulty by the poet's language, the spelling of the single manuscript, his subtle images and the elements of material culture in his verse, and says that his scholarly personality played a part in it. In his view, the marked lyricism of the poems has led to Kadı Burhaneddin being counted among the founders of divan poetry. The divan is also known for its wealth of idioms and expressions; Müjgân Üçer identified in it 69 idioms of local character used in Sivas.

The tuyugh is the verse form that sets Kadı Burhaneddin apart from other divan poets. According to Tören, the poet served as a bridge in bringing the tuyugh, one of the pre-Islamic Turkish verse forms, to Anatolia, and joined the wisdom that governed the old tuyugh to the Sufi tradition. Which linguistic area his language belongs to is disputed. It is generally assigned to the Azeri area of Old Anatolian Turkish; Alparslan notes that some tuyughs contain North-eastern Turkic forms such as bolmak, -gay and -gan. Özkan, and Küçük after him, hold that the poet's language should be assessed within the Anatolian and Azerbaijani areas together.

Examples of His Poetry

Ergin's complete transcribed edition of 1980 could not be consulted for this study. The poems and couplets below are reproduced exactly, in the transcription used there, from two scholarly articles that quote the divan and from the TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi. Nevzat Özkan's quotations are cited with the abbreviation "KBD" in page/line form; Ahmet Kavaklıyazı gives the poem and couplet number in Ergin's edition, followed by the folio in the TDK facsimile of 2020. The renderings in plain language follow the explanations in the source articles.

Ghazal Couplets: Dün içre gelseyidi göŋlüme ħayâli anuŋ

Dün içre gelseyidi göŋlüme ħayâli anuŋ
Amâsiye gibi cânumda ġâret olayidi
Ħarâb ķıldı gözüŋ göŋlümüŋ Amâsiyesin
Ħayâli ķulleye gelse ‘imâret olayidi

In the first couplet the poet says that, had the image of the beloved come to his heart in the night, there would have been plunder in his soul as there was in Amasya. In the second, the beloved's eye has laid waste the Amasya of his heart; were the image of that eye to come to the heart's tower, the place would flourish again. Özkan connects these couplets with the time when Sivas was under siege and Ahmed Bey, emir of Amasya, seized some of Kadı Burhaneddin's castles, which were retaken as soon as the siege was lifted. Here Amasya is named, in Özkan's words, as "the place that is plundered, the place that is laid waste"; the city is the seat of the rival emirate for which the sultan fought again and again. Since the two couplets share the same refrain and rhyme (ġâret olayidi / ‘imâret olayidi) and the places cited lie very close together, they most probably belong to the same ghazal; this, however, is an inference that the source does not state. (Özkan 2018, KBD 71/16 and 72/2)

Tuyugh: Devletinden ķaçan olur ħâk-sâr

Devletinden ķaçan olur ħâk-sâr,
‘Âşıķ olur ma’şuķından şerm-sâr,
Ĥimmetümüz iki ‘âlemde gezer,
N‘olısar Amâsiya ya Niksâr

He who flees his fortune falls to the dust, the lover is put to shame before his beloved; our ambition roams the two worlds, so what are Amasya or Niksar, says the poet. Özkan reads this tuyugh together with Kadı Burhaneddin's capture of Niksar in 1387 and his effort to keep Amasya under control. The ruler's self-assurance is plainly heard in these four lines: the cities of rival emirates are shown as small targets beside an ambition that reaches across the two worlds. That the name of Amasya enters a four-line tuyugh also shows the place the city held in the poet's political horizon. (Özkan 2018, KBD 588/10-11)

Tuyugh: Ezelde Ĥaķ ne yazmış ise bolur

Ezelde Ĥaķ ne yazmış ise bolur,
Göz neni ki görecek ise görür,
İki ‘âlemde Ĥaķķa sıġınmışuz,
Toĥtamış ne ola yâ Aħsaħ Temür.

Whatever God wrote in pre-eternity will come to pass, whatever the eye is to see it will see; in both worlds we have taken refuge in God, so who are Toktamış or Timur the Lame. The section of the TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi on the Kadı Burhaneddin state writes that his disregard for Timur's threats can be seen in a poem on page 586 of the divan; the tuyugh Özkan quotes from the same page must be that poem. In Özkan's view the poet's stance here is that of a warrior who has surrendered himself to fate. The form "bolur" in the first line is one of the North-eastern Turkic forms that Alparslan points out in some of the tuyughs. (Özkan 2018, KBD 586/2-3)

Tuyugh: Dünyâ diyen gişiye bir vâyedür

Dünyâ diyen gişiye bir vâyedür,
Yimek içmek bu câna bir dâyedür,
Dünyâ bir geçüt durur gelen geçer,
İllâ server yigide sermâyedür.

