The Safavid Dynastic Shrine: Architecture, Religion and Power in Early Modern Iran 9780755610877, 9780755614592

Citation preview

This book is dedicated to my mother, Doreen Nargis, and the memory of my father, Muhammad Hassan Rizvi.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS



Map of Safavid Iran. Drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

xviii

Introduction

1 2

3

4 5 6

Courtyard of the shrine, showing Dār al-ḥuffāz and tomb tower of Shaykh Safi. 2 Sokollu Mehmed Pasha complex at Kadirga, Istanbul, after Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire (London: Reaktion Books, 2005); 334. Drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh. 9 Friday Mosque, Ardabil (c. 13th c.). Drawing by Bruno Schulz, from Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 11 Ceramic plate from the collection of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. OA 96.6-26.6, gift of Sir A. W. Franks. 13 Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. Site plan. 14 ‘Ali Qapu Gateway, Ardabil. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 17 Chapter 1

1

Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1335. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

29

List of Illustrations   2 ‘Ardebil’ from Adam Olearius, Offt begehete Beschreibung der newen orientalischen Reise (1646). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University.   3 ‘Shaykh Safi dancing at the shrine,’ Tazkireh of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili 1582 (Shiraz), Collection of the Aga Khan Museum (AKM 00264). © AKTC.   4 Ḥaramkhāna, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1300.   5 Ḥaramkhāna, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1300. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.   6 Ḥaramkhāna, interior view of epigraphy on ceiling.   7 Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1350. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.   8 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, detail showing artisan’s signature medallion.   9 Wooden casket of Shaykh Safi. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 10 Wooden casket of Shaykh Safi. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 11 Dār al-ḥuffāz, entrance portal, 14th–15th centuries. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 12 Detail, space between Dār al-ḥuffāz and Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi. 13 Section through Dār al-ḥuffāz and Tomb Tower.

ix

33 40 43

44 45 47 49

50 51 53 54 56

Chapter 2

  1 Tomb of Shah Isma‘il, interior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.   2 Bowl, dated 1590/1. Courtesy of the State Hermitage Museum, 1r 2260.   3 Tomb of ‘Shah Tahmasb’s mother.’

63 65 73

x

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine Chapter 3

  1 ‘The first sermon of Hasan ibn ‘Ali in Madina,’ Ahsan al-akhbār fī ma‛rafāt aima’ al-athārr, c. 1526, copied by Muhammad al-Husayni al-Varamini. Russian National Library, St Petersburg (folio 373v, Dorn 312). 78   2 Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1620. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou. 80   3 Chillākhāna. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, 14th–16th centuries. 82   4 Dār al-ḥadīth. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 84   5 Jannatsarā, exterior view from rear. 87   6 Jannatsarā, sketch of interior mihrab. 88   7 ‘Muhammad Tabakhani dancing with dervishes,’ Majālis alushhāq, Kamal al-din Gazurgahi, 1560. British Library (folio 152a, OR 11837). 90   8 ‘Ardabil Carpet,’ 1539–40, Victoria and Albert Museum, London. 92   9 Friday Mosque, Isfahan, 8th–17th centuries. Renovated in 1531 by Shah Tahmasb. 94 10 Dār al-ḥuffāz, detail of window panel. 96 11 Fārman installed on the Dār al-ḥuffāz, c. 1536/7. 97 Chapter 4

  1 Lamp stand, last quarter of the sixteenth century, State Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg, inv. no. IR 2202.   2 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi.   3 Section through courtyard showing Jannatsarā and Dār al-ḥadīth, c. 1537. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

112 118 119

Chapter 5

  1 ‘Ashūra ceremonies in the courtyard of the Shrine of Shaykh Safi,’ from Adam Olearius, Offt begehete Beschreibung der newen orientalischen Reise (1646). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University. 125   2 ‘A gathering of Dervishes,’ c. 1615 (Isfahan). Oriental Institute, St Petersburg. 127   3 ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, Palace precincts, Isfahan, early 17th century. 131   4 Tawhīdkhāna, Palace precincts, Isfahan, early 17th century. 132   5 Silver-plated door at entrance to the Dār al-ḥuffaz, gifted by Zulfiqar Khan Qaramanlu in 1602. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 134

List of Illustrations

xi

  6 ‘Majd al-din Baghdadi preaching in Khwarazm,’ Majālis alushhāq, Kamal al-din Gazurgahi, 16th c. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin. 136   7 View of the shrine of Shaykh Safi showing the collapsed roof of the Dār al-ḥuffāz. From Jacques de Morgan, Mission Scientifique en Perse (Paris, 1894). 137   8 Dār al-ḥuffāz, drawing showing interior. From F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 138   9 Silver hanging lamp, 1614 (Ardabil), inscribed with the name of the donor, Sahib Nazir ‘Ali Khan. National Museum of Iran (invoice number 9822). 141 10 Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1620. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou. 145 11 Chīnīkhāna, exterior view from graveyard. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 146 12 Chīnīkhāna, details of ceiling carvings. 147 13 Chīnīkhāna, interior view showing lower zone and storage. From F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 148 14 Zarnigārkhāna, interior view, 15th–16th centuries. Shrine of ‘Abdullah Ansari, Gazargah. Courtesy of the Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT. Photo by Lisa Golombek. 149 15 ‘The Beggar before the King,’ Attar, Mantiq al-ṭayr, 1483 (Herat) inv. 63.210.28.  Photo: Malcolm Varon. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A. Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Art Resource, NY. 151 16 Meiping (vase) with flowering and fruiting branches, 1425–35 (Xiangxi province, China), inscribed with the mark of Behbud and Qarachagahay. National Museum of Iran (inv. no. 9314). 152 17 Chīnīkhāna porcelains, photo from F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library. 152 18 Detail of the window in the ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, fifth floor atrium, Isfahan, early 17th century. 154

xii

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine Chapter 6

  1a Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, Kalkhoran, c. 1605. 162   1b Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, Kalkhoran, rear view, c. 1605. 162   2 ‘Ardebil,’ from Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn (1703) (London, 1737). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University. 164   3 Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, plan. c. 1605. 165   4 Entrance, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il. 166   5 Tomb chamber, interior detail, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il. 168   6 Shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar, c. 1610. From Jacques de Morgan, Mission Scientifique en Perse (Paris, 1894). 169   7 Shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh. 170   8 Exterior portal with epigraphy panel, shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar. 172   9 Courtyard, shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad, 14th–20th centuries. Courtesy of Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT photo by May Farhat. 176 10 Shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh. 177 11 Tomb of Khwaja Rabī’, near Mashhad. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh. 179 12 Tomb of Padshah Humayun, Delhi, 1562–72. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh. 180 13 ‘Akbar’s pilgrimage to the shrine of Muin al-din Chishti,’ Akbarnama, Abul Fazl, c. 1569–90, Victoria and Albert Museum, London. 181 14 View of dome, Masjid-i Shah, 1611–38, Isfahan. 183 Colour Plate Section

  1 ‘The ship of Shi‛ism,’ Shāhnāma-yi Shāh Tāhmāsb, Firdawsi, 1524–25 (Tabriz), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (folio 18v). Gift of Arthur A. Houghton Jr., 1970 (1970.301.1). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A. Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Art Resource, NY. 1   2 Façade of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, shrine of Shaykh Safi. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis

