excel ent pasture grounds and, as the Turkic name
This apparently conscious selection had a prec-
“place abounding in marmots” suggests, the abun-
edent in the Mongols’ choice of capital Thomas
dant game, which enabled the Mongols to pursue
Allsen convincingly argues that they “went to
their favourite pastime of hunting As part of
great lengths to properly site their capital,
their sedentarisation, the second Ilkhanid ruler,
Qaraq orum, in the same region as the imperial
Hülegü’s eldest son and successor, Abāqā (r 663/
city of the Türk qaghanate and Uighur empire
1265–680/1282) began the construction of a
because they believed that there inhered in that
summer residence at Sughūrlūq in the 1270s,46
particular locale a special good fortune, a cha-
less than fifteen years after the arrival of the Ilkha-
risma (Turk qut) that would favor their own
nids
political enterprise ”50 The site may therefore have
The project was completed under his son
been carefully selected in an effort to activate its
Arghūn, who also used the residence to house his
ancient “spiritual resource” (in Allsen’s words)
imperial treasury 47 The site, later also known as
and thereby generate qut which is also one of the
Takht-i Sulaimān (“Solomon’s Throne”), remains
characteristics that identifies a nomadic Inner
the only surviving palatial architectural complex
Asian sovereign as chosen by heaven 51 The stra-
of the Ilkhans for which provenance and date are
tegic positioning of the Ilkhanids was particularly
certain It was built over and incorporated the
crucial: the Mongolian takeover marked a pro-
remains of a pre-existing sanctuary, the important
found rupture resulting from the destruction of
Zoroastrian fire temple of Ādur Gushnasp, the
the five hundred year-old ʿAbbasid empire
“City of the Warriors’ Fire,” active during the late
(132/750–656/1258) centred on Baghdad and the
Sasanian period, indicating that the site was per-
demise of the two hundred year-old Saljuq
haps not only selected for its excellent location
dynasty which ruled over a wide area of Western
but for its associations with ancient Iranian king-
Asia during the eleventh and twelfth centuries
ship, and was intended to appropriate the early
(although it survived in Anatolia until the begin-
ning of the fourteenth century) The radical polit-
charisma that attached to the site 48 The fire temple
ical change necessarily also brought with it new
is said to have been erected by Kay Khusraw, the
forms of visual expression
third mythical ruler of the Iranian dynasty of the
It was however in the introduction of mythical
Kayānids According to the philologist Ḥamza
creatures of Chinese stylistic derivation, in par-
al-Iṣfahānī ( c 280/893– c 350/961) he killed a
ticular the dragon (long) and the phoenix (feng-
dragon called Kūshīd and gave its name to the
huang),52 that Takht-i Sulaimān would have the
fire temple he built in the place of Ādur Gushnasp,
greatest impact on Iranian art These creatures
calling it Kūshīd for Gushnasp (lit “possessing
appear on star-shaped, rectangular and other
stallions” – thought to be the name of the
polygonal glazed revetment tiles on the interior
unknown founder) 49
walls of the palatial buildings 53 Excavations show
46 This date is corroborated by production dates inscribed
of lajvardina star and cross tiles from the northern Octagon
on at least 163 lustre-painted tiles excavated at the site: 670
at Takht-i Sulaimān, fig 205 The dragon and sīmurgh, both
and 671 H and 674 H, that is, 9 August, 1271 to 17 July 1273
of Chinese inspiration, appear also on a large-size brass
and 27 June, 1275 to 14 February, 1276 ad; Masuya, 1997,
basin inlaid with gold and silver of scalloped outline, which
pp 72, 368–77 See Legacy, 2002, figs 59, 79, 95, 97, 100, 101
has been dated to the early fourteenth century, now in the
and 205, cat nos 84, 99, 100, 101, 103
Victoria and Albert Museum in London, inv no 546–1905,
47 Masuya, 1997, pp 200–1
one of the most striking examples of Ilkhanid metalwork
48 See Boyce and Grenet with a contrib by Beck, 1991,
Melikian-Chirvani, 1982, pp 202–7, no 93; Legacy, 2002,
pp 74–81
fig 211, cat no 169 The points of resemblance between
49 Huart, “Kay Khusraw,” EI 2 IV, 815b
the dragons and the sīmurgh s depicted on the basin with
50 Allsen, 2001, p 208, and idem, 1996, pp 125–6 Cf
those rendered on the eleventh-century Liao imperial mau-
al-Juwaynī, Taʾrīkh-i jahān-gushāy, tr Boyle, 1912–37, vol 1,
soleum at Qingling in Liaoning province have been noted
pp 54–5, 236
by Jessica Rawson (1994, pp 148–9) Hence by the end of
51 Allsen, 1996, pp 116, 131 According to a yuan-period
the thirteenth century the influence of a Chinese-derived
Uighur inscription, the word qut was also used in the title
phoenix is noticeable in the visual imagery of the sīmurgh;
of their sovereign, altun iduq qut (lit “golden sacred good
cf Baer, 1965, p 41
fortune”) Geng and Hamilton, 1981, pp 17 and 19, Uighur
53 Masuya, 1997; tile types displaying the dragon: 4-b,
text, 26 and 28, French tr
4-c, 4-i, 4-s, 4-u, 6-1-f, and 6-2-2a See also Legacy, 2002,
52 See, for instance, Legacy, 2002, figs 83, 92, 93, 96,
figs 59, 93, 102, 106, 275, cat nos 86, 91, 93, 101, 102
cat nos 88–91, 105, 204; also, the reconstruction drawing
216