The world is a portion allotted to man, and what we eat and drink is a nurse to this soul; the world is a passage, whoever comes passes on, but for those foremost in valour it is capital. Özkan offers this tuyugh as an example of how the poet, a man of struggle, judged the life of this world. The image of the passage, in the mouth of a ruler whose life was spent in war, reads both as a saying of wisdom and as a call to action. (Özkan 2018, KBD 597/9-10)

Tuyugh: Oldı musaħħar bize çü Şamla Rûm

Oldı musaħħar bize çü Şamla Rûm,
Düşmene demür bolduħ, dostlara mûm,
Her kişiler yürisün yollarına,
Çün dôsta mübareküz düşmene şûm.

Syria and Rum have submitted to us; we have become iron to the enemy and wax to our friends. Let everyone go his own way, for we are a blessing to the friend and an ill omen to the foe. Özkan connects this tuyugh with the alliance Kadı Burhaneddin formed with the Mamluk sultan Barquq and the Ottoman ruler Bayezid I (the Thunderbolt). The contrast of iron and wax is a simple and effective example of antithesis. (Özkan 2018, KBD 607/10-11)

Couplet: Ben Türkem ü sen Tatar yolıyle sorışalum

Ben Türkem ü sen Tatar yolıyle sorışalum,
O cây gerek baŋa baħar iseŋ oynuma.

I am a Turk and you a Tatar; come, let us speak in due form. That place is mine to have; if you heed my word, withdraw from this game. According to Özkan, the poet here tells Timur, whom he saw as a bloodthirsty ruler come from the land of the Tatars, that he must keep his hands off Anatolia. The couplet reflects the character of the divan well in the way it joins a political challenge to the language of the ghazal. (Özkan 2018, KBD 238/7)

Couplets: Cities and Castles

Gözlerimüz yaşını aħıdup ırmaġ idüben,
Ķayseriyi daħı bu yaşile Baġdâd idelüm.
Bini çü ķılur Sa’dî aceb olmaya ger ol,
Sîvâsı daħı ħıŧŧa-i Şîrâz idiserdür.
Toķat ķal’asında śabûhîyi vir ŧolu
Bâşed ki śubha irüre Taŋrı śafâyile
N’ola eger fetĥ oldıyısa bize Simâlu,
Ki görmemiş ola göz ħûbı işbu sîmâlu.

In the first couplet the poet wishes to let his tears flow like a river and with that water turn Kayseri, where he was born, into Baghdad; Özkan draws attention to the fact that Baghdad was founded near the Tigris and Kayseri near the Kızılırmak. In the second, since the beloved has made him a poet like Sa'di of Shiraz, the beloved will make Sivas a land of Shiraz too. The third recalls the castle of Tokat, besieged in 1388, as a morning of victory: pour the morning wine full in the castle of Tokat, that God may bring us to the dawn in joy. The fourth makes a punning allusion to the taking of the castle of Simâlu; Özkan explains it by Kadı Burhaneddin's siege and capture of the castle in 1391, after Ahmed Bey, emir of Amasya, had decided to hand it over to the Ottomans. The play of sound between Simâlu and "sîmâlu" (having a fair face) shows how the poet binds even a historical event to praise of beauty. (Özkan 2018, KBD 446/6, 261/10, 74/7, 108/9-10)

Couplet: Rûm ilin, yüzüŋ göreli göŋlüm yurd eyledi

Rûm ilin, yüzüŋ göreli göŋlüm yurd eyledi,
Göreli gözüŋi lîkin rây-ı Türkistân ider.