List of Illustrations (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.   3 From left to right: Haramkhāna, tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, and mausoleum of Shah Isma‘il.   4 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1335.   5 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, interior view of the ceiling.   6 Dār al-ḥuffāz, cornice epigraphy.   7 ‘Shaykh Safi dining with disciples,’ Tazkireh of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili 1582 (Shiraz), Collection of the Aga Khan Museum (AKM 00264). © AKTC.   8 Tomb of Shah Isma‘il, exterior view.   9 Dār al-ḥadīth, detail of epigraphy panel. 10 Jannatsarā, entrance portal. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1537. 11 ‘Shah Tahmasb greets the exiled Humayun,’ 1647. Wall painting on the Chihil Sutun Audience Hall, Isfahan. Courtesy of the Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT. 12 Chihil Sutun Palace, Qazvin, c. 1545–55. 13 Dār al-ḥuffāz, Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, detail of entrance portal 14 Dār al-ḥuffaz, interior. Shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad, 15th–17th, 20th centuries. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat. 15 Dār al-ḥuffāz, interior view of two-storey alcoves. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. 16 Shāhnishīn, interior view, c. 1610. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat. 17 Chīnīkhāna, interior view. 18 ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, fifth floor atrium, Isfahan, early 17th century. 19 Tomb chamber, interior detail, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il. 20 Golden Iwan, shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma, Qum, c. 1519. 21 Detail of dome, shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat. 22 Tomb of Khwaja Rabī’, near Mashhad, 1617–22. 23 View of the Masjid-i Shah and Shaykh Lutfullah Mosque from the Maydan-i Naqsh-i Jahan, early 17th century, Isfahan. Courtesy of Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT. Photo: Khosrow Bozorgi.

xiii

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23

Acknowledgements

There are many debts that I have collected over the course of researching and writing this book, from teachers, mentors, colleagues, and friends. Nasser Rabbat enriched this project through his guidance and intellect, always pushing me to ask difficult questions of architecture and its history. Gülru Necipoğlu provided support and inspiration, serving as an exemplar of rigorous scholarship and creativity. Kathryn Babayan devoted many hours helping me unravel the complexities of Safavid ideology, reading and commenting on my work in its earliest phases. Abbas Amanat, Shahzad Bashir, Sheila Canby, Houshang Chehabi, Jamal Elias, Finbarr Barry Flood, Paul Losensky, Christine Mehring, Charles Melville, and Ethel Sara Wolper have given generously of their time and friendship, at various stages of the book’s development. A scholarly debt is also owed to Catherine Asher, Sussan Babaie, Stefano Carboni, Devin DeWeese, Rudi Matthee, David Roxburgh, Sunil Sharma, Marianna Shreve Simpson, Priscilla Soucek, Wheeler Thackston, and Irene Winter. The Institut Français de Recherche en Iran, under the directorship of Rémy Boucharlat, provided a base in Tehran, while the hospitality of friends and colleagues made my visits exciting and fruitful. Among them are the families Matin, Najafi, Haeri, Safizadeh and Jafari. Mahmud Moussavi, Zohreh Ruhfar, S. Kazem Sajjadpour, and the administrators at the Society for National Heritage, provided access to archives and guidance. The late Sayyid Jamal Torabi-Tabatabai was a remarkable scholar, and a generous guide on an unforgettable trip from Tabriz to Ardabil. Isa Whalley at the British Library in London, Olga Vasileya at the Russian National Library and Ada Adamova at the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg, Francis Richard at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, made their collections accessible to me. I am also grateful to the staff at MIT’s Rotch Library, Columbia University’s Avery Library and Yale University’s Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library.

Acknowledgements

xv

The Aga Khan Programs for Islamic Architecture at MIT and Harvard supported my dissertation and research, serving as a home base through the period of research in Iran. A Barakat Foundation Grant enabled my first field trip to Iran. The Macmillan Center at Yale University (then the YCIAS), under the directorship of Gustav Ranis, gave me a two-year postdoctoral fellowship, for which I am most grateful. A Hilles Publication Grant from Yale provided a subvention for the photographic documentation in the book. I am thankful to the British Institute for Persian Studies for their publication support, and to the director, Vanessa Martin, for her commitment and belief in the project. The book would not have been possible without Jenna Steventon’s patient stewardship. Tala Gharagozlou and Mahdi Sabbagh helped with the architectural renderings in the book. At Yale University, and previously at Barnard College and Columbia University, I have been fortunate to share my ideas with students and colleagues who enriched my ideas and reminded me that although Ardabil is thousands of miles away, and the shrine of Shaykh Safi flourished many hundreds of years ago, there is much that we can learn from the Safavid dynastic shrine. My family and friends have been a source of strength throughout the writing process and when life interfered with it, in particular Doreen Rizvi, Fateima Shaikh, Sayeda Habib, Mehdi Rizvi, Unaizah Moonis, and Elizabeth Hutchinson. My children, Reza and Yasmin, sat in my lap as I wrote the book, and I hope some of their exuberance has permeated its pages. Dirk Bergemann has been my companion in this adventure from its beginning and I thank him for his love, patience, and good humour. New Haven, CT. October 2010

Note on the Transliteration

In this book, Persian and Arabic words occur in a range of contexts, from unpublished Safavid endowment deeds to epigraphic Qur‘anic verses. In order to attain consistency I have chosen to follow the transliteration conventions established in the International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies. Geographical names are rendered according to current scholarly convention not pronunciation, for example, Isfahan instead of Esfahan. Names and terms, such as Hassan or Sufism, that are commonly used in the English language, have been rendered without diacritical marks or italics.

Map of Safavid Iran. Drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

INTRODUCTION THE HISTORICAL IMAGINATION

In 1544, news reached the Safavid court of the arrival of the exiled Mughal emperor, Padshah Humayun, to Iran. High-ranking officials were sent to Khorasan to receive the Indian entourage which was subsequently brought to Mashhad, where they performed pilgrimage at the shrine of Imam Reza. Humayun was then brought to the capital, Tabriz, where Shah Tahmasb welcomed him and promised him support in order to regain the throne.1 After a few days of magnificent feasting and entertainment, the two rulers traveled to Ardabil to perform pilgrimage at the shrine of the Safavid ancestor and Sufi shaykh, Safi al-din Ishaq. When Shah Tahmasb and Humayun arrived in Ardabil, they performed the rites of visitation and kissed the sanctified threshold of the shrine.2 Together, they prayed for intercession and aid from the holy ancestors. Just a few years before, the entire shrine complex had been expanded by orders of the Shah with new buildings that were contracted for the transcription of the Qur’an and the performance of Sufi rituals. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was a highly venerated site and also a grandiose setting for the enactment of imperial ceremonial rites (figure 1). In bringing his royal counterpart to the ancestral shrine, Shah Tahmasb recognized its significance as both the symbol of the Safavid Empire and a monumental exemplar of Iranian architecture. The shrine of Shaykh Safi represented the long history of the Safaviyya order as well as its transformation into an imperial dynasty. A study of the shrine provides information regarding the profound changes that were implemented by the rulers of early modern Iran. Architecture was mobilized by the Shahs as a source of self-representation, just as it was for the contemporaneous Ottoman sultans in Turkey and the Mughal padshahs in India. It also aided in the goal of distinguishing the three empires from each other, despite shared concepts of kingship and the arts. While the

Figure 1  Courtyard of the shrine, showing Dār al-ḥuffāz and tomb tower of Shaykh Safi.

Introduction

3

Ottomans marked their military successes through the construction of Friday mosques in the capital, Istanbul, the Mughals constructed multiple centers of authority through the building and expansion of forts in cities such as Lahore and Agra. The Mughals, drawing inspiration from their Timurid ancestry, also built majestic funerary structures. The Safavids, in contrast to both the Ottomans and Mughals, concentrated their architectural patronage on their ancestral shrine and others associated with Shi‛i and Sufi figures. Such commemorative monuments were crucial sites for the construction of an imperial iconography and for the dissemination of ideology. The shrine of Shaykh Safi provided a unique context for representing the Safavid dynasty as well as the architectural culture of early modern Iran. This book examines the intersection between popular piety and imperial ideology, as manifested in the patronage and production of architecture. Through an examination of the shrine of Shaykh Safi, I address issues of imperial iconography and popular religious practice during the early modern period in Iran. The historical consciousness that defined the Safavid Empire was manifested in multiple imperial representations, from illustrated manuscripts to religious edifices. The past was amended in order that the shahs were presented as direct descendants of the sixth Shi‛i Imam, Musa Kazim, giving them both spiritual and familial authority. The sources utilized by the panegyrists, painters and architects ranged from the histories of Shi‛i imams to the feats of mythical kings and heroes in Abu’l Qasim Firdawsi’s epic, Shāhnāma (Book of Kings, c. 1010) (plate 1). For architecture, the Safavids drew inspiration from their immediate predecessors, the Timurids (1363–1506), who patronized shrines and mosques throughout the region from Samarqand to Gazurgah.3 The shrine of Shaykh Safi, as the political base of the ruling dynasty, could be viewed as a reservoir of Safavid history, concretized through architecture. In 1501 Isma‘il bin Haydar (d. 1524) founded the Safavid Empire in Tabriz and established Shi‘ism as the official religion. Shah Isma’il was a descendant of Shaykh Safi, the founder of the eponymous Safaviyya order in Ardabil. His grandfather, Junayd (d. 1460), had married the sister of the Aq Qoyunlu (White Sheep) ruler, Uzun Hasan (d. 1478), thereby forging an important tribal allegiance that gave to the Sufi shaykh increased political authority. Isma‘il’s father, Haydar (d. 1488) was also married into the Aq Qoyunlu royal family, to a daughter of Uzun Hasan. These marriages marked the importance of the Sufi order for the ruling elite, while simultaneously augmenting their millenarian ambitions. As Andrew Newman has written, ‘Isma‘il’s father and grandfather led an order which, based

4

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

on its growing association with a number of the region’s Turkish tribes, was indeed both propounding a more radical, messianic discourse and undertaking a proactive military strategy’.4 Upon their deaths, in battle against the Christian Shirvanshahs in the northwest, their young sons were brought to the forefront of regional politics. Isma‘il returned from exile in 1499 and over the course of the next two years garnered a great deal of support from followers in Ardabil and the wider region, foremost amongst whom was the consortium of Qizilbash (‘Red-Headdress’) tribesmen, who derived their name from the headgear they wore.5 The twelve-gored hat represented the twelve Shi‛i Imams, a reference with particular potency in an environment in which devotion to the family of the Prophet Muhammad was shared broadly. In masterfully composed poetry, written in his native Azeri Turkish, Isma‘il roused the passions of his Qizilbash, using the language of charismatic leadership and millennialism. He described himself as divinely-chosen, a warrior and a prophet, a scion of Iranian kings and an heir to great Sufis. It was within this religio-social environment, described by some as that of extremism (ghulāt) and Imamism (devotion to the Shi‛i Imams), that Safavid authority was founded.6 Isma‘il defeated the Aq Qoyunlus and entered Tabriz in 1501, which he established as the capital of an empire which merged ancient Iranian symbols of kingship with the charismatic authority of Sufism. Shi‛ism was the third component in this new political and religious ideology, supplanting Sunni Islam as the official creed.7 Yet a study of the Safavid ancestral shrine reveals the fluidity between these designations, such that in practice all three – namely, Sunnism, Shi‛ism and Sufism – co-existed to varying degrees over the course of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Thus material culture, in the form of architecture, served as an important complement to the official chronicles and polemics written by theologians and historians. The first half of the sixteenth century was profoundly important in the history of the Islamic world in general, and Western and Southern Asia in particular. Not only did this period witness the establishment of the Safavids in Iran, but also the rise of the Mughals in India with the conquest of Delhi by Babur in 1524. This off-shoot of the Timurids was among the wealthiest dynasties of the early modern world, renowned for its heterogeneity as well as its prosperity. On Iran’s western borders, Selim I (d. 1520) expanded Ottoman territory to include the holy cities of Mecca and Jerusalem, and also controlled the maritime routes of the Mediterranean Sea. The age of great imperial powers controlling the breadth of the Islamic

Introduction

5

world was one that witnessed the flowering of Persianate culture from Turkey to the Caucasus and from India to Transoxiana. Iran’s central position, both geographically and conceptually, resulted in the Safavids’ need to consolidate their own authority and disseminate it through a variety of media, the arts and architecture being among their most powerful conduits. A consolidated effort to forward the imperial vision of Shah Isma‘il and his heirs was comprised of a transformation of religious and tribal mores and could be seen in the reinterpretation of all vestiges of their past, be it history or architecture. As the heads of the Safaviyya Sufi order, the early Safavid shahs favored shrines for the dissemination of their sovereign image, foremost among which was that of their ancestor, Shaykh Safi in Ardabil. What had initially been a modest Sufi lodge, consisting of the Shaykh’s residence and retreat, had developed by the seventeenth century into a vast complex, with halls for initiation ceremonies and scriptural studies, as well as a magnificent library. This book touches upon distinct moments in the shrine’s development, from its inception as a Sufi zāwīya (lodge) to its apogee as the dynastic mausoleum of the Safavid shahs. A primary concern is to understand the manner in which architecture, as both symbol and artifact, was instrumental in the formation of the cult of kinship that ensued after Shah Isma‘il’s advent to the throne. The sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries are the primary focus of this study, as it was a time when major renovations were undertaken and new monumental structures were constructed at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, as elsewhere in the Empire. Nonetheless, the longue durée method taken here reveals the buildings’ past, but more importantly, highlights what that past was perceived to be in the Safavid period.8 I consider the role of historical memory in the case of the shrine of Shaykh Safi as part of a larger agenda of erasure and reinvention, one that characterized Safavid political culture and included the world of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century literature and the arts. Historians of the early modern Islamic world have tended to equate imperial territorial power with nationalist authority, a strategy that is anachronistic when applied to this period. Thus boundaries between the Mughal, Safavid, and Ottoman empires were not as impermeable as is sometimes suggested, or the population as ideologically separate. Networks, such as those formed by pilgrims or even works of art, attest to the fluidity of the borders between what are today Turkey, Azerbaijan, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India.9 The popularity of the shrine of Shaykh Safi extended beyond Safavid territory, far into the region of eastern Anatolia which was under Ottoman rule. As the polemics against

6

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the Safavids attest, this influence was considerable and seen as a vital threat by the Ottoman rulers.10 The endowment deeds and, subsequently, the patronage patterns of the shrine of Shaykh Safi further the assumption that pilgrimage sites evince the presence of multiple religious and tribal networks, and call into question the imposition of strict geographical or political boundaries in the region. This study provides a reconsideration of traditional concepts about what were considered the centers of power and their periphery in the early modern period. Running throughout this book is the question of representation – of ideology, of society, and of architectural space. Art historians have long been concerned with the object of representation and the manners in which a particular work represents the intentions of the artist and how that is communicated. According to David Summer, ‘The words “representation” and “representationalism” obviously and literally contain the term “present”; and they thus also presuppose the presence of something as well as the presence of someone by whom and to whom representation is made.’11 In terms of architecture, this definition of representation implies a concern with the semantic value of a building at a particular historical ‘present’ or moment, as well the intentionality behind its making, both from the point of view of the patron as well as the architect. A third factor is the manner in which a building may signify its use and the rituals that may take place within it. In the case of the shrine of Shaykh Safi, the architecture may be viewed simultaneously as a symbol of the dynasty that patronized it, but also a means for understanding the multiple rituals of inhabitation that were enacted within it. Shrines in Iran, as elsewhere in the Islamic world, were built as commemoratives to a holy person. As institutions representative of their historic and cultural context, shrines were the sites of ceremonial, both imperial and plebian. Unlike the mosque, which was most closely associated with Islamic convention, or the madrasa, which was associated with the study and practice of theology, shrines in the early modern period could be representative of both orthodoxy and deviance from the norm. For example, the architecture could be seen as furthering the ideological goals of the patron, while the rituals that took place within the shrine could be viewed as contradictory to the patron’s beliefs. That is to say, contradictions could be found between how beliefs were represented formally (for example, in a dedicatory text) and between how they were enacted informally (for example, through antinomian rituals).12 Those seeming contradictions could also be seen as the tension between doxis and praxis, between the institutionalization of belief and its public enactment.