Since seeing the beloved's face, his heart has made the land of Rum, that is Anatolia, its home; but since seeing the beloved's eyes, it longs for Turkestan. According to Özkan, the poet here likens Anatolia to the beloved's fair face and Turkestan, as the home of gazelles with lovely eyes, to the beloved's eyes, voicing through these features of beauty his attachment to both lands. The couplet has also been read as the voice of an Anatolian ruler who never forgot that his roots lay in Turkestan. (Özkan 2018, KBD 183/6)

Couplet: Sûfîlerin dileği mihrâb namaz

Sûfîlerin dileği mihrâb namaz
Er kişinin arzusı meydan olur

The Sufis' wish is the prayer niche and prayer; the true man's desire is the field. Tören cites this couplet as an example of the poet's warlike, bold and harsh bearing. The contrast between prayer niche and battlefield sets side by side, in a single couplet, the two worlds of a poet who was as much a soldier as a scholar. (TDV İslâm Ansiklopedisi, "Kadı Burhâneddin", section on his literary personality)

Tuyugh: Ḳaġan aslanlar eger añrar-ısa

Ḳaġan aslanlar eger añrar-ısa
Añlaya her kim aña uġrar-ısa
Ḳanda egri var-ısa ṭutmaġıl daḳ
Ṣāʿiḳa ḳoç ḳılıcı ṭoġrar-ısa

Kavaklıyazı quotes this tuyugh for the expression "koç kılıç". The koş kılıç, or double sword, is a fork-bladed sword that also appears in Mahmud of Kashgar's proverb "Koş kılıç kınka sığmas" (a double sword does not fit in one scabbard), and its shape recalls Ali's sword Zulfiqar. The tuyugh opens with the roaring of enraged lions, and its last line speaks of a thunderbolt cutting the double sword. To Kavaklıyazı, the image of the double sword being cut by lightning suggests that such swords were thought to draw lightning. The expression "kağan aslan" is likewise an old phrase found in the Book of Dede Korkut, meaning an angry, roaring lion. (Kavaklıyazı 2022, p. 317; Ergin 1145, TDK 2020 fol. 304v)

Ghazal Couplets: The Beloved and the Lover

Seni ben sevmişem şāhā vü ölince seviserem
Ḳaġan aslan bu bįşede nicesi ḳorḫa ʿafʿafdan
Cevrüñ ṭaşını göñülüme niçe atarsın
Bir sırça-durur āhen-i Şįrāzį degüldür
Ciger ḳanını gözlerüñ yürek odıyla su ḳıldı
ʿAcāyib kār-ḫānedür niderler ḳarʿ u enbįḳi

In the first couplet the poet addresses the beloved as one would address a sultan: I have loved you and will love you until I die; why should a roaring lion in this forest be afraid. According to Kavaklıyazı, by likening himself to a roaring lion the poet says that nothing can keep him from the beloved's path. In the second, the beloved's cruelty is likened to a stone and the poet's heart to glass: how long will you throw the stone of cruelty at my heart, it is glass, not Shiraz iron; Shiraz is remembered as a city once known for making weapons. In the third, the beloved's eyes have turned the blood of the liver into water with the fire of the heart; this is a marvellous workshop where distilling is done with alembic and flask. Kavaklıyazı recalls the classical belief that the liver melts into blood and that this blood leaves the body mingled with tears; blood turning to water and water to blood is a frequent expression in the divan for great suffering. (Kavaklıyazı 2022, pp. 315-317; Ergin 612/6, 34/3, 66/4)

Chronology

1345 (3 Ramadan 745): Born in Kayseri.

Autumn 1381 (783): Defeated and had killed Hacı Şadgeldi, emir of Amasya, and proclaimed his sultanate in Sivas; some scholars of Amasya left for Bursa and Karaman.

1384: Defeated Ahmed Bey, emir of Amasya, repeatedly.

1393-94 (796): The copy of the divan now in the British Library was made by Halil b. Ahmed.

1394: Campaigns against Amasya and Erzincan.

1395-96 (798): İksîrü's-saâdât completed.

1398 (800): Killed by Kara Yülük Osman Bey.

1895: Melioransky translated twenty rubais and twelve tuyughs into Russian.

1922 (1338): Godsell's selection published in Istanbul.

1943-1944: The Turkish Language Association issued the first facsimile of the divan.

1951: Muharrem Ergin's grammatical study published.

1977: Ali Alparslan's selection appeared in the 1000 Basic Works series.

1980: Muharrem Ergin's transcribed edition published.

2000: Hatice Tören proposed new readings for the first hundred pages of the divan.

2019: The new facsimile prepared by Hatice Özdil published.

2020: The Turkish Language Association published a colour facsimile.

Bibliography

Primary sources

Academic studies

Online sources