Introduction

7

The architecture of shrines served as a setting for the enactment of social mores and their expression through ritual and ceremony. Catherine Bell writes that ‘Ritualized action construes its situation for the advantages of promoting images and relationships in which there is overt deference to the authority of otherworldly sources of power as well as of those of human beings believed to speak for these powers.’13 In the case of Safavid Iran, the shahs were the intercessors between people and God; they represented the cult of holy figures through their familial ties to Shaykh Safi and the Shi‛i imamate as well as the cult of royalty derived from Iranian and Islamic models of sovereignty. Thus, the buildings they inhabited were highly-charged symbols of both piety and kingship. As the ancestral shrine, that of Shaykh Safi was foremost among Safavid monuments as representative of the Safavid dynasty. At the shrine of Shaykh Safi, Sufi rituals, such as dhikr (remembrance), were performed alongside Safavid imperial ceremonies, such as the presentation of ambassadors. The diversity of clientele and religious practices witnessed at the shrine points to the manner in which commemorative architecture was utilized not only to describe the past, namely the figure commemorated, but to define current society. This study allows access to the manner in which the Safavid court was presented and represented, through the staging – through architectural space – of piety and regality. As such, it fills in crucial lacunae in the current scholarship on Safavid court culture. Patronage by the clerical and imperial elite points to the sometimes conflicting agendas and competition between the diverse communities that they served. In such contexts, architecture may be a way of negotiating difference, just as it may be a way of asserting authority. While this case study is specific to a particular historical moment and site, early modern Iran, it invites fruitful comparisons with similar institutions and practices, such as Sufi shrines in India and Turkey.14 The shrine of Muin al-din Chishti (d. 1230) in Ajmer is of particular relevance, as a Sufi shrine that was closely associated with a prestigious order and was the focus of ongoing Mughal benefaction.15 Similarly, Ottoman sultans regularly made generous gifts at the shrines of Sufi shaykhs, such as Sultan Selim I’s (d. 1520) construction of a dervish convent in 1519–20 for the Halveti shaykh, Ibrahim Gulseni (d. 1534).16 In both cases, as at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, architectural space was a form of staging diverse events and rituals, supplemented by considerations of liturgical practice and economic patronage. Sufi shrines in sixteenth-century Iran were often linked to theological institutions that implemented the changing ideologies of the empire. It is

8

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

important to note that designations, such as Sufi and Shi‘i, are mutable and their meaning changed profoundly over the course of the sixteenth century.17 Rather than imposing any normative meaning for either term, a study such as this one affirms the need to contextualize religious identity both historically and geographically, and to be mindful of its flexibility in terms of use and meaning. Scholars have often tended to discuss the complexities in religious identities through the context of ‘border zones,’ such as in India and Anatolia. They are extremely useful in establishing the fragility of strict distinctions between religions, nonetheless, the case of Ardabil, in particular, and Safavid Iran, in general, is different.18 Here, the ambiguity was between ideologies within Islam which were not necessarily in conflict, but rather often expressed as complementary to each other. In the middle of the sixteenth century, for example, a madrasa and a Dār al-ḥadīth (Hall for ḥadīth study) were built at the shrine of Shaykh Safi in order to codify the newly introduced Shi‛i laws. The combination of a Sufi shrine and a theological institution, while seemingly at odds in terms of function, was not unusual at this time. In fact, the shrine of Shaykh Safi can be fruitfully compared to the Kadirga complex in Istanbul that was commissioned by the Ottoman Grand Vizier, Sokollu Mehmed Pasa (d. 1579) and his wife, the princess, Ismihan Sultan (figure 2). The complex was built in 1571 as an endowment for the vizier’s spiritual advisor, a Halveti shaykh of great influence.19 It consisted of a variety of buildings, including a mosque and a madrasa, and was considered instrumental in the assimilation of Sufi figures into the Ottoman bureaucracy. Like the shrine complex of Shaykh Safi, that in Kadirga ‘exemplified the symbiosis of Sufism with orthopraxy in the second half of the sixteenth century.’20 The patronage of religious institutions by rulers is a common trope in architectural history in general, in the Islamic world and elsewhere. The regional influence of the shrine of Shaykh Safi was harnessed by the Safavid rulers, who co-opted the site to disseminate their ideology. Although only one Safavid ruler, Shah Isma‘il, is interred at the shrine, the site was a popular burial site for family members such as the mother of Shah Tahmasb as well as the bureaucratic elite. Over the course of the sixteenth century, the shrine was increasingly viewed as an alternate court where the Shahs would meet governors and issue imperial orders. In keeping with this new function, the architecture was reconceived in such a way that it, too, was reflective of the courtly aesthetic. This study illustrates the visual, literary, and architectural culture of Safavid Iran in which Sufi, Shi‘i and Iranian symbols of authority were

Introduction

9

Figure 2  Sokollu Mehmed Pasha complex at Kadirga, Istanbul, after Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire (London: Reaktion Books, 2005); 334. Drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

overlaid. In such a climate, shrines and palaces together must be viewed as analogous, if essentially different, spaces for the display and enactment of the rituals of piety and regality.21 This association was evinced not only in their architecture, but also in the ways that they were described in contemporary sources, which equate them as the ‘courts of man, and the courts of God.’ The Safavid shahs were treated by their subjects as charismatic and, sometimes, divinely-guided, rulers. The spaces they inhabited were believed to be similarly imbued with baraka, or divine blessing. Safavid rituals of presentation and allegiance added another dimension to the architecture, that of sovereignty. For example, the courtyard of the palace and that of the shrine, although structurally and functionally different, came to be seen as equivalent sites. Both were viewed as sacred thresholds that were imbued with the aura of divinity, arbitrated through the person of the king.22 This study highlights the significance of architecture as a source for understanding the rituals of piety performed in an early modern society. The scarcity of textual evidence about Sufism at this time points to the crucial role of the shrine of Shaykh Safi as documentary evidence through which Safavid religious practice may be studied. The buildings of the shrine functioned as settings for the rulers but also served the shrine

10

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

community. As a highly frequented and popular edifice, the shrine could be viewed as a template for studying the emerging Safavid architectural aesthetic; one which merged the royal with the religious, and the palatial with the sacral, in innovative and resourceful ways. A Brief History and Description of the Shrine

Ardabil is situated east of Tabriz and forty kilometers west of the Caspian Sea on a plateau at the base of Mount Sabalan. Sited at the edge of what was considered the Dār al-ḥarb (Abode of War), the city had been an important Islamic settlement from as early as the ninth century, competing for prominence with nearby Maragha and Tabriz. In the tenth century it was a central link for routes connecting the Caspian to points north, south and west. In the thirteenth century the city was walled, with four gates, and within which were a citadel and the main congregational mosque (figure 3). The area outside the city gates was divided into seven agricultural districts (khāns) on which Ardabil was economically dependent. The major source of livelihood for the people of medieval Ardabil was trade and commerce. During the Ilkhanid period, with the growing popularity of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq and his shrine, the religious and political character of the city began to take shape. Ardabil was identified through its association with the Shaykh’s lodge and, after his death, his mausoleum and its subsidiary institutions became the primary focus of the city. After Shaykh Safi’s death, his sons became the leaders of the order and continued its traditions. The popular Safaviyya order continued as a vibrant social and political force in the region.23 While adhering to the norms of Sufi kinship, the order nonetheless began a profound transformation such that the charismatic leadership of the pīr was supplemented by political authority. At the same time, the importance of the shrine, as both a powerful local institution and a regional center for pilgrimage, was augmented. The story of the shrine was thus bound to the fortunes of its shaykhs – as their power and influence grew so too did the prosperity of their spiritual home. As mentioned earlier, by 1501 the leader of the order, Isma‘il, defeated the reigning powers in Azerbaijan, namely, the Shirvanshahs and Aq Qoyunlus, and declared himself Shah in Tabriz. When the Sufis of Ardabil became the shahs of Iran, their increased authority was proudly displayed at the ancestral shrine through built projects and generous endowments. The patronage of the shrine was undertaken by local Ardabili men and women, as well as by Safavid kings and queens. The central authority of Tabriz or Qazvin, or even Istanbul, did not entirely define the movement

Figure 3  Friday Mosque, Ardabil (c. 13th c.). Drawing by Bruno Schulz, from Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

12

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

of people or goods to the shrine. Contemporary visitors reported of the presence of caravans arriving from Anatolia to pay homage to the cult of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil.24 Similarly, the endowment deeds of the shrine reiterate its diverse clientele and the depth of its economic viability. Portable objects, such as lamps and carpets, as well as large tracts of land in far-away provinces, were gifted to the shrine.25 The importance of the institution lay precisely in its appeal to all strata of society and cemented its central position in the political culture of early modern Iran. The reigns of Shah Tahmasb (d. 1577) and Shah ‘Abbas (d. 1629) were pivotal in the formation of a Safavid imperial ideology, and the shrine of their ancestor was considered the most appropriate site for its dissemination. The range of their patronage, from the gifting of precious objects to the construction of monumental structures, certainly reinforces this observation (figure 4).26 In the sixteenth century, Qizilbash authority gave way to ghulām (‘slave’) conscription in the military. The practice of conscripting and converting non-Muslim subjects into the court and military was one already practiced in Ottoman lands (and earlier in India as well). It was used by Shah Tahmasb to diminish the power of the Qizilbash and to forge a new cadre of military leadership and bureaucracy with primary loyalty not to the tribe, but to the Shah.27 Shah ‘Abbas’ rule similarly marked important changes in Iranian political culture, in the manner in which he consolidated the empire and centralized authority, moving further away from the heterogeneous tribal allegiances that had continued to play an important role in social and military matters. With this move, he also altered the fortunes of the ancestral shrine as it vied for importance alongside other religious sites, such as the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma in Qum and that of her brother, Imam Ali Reza in Mashhad.28 The primary focus of the shrine remained the tomb of Shaykh Safi which is in the form of a tall tomb tower and attached to the tomb of his predeceased son, Muhiy al-din (the latter’s tomb was built by the Shaykh himself). Behind the tomb tower was a vast cemetery, known as the Shahīdgāh, where family members and loyal devotees were buried. Soon after Safi’s death his son, Sadr al-din Musa, constructed a large hall for the recitation of the Qur’an at the threshold of the tomb. The building, known as the Dār al-ḥuffāz (Hall of Readers), was connected to both the older tombs and, later, to the small tomb chamber where Shah Isma‘il was buried. The Dār al-ḥuffāz was a crucial part of the shrine complex, along with the Chillākhāna, or meditation hall, with rooms for solitary meditations and group activities (see plan, figure 5).

Introduction

13

Figure 4  Ceramic plate from the collection of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. OA 96.6-26.6, gift of Sir A. W. Franks.

The greatest physical reconstruction took place during the reign of Shah Tahmasb, who appropriated land owned by the shrine and its neighbors to build two complementary structures perpendicular to the Dār al-ḥuffāz: a Dār al-ḥadīth and a Jannātsarā (Paradisal Palace). Both were free-standing buildings, with their large arched portals facing each other. Next to the Dār al-ḥadīth and opposite the Dār al-ḥuffāz was the Chillākhāna. This was among the oldest structures and was believed to be from the lifetime of Shaykh Safi himself, and was thus carefully preserved by subsequent Safavid patrons. According to textual evidence, the shrine also included kitchens, bakeries, a madrasa and public gardens, none of which have survived.29 The entire complex was surrounded by residential quarters and located within the heart of Ardabil.

14

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Figure 5  Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. Site plan.

Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations sealed the Safavid changes that took place over the course of approximately one hundred years and transformed the shrine of Shaykh Safi from a Sufi institution into a dynastic monument. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the interior of the Dār al-ḥuffāz was entirely renovated during Shah ‘Abbas’ reign, along with an adjacent building, the Chīnīkhāna (Porcelain House). The latter was itself an older structure which had most likely been used for Sufi rituals, but was converted by Shah ‘Abbas into a luxurious repository to hold his endowment of porcelains and manuscripts to the shrine. The style of the opulent renovations, comprising gilt and rich hues of red and blue, was evocative of

Introduction

15

an imperial and palatial aesthetic. It also linked the Safavids to their predecessors, the Timurids, whose courts were renowned for their collections of books and objects.30 Safavid architecture was similarly associated with the past, through a willful emulation of Timurid taste and visual culture. By the late seventeenth century the shrine’s centrality to Safavid culture had been reduced, supplanted by the increased popularity of Shi‛i sanctuaries in Mashhad and Qum.31 Shah Safi (r. 1629–42) limited his patronage to the gifting of a silver window plaque, which is installed inside the tomb of Shaykh Safi. In contrast, Shah ‘Abbas II (r. 1642–66) paid relatively more attention, such as ordering the repair of the roof of Shah Isma‘il’s tomb and the large-scale reorganizing of the forecourt of the shrine. The forecourt culminated in the majestic ‘Ali Qapu gateway which was constructed by the mutawallī, Nazar ‘Ali Khan, to commemorate Shah ‘Abbas II’s ascension (plate 2). These were the last new architectural commissions at the shrine whose fortunes were tied to the Safavid dynasty, which came to an end in 1722. With the decline of the Safavid dynasty, the shrine’s good fortune also came to a close. After defeating the last ruler, Tahmasb II (d. 1732), Nader Afshar was crowned the Shah of Iran in 1736. This Sunni king expropriated the shrine’s endowments and discontinued centuries-old traditions such as the feeding of pilgrims and the poor.32 The Russian occupation of Azerbaijan in the nineteenth century wrought immense damage on the estate of the shrine and a major portion of its library was removed to St Petersburg where it now resides, at the Russian National Library (known as the Dorn collection). This state of neglect and displacement continued and the buildings were allowed to deteriorate until the beginning of the last century, when the Iranian government began renovations at the shrine. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the shrine’s fortunes have changed even further: it is now the crowning glory of the capital, Ardabil, and its eponymous province. On tourism posters the shrine symbolizes the new political and cultural renaissance envisioned by the state authorities. Unfortunately, its prestige has been gained at the cost of its past – graves have been removed and the site resembles more the museum it has become than the vibrant pilgrimage destination it was during the Safavid period.33 Historiography of Sources

This book provides a rich case for studying architecture within the context of its political, social and religious milieux. The variety of evidence about the shrine goes beyond historical texts to include many different media,

16

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

from buildings to pilgrimage manuals, to provide as comprehensive an understanding of the shrine as possible. Recent historians have also paid attention to the shrine, notably in regard to the Ṣarīḥ al-milk, a list of the shrine’s property transactions that was compiled in 1570 by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi (d. 1580/81), the famous poet and historian of Shah Tahmasb’s court.34 An example is Monika Gronke’s book on the economic and social context of Ardabil; however, it only covers the pre-Safavid period and does not address the shrine’s major phases of architectural development in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.35 Owing to an increase in critical editions of Safavid manuscripts there has been a subsequent surge in scholarly interest in the period, and this is an opportunity to understand more fully the history of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Studies on architecture in the province of Azerbaijan have been undertaken in Iran by those involved with historic preservation and conservation. The Iranian Ministry for Heritage (Sāzmān-i mīrās-i farhangī) has an office in Ardabil which has been surveying extant buildings in the city, and their findings have been made available through recent publications.36 Sayyid Jamal Torabi-Tabatabai’s 1972 analyses remain the most important documentation of the epigraphy on the interiors and exteriors of the shrine buildings.37 Although some of the original epigraphy has been repaired and sometimes replaced, a significant amount remains and provides information about the buildings’ use and patronage. The earliest comprehensive study of the shrine’s architecture was by the German museum director and scholar, Friedrich Sarre, who documented the buildings in 1897 and published the results in 1910 and 1924 (figure 6). Photographs by Sarre and, earlier, by Jacques de Morgan are visual documents of the shrine before the renovations undertaken in the mid-twentieth century by the Iranian government.38 Archaeological excavations led by Mahmud Mousavi promise to shed significant light on the earlier and less formal aspects of the shrine’s built form.39 Two primary texts focus on the architectural history of the shrine. First is the Safwat al-ṣafā biography of Shaykh Safi’s life, written by Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili (d. 1392/93) in the middle of the fourteenth century, shortly after the Shaykh’s death.40 The book presents important information about the shrine’s establishment and its architectural development. In addition, it contains material that assists in understanding the rituals that the Shaykh performed, which buildings were given most attention, and the shrine’s popular appeal. A complement to the legendary history of the Safwat al-ṣafā is the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register, which opens with a preface and poetic description of the shrine. ‘Abdi Beg’s panegyric poetry

Figure 6  ‘Ali Qapu Gateway, Ardabil. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

18

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

illustrates how all things associated with the Shah, including architecture, were elevated to a semi-divine status. The abridged summaries of original endowment deeds that follow the preface contain detailed information about the shrine’s holdings and the monetary gifts which were made for the construction and embellishment of buildings. Safavid chronicles offer a range of information on the shrine and are invaluable resources for understanding its central role in Safavid society.41 For example, a sixteenth-century writer, Hasan Beg Rumlu (b. 1530), covers the period up to 1577 and gives intriguing details about the inception of the Safavid dynasty. Being a Qizilbash notable himself, he was knowledgeable about the dynamics of the tribal consortiums and seemed familiar with the shrine and city of Ardabil.42 In contrast, his contemporary Qazi Ahmad Qummi (b. 1536) does not appear to be too familiar with the physical shrine, but gives a great deal of information about the myths surrounding it. Shah Tahmasb’s memoirs are an important trajectory into the ruler’s mindset and self-image, and give essential details into the reconstruction of his ancestral shrine, including his construction of the Jannatsarā building. Shah ‘Abbas’ astrologer, Jalal al-din Yazdi is perhaps the best known of the Safavid historians in regard to the shrine of Shaykh Safi, as he reports about the Shah’s visits there and his important endowments to the shrine. Yazdi also gives rare eye-witness accounts of the architectural repairs that were ordered at this time, such as the building of a royal loggia in the Dār al-ḥuffāz.43 The diversity witnessed in this small sample of texts is indicative of the range of information that Safavid chronicles contain. The shrine of Shaykh Safi served as a showcase of Iranian architecture. Starting with the oldest building, the Ḥaramkhāna, there are examples of Ilkhanid, Timurid and early Safavid styles, all unified in their functional interdependence (plate 3). These older styles were still visible alongside the emerging artistic vocabulary that would characterize later Safavid projects. Previous artistic paradigms were reinterpreted and novel architectural solutions found in order to represent most fully the dynasty’s imperial aspirations. A project as complex as the Safavid dynastic shrine cautions us against oversimplified answers about ‘origin’ and ‘influence’ – the usual manner in which Safavid architecture has previously been studied. This book attempts to remedy some of the misconceptions about architectural production in this period. Safavid architecture has been called derivative of Timurid styles, but we must question the meaning of these revivals; it has been deemed repetitive, without wondering what the implications of this standardization were in terms of a unifying imperial

Introduction

19

aesthetic. Analyses of the urban, economic, social and sacral nature of the shrine complement the architectural study. By considering architecture in a broad sense to be inclusive of disparate modes of use, perception, and inhabitation, this book addresses the complex issues inherent in the corporative act of building. Summary of Chapters

The chapters in The Safavid Dynastic Shrine unfold chronologically and touch upon separate, but related, aspects of the shrine’s development – that is, its foundation myths, urban imprint, physical expansion, economic autonomy, architectural patronage and public ceremonial. The transformation of the Sufi institution into a regal dominion was not a simple transfer of meaning, but a constant negotiation between the varied clientele who visited the shrine and participated in its rituals. The space of the shrine was thus made up of a collection of simultaneous, yet varied, inhabitations. They represented the diverse community that was the core of the institution, comprised of Sufis, patrons and pilgrims. The relationship thus established was not simple or uncomplicated, but rather mediated through spatial hierarchies and delimitations. The rituals aid in describing the functions of the architecture and provide important insights into the religious and imperial culture of Safavid Iran during the early modern period. The first chapter charts the development of the cult and shrine of Shaykh Safi from the thirteenth until the beginning of the sixteenth century. The chapter addresses criteria that affected the growth of the zāwīya of Shaykh Safi from a modest room in the Shaykh’s home to a vast monumental aggregate. The early history of the shrine is studied though the extant structures, starting with the Ḥaramkhāna built by Shaykh Safi himself in the thirteenth century.44 The shrine was an integral part of the city of Ardabil, and in this chapter the symbiotic relationship between the two is investigated through the analyses of endowment deeds and historical chronicles. The results reveal the role of the shrine of Shaykh Safi in particular, and Sufi shrines in general, as crucial links between public piety and urban economy. The shrine in Ardabil was the site of pious worship, plebeian as well as sovereign, typical of the cult of saints in Iran. However, when the ambitions of the leaders of the order coalesced with the growing wealth of its endowment, they produced a profound change in the culture and politics of the region. This chapter lays out the manners in which the Ardabil shrine operated before its transformation into a symbol of the Safavid dynasty. The

20

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Safwat al-ṣafā biography of Shaykh Safi belongs to the genre of hagiographic literature prevalent in the medieval Islamic world. As such, it is not as much a historically accurate source as one that gives unique insight into the making of the Safavid dynastic legend and the role of the shrine within it. The urban and mythic contexts of the site reveal how the shrine was situated in the city of Ardabil and also its perceived position in sixteenth-century society. The Safwat al-ṣafā and later chronicles pay much attention to Ardabil, subsequently called the Dār al-irshād (Abode of Guidance), in recognition of its close association with the Safavid cult. The miraculous stories about the shrine and the city associated them with the Prophet Muhammad and Imam ‘Ali – clearly showing the Shi‛i leanings of Safavid writers and the centrality of the shrine in furthering their didactic mission. The foundation myths related to the shrine of Shaykh Safi, in historical chronicles and even in the biography of Shah Tahmasb, give crucial insights into its use and perception in the early sixteenth century. These myths are the subject of the second chapter, which concurrently focuses on the architectural sites that were associated with them. A consideration of the earlier buildings, as well as those still extant today, helps to elucidate the particular significance that some of the sites held for Safavid patrons. The tombs of Shaykh Safi and Shah Isma‘il, belonging to the founder of the order and the dynasty, respectively, were integrated into the dynastic history of the shrine. Shah Isma‘il was buried in a small mausoleum, built by his wife, which was situated between the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi and the Haramkhāna. At this time, the shrine retained its relatively modest architecture, its plan and program typical of contemporary Sufi shrines. Architectural endowment was part of a culture of charitable giving and highlights the diversity of the shrine’s patrons and their varied methods of benevolence. Analysis of such gifts reveals the diversity of the shrine’s clientele and their varied methods of benevolence. Sub-imperial patronage, that is, by government officials and the Ardabili elite, revealed aspirations more complex than mere charity: the shrine’s close association with royalty made it an ideal site for displaying allegiances and gaining access to political power. Women, too, played a significant role in the shrine’s affairs as donors and partners in property transactions. Whether donating candlesticks or vast tracts of farmland, the patrons of the shrine displayed their piety and deep concern with gaining divine rewards in the afterlife. The survival of these detailed endowment records provides a rare opportunity to speculate on hierarchies within Safavid society and the role of the shrine institution as mediator in its urban politics.

Introduction

21

The creation of a unified Safavid architectural language is one of the themes raised in the third chapter, which analyzes Shah Tahmasb’s patronage at the shrine. In 1533 the Safwat al-ṣafā biography was amended such that the Safavid familial history led to the Prophet, Muhammad, through the seventh Imam, Musa Kazim. This change profoundly augmented the Shah’s legitimacy to rule and his aim to convert Iran to Shi’ism. I argue that as in the case of the redacted Safwat al-ṣafā, the shrine of Shaykh Safi was altered by Shah Tahmasb in order to fit into his new vision of piety and worship. In 1534 a farmān (imperial order) was installed in the courtyard of the Ardabil shrine, which curtailed Sufi activities and encouraged a more normative version of Islam. The physical orientation of the shrine was also shifted, with the construction of two new buildings, namely, the Dar al-ḥadīth and the Jannatsarā. The shrine was part of Shah Tahmasb’s larger scheme of repairing mosques and shrines, such as those at Isfahan, Mashhad and Qum. The Dar al-ḥadīth and Jannatsarā reinforced the two main religious trends in mid-sixteenth-century Iranian society, namely, Shi‛ism and Sufism. With their construction the focus of the shrine was literally shifted away from the cult of Shaykh Safi, toward a reinterpretation of Safavid sovereignty. The changes acknowledge the importance of Sufism and the Shah’s commitment to its perpetuity while augmenting the importance of the new creed, Shi‛ism. Thus, the emphasis on legal authority was balanced by the respect for the older traditions of Safavid Sufism, such as meditation and dhikr (remembrance). The co-existence of these religious affinities, which are often considered in modern scholarship as antithetical, is called into question through an analysis of the architectural history of the shrine. Thus buildings and material culture present an important opportunity to rethink the ways in which religious identities have often been understood in the early modern period. The architectural expansion undertaken by orders of Shah Tahmasb points most of all to his regal presence, such that the shrine was now truly worthy of the Safavid monarch. Eulogistic literature about the shrine described its physical characteristics through laudatory associations with the Shah. The fourth chapter is devoted to one particular example of this type, which serves as an important example of court poetry and the significance of architecture in the performance of royalty. The 1570 Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register, compiled by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, begins with praises of Shah Tahmasb and the Safavid dynasty, however, the most intriguing part is the preface, which is a descriptive eulogy of the shrine complex of Shaykh Safi. In Timurid Iran wasf, or descriptive poetry, was

22

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

considered the epitome of cultural production and was practiced by the court elite, including the rulers themselves. During the Safavid period, writers continued conventions from the fourteenth century, and prominent poets wrote in praise of imperial monuments and even whole cities. The encomiastic poetry of ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi sheds light on the role of palaces and shrines in the construction of an imperial iconography of power by reporting on the buildings commissioned by Shah Tahmasb. This section is invaluable in reconstructing the shrine and gives essential information about the significance of the various buildings of which it was comprised. Interestingly, ‘Abdi Beg reused some of the same verses to describe the shrine of Shaykh Safi that he had earlier composed to praise Shah Tahmasb’s palace in Qazvin. The overlapping meanings embedded in these contemporaneous projects, the palace and the shrine, point to the complex ideological dimensions of Safavid architecture at this time. Furthermore, the poems were not merely lists or simple descriptions of buildings, but literary constructs that represented the aesthetic principles of the times. The fifth chapter focuses on the transformational architectural projects undertaken by orders of Tahmasb’s grandson, Shah ‘Abbas. A variety of textual sources, from European travelers’ accounts to Safavid chroniclers, provide detailed descriptions of the shrine during his reign. Shah ‘Abbas’ expansive renovations of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and the Chīnīkhāna resulted in an entirely novel architectural idiom, and formalized the shrine-palace association already initiated by Shah Tahmasb. The relationship of the shrine to other imperial projects, such as the palace in Isfahan, was manifested overtly, through stylistic and formal similarity. It may be argued that the functions of the buildings, and by extension the rituals at the shrine, were similarly overlaid. The epigraphy within the Dār al-ḥuffaz praised not only the founder of the order, but his royal progeny, who clothed themselves in the cloak of piety and semi-divinity. In the neighboring Chīnīkhāna, Shah ‘Abbas’ porcelain collection, illustrated albums, histories and ancestral genealogies were stored in a grandiose setting evocative of Timurid princely collections of art. The shrine was not, however, solely a representation of the ruler’s worldly power, but continued its role as a site for the enactment of piety as represented by Shah ‘Abbas’ public acts of servility and charity. By encouraging a more grandiose yet religiously sanctioned imperial aesthetic within the core of Shaykh Safi’s shrine, Shah ‘Abbas’ reconstructions set the stage for the future. Subsequent Safavid projects, whether new shrines in Azerbaijan or the augmentation of the palace at Isfahan, were built in

Introduction

23

a similarly opulent manner that laid emphasis on a regality that served well the Safavid dynasty’s complex self-representations. These structures signaled a portentous turning point in Safavid architectural history, one in which Timurid precedents were evoked whole-heartedly, just as they were in the realms of Safavid literature and painting. The shrine of Shaykh Safi figured prominently in the larger scheme of Safavid architectural patronage of religious sites, which is the subject of the sixth chapter. Shah ‘Abbas’ goal of propagating his faith and the authority of the dynasty was augmented by the renovation of local Sufi shrines in Ahar and Kalkhoran, both in close proximity to Ardabil. The shrines were of familial significance and their patronage broadened the sacred aura of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Barefoot pilgrimages, first undertaken by Shah ‘Abbas to the ancestral shrine, were repeated now in the direction of the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad, in northwestern Iran. The book is concluded by placing the shrine of Shaykh Safi within a broader context by considering the sacred landscape of Iran in the earlyseventeenth century. Shrines and tombs of holy figures, Sufi, Shi‛i, men and women, were selected for imperial patronage by the Shahs and their associates, in a manner that aimed to solidify the dynastic ambitions of the Safavids. In so doing, the devotional merged with the palatial in a complex overlaying of both function and meaning. The buildings comprising the shrine of Shaykh Safi may be seen as icons of imperial power, tempered nonetheless by the exigencies of public devotion. Architecture, patronage, and public piety are analyzed here in order to question the idea of a monolithic, overarching authority at the shrine. The book shows that although much was changed by the rulers, significantly in fact, much remained the same; the customary rituals were long-lived and had a trajectory all their own. However, they were mutable and responsive to the broader social and political context. For example, by the reign of Shah ‘Abbas, the Sufi devotions at the shrine were mostly part of the imperial pageantry, a symbolic reminder of the origins of the great Shahs. The shrine provides specific contexts through which the study of social and spatial hierarchies in early modern Iran may be understood. Here was displayed a man’s personal relationship to his saint, a woman’s social autonomy, or a ruler’s pious ambitions. Here were enacted political edicts, and it was here that rituals of devotion were performed.

1 THE SHRINE AND THE CITY SHAYKH SAFI AND THE INCEPTION OF THE SAFAVIYYA ORDER

Excellent Ardabil! The light of the eyes, the core of the heart! Gabriel’s wings sweep the threshold of your magnificence. Every moment the tidings of devotees reach your pilgrims, That in our gardens ‘is a spring, named Salsabil’ (76:18).1 The Life of Shaykh Safi and the Early History of the Shrine

The founder of the Safaviyya order, Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq, was the locus of his shrine and his charisma was the source of its prosperity. The story of this Sufi shaykh parallels that of other contemporaneous religious figures in medieval Iran, yet it is unique in the manner in which the order evolved from a regional entity to a powerful movement that resulted in the establishment of a new empire in Iran. The foundations of the Safavid Empire were deeply rooted in Ardabil, and in particular the shrine, where the support for the movement was first garnered among the devoted followers of the Safaviyya order. The cult of Shaykh Safi’s personality and the aura of his sanctity were preserved by his descendants who proved to be talented Sufi leaders in their own right. The goal of this chapter is to establish the originary history of the Safavid dynastic shrine, as described by the fourteenth-century biographer, Tawakkul bin Isma‘il Ibn Bazzaz Arabili (d. 1391–2) and as evinced through its architecture.2 The buildings within which the story of Shaykh Safi’s life unfolded were described by his biographer in the fourteenth century and, later, by numerous historians writing in the Safavid court. Although many of the structures from the lifetime of Shaykh Safi no longer existed, they played an important role in the way the Safavid rulers imagined the dynastic shrine and the manner

The Shrine and the City

25

in which they augmented or renovated it in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. The Safwat al-ṣafā (c. 1357–8), a biography written after the death of Shaykh Safi in 1335 by Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili, provides the earliest information about the shrine and the origins of the Safaviyya order. According to the sixteenth-century redaction, Shaykh Safi was born in 1252 in Kalkhoran, one of Ardabil’s seven districts. His father, Amin al-din Gibrail, was a respected and wealthy farmer who owned land in the village. According to Ibn Bazzaz, when Safi decided to take the mystic path he left Kalkhoran in search of a Sufi master with whom he could study. In Shiraz he heard of Shaykh Zahid (d. 1301) of Gilan who was reputed to have attained great heights in mystical training. After many years of travel, Safi met the Shaykh and was invited to stay at his khānqah (lodge). Safi’s closeness to his master had two significant consequences: his marriage to Shaykh Zahid’s daughter, Fatima, and his inheritance of the Shaykh’s khirqa, or mantle. Through these events Safi’s spiritual genealogy was linked to that of Shaykh Zahid, which led back to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Prophet, Muhammad.3 Such genealogies are a common trope in Sufi hagiography yet the presence of both familial and spiritual lines of transmission strongly authenticated the spiritual authority of Shaykh Safi. The coalescing of Sufi and Shi‘i forms of authority witnessed in the Safwat al-ṣafā was not unusual in post-Mongol and Timurid biographical sources.4 Reverence for the Prophet Muhammad’s family was shared by both Sunni and Shi‘i members of society. Sufi orders espoused great respect for the ahl al-bayt (lit., ‘people of the house’, referring to the family of Muhammad), using the attributes of the Prophet and his cousin and son-in-law, ‘Ali, as ideals of human perfection. Modern scholars have shown that the Shi‘i lineage of Shaykh Safi was added into later redactions of the Safwat al-ṣafā, an essential point that I will return to in subsequent chapters. In this chapter, the focus will be on Shaykh Safi’s life and the early development of the shrine through a close analysis of his biography. Thus for the time being we may suspend the critique of the Safwat al-ṣafā as Safavid imperial fiction and utilize it in order to glean information regarding Shaykh Safi and the shrine, as portrayed by a contemporary source. This beginning, however fragile, allows us to better understand the manner in which Safavid dynastic history was conceptualized and the role of the shrine in the creating of a legendary and didactic history. Hagiographies of Sufi shaykhs serve multiple purposes, from legitimizing the authority of the mystic to instructing the novices on the rituals particular to the order. Often written after the death of the shaykh and

26

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

compiled by his followers, the hagiography would be a collection of words that recreate, textually and spatially, the major events of his life.5 The story of Shaykh Safi’s life, filled with miraculous events and the names of famous figures from the period, was typical of the genre.6 Shaykh Safi was characterized in the Safwat al-ṣafā as a devout man who claimed that the purpose of his zāwīya was the feeding of the poor and aiding the weak.7 Through his example, the legitimate ways and beliefs of the Safaviyya order were told through descriptions of the everyday, such as the daily distribution of bread, gatherings at mealtimes, dhikr and sama‘.8 Many of the events related by Ibn Bazzaz also took place in communal settings in the shrine, including the bazaars of Ardabil and the zāwīyas of other Sufi shaykhs. The figure of the Sufi shaykh defies easy characterization. Each example that one may study points to different modes of spiritual and political authority that are dependent on specific historical and geographical contexts. Nonetheless, Shaykh Safi’s attributes may appear similar not only to other Sufi figures in medieval Iran, but more generally to holy men in Christian as well as Indic traditions. The mystical tradition in Islam is filled with charismatic figures who espoused a restrained, yet social, version of Sufi practice, such as that of Shaykh Safi. Commonalities also existed between religious sites throughout the Muslim world, from Andalusia to India. Leonor Fernandes, through the examples of Sufi institutions in Mamluk Egypt (1250–1517), formulated distinctions between the names given for religious institutions related to Sufi practice, such as ribāt, zāwīya and khānqah. According to Fernandes, in Egypt the ribāṭ was probably the earliest of the three types, associated primarily with conversions and jihād (holy war). These were located on highways and served as rest-stops for travelers.9 In contrast, the zāwīya was a popularly patronized lodge, centered on a Sufi shaykh and his community of disciples, associated closely with his residence. A khānqah was an institution related to official patronage. Often it was named after the founder, who would determine its functional details and appoint the shaykh.10 In addition to the word ḥāzirā, both zāwīya and khānqah were used by Ibn Bazzaz and subsequent Safavid authors in reference to the shrine of Shaykh Safi, pointing to the ambiguity of these terms and their architectural indeterminacies. The socially-engaged nature of Safi’s order resulted in its prosperity, both economic and political. Unlike some other Sufi mystics, who had renounced the world by staying away from people, Safi found his place within society. Coming from an affluent family of landowners, he was not an outsider to the community (although, perhaps, a ‘stranger’ in the

The Shrine and the City

27

esoteric sense). Much is made of Shaykh Safi’s devotees in the Safwat al-ṣafā, a group that was comprised of mystics, notables and royalty. However, the major focus is on the person of the Shaykh himself, his upright character, and the miracles associated with his role as a holy man. He is presented as a model type, in behavior and religiosity. As such, Shaykh Safi symbolized the ideals of the Safaviyya order and his actions were presented as prototypes for his followers to emulate. The Safaviyya Sufi order continued to prosper even after the death of its founder; the leaders acted as important liaisons between Mongol and Ilkhanid rulers and the local Ardabili populace, thereby gaining not only an important clientele but the prestige of imperial association. The history of the shrine is bound to the fortunes of its revered shaykhs. As their power and influence grew, so too did the popularity of their spiritual home; in time, they developed his once humble abode into a powerful institution. The political history of the order began in the fifteenth century, during the leadership of the fourth shaykh, Junayd (d. 1460), who fought against the Qara Qoyunlu (‘Black Sheep’) rulers of Azerbaijan. He married into the family of their successors, the Aq Qoyunlu (‘White Sheep’) thereby establishing direct familial relationships with the ruling dynasty. His son, Haydar (d. 1488) also married into the Aq Qoyunlu family (marrying the daughter of the ruler, Uzun Hasan), strengthening the ties even further. Haydar’s followers were Sufi disciples banded together by their leader into a tribal consortium collectively known as the Qizilbash (red-heads) after the twelve-gored cap that they wore. The tāj-i haydarī, as the hat was known, symbolized the twelve Shi‘i Imams and came to represent the ‘Alid proclivities of the Safaviyya.11 The mobilization of military power was partly owing to the political support gained through marital allegiances, but it was mostly through the cultic nature of the Safavid cause. Shaykh Haydar was killed, like his father, during an expedition against the rulers of Shirvan who were aided by Yaqub, the Aq Qoyunlu sultan (r. 1478–90). Haydar’s heirs were exiled to Fars until the eldest of his sons, Sultan ‘Ali, returned to Ardabil as the pīr of the shrine of Shaykh Safi.12 But upon Sultan ‘Ali’s assassination in 1494, they were once again exiled, this time to Lahijan. In 1499, the youngest of Haydar’s sons, Isma‘il, was named the leader of the Safaviyya order and given the mandate to return to Azerbaijan. During his absence, the shrine was taken care of by the group of elders who were known as the ahl-i ikhtisās (‘the Select’).13 Isma‘il captured Tabriz in 1501 and, in so doing, established the rule of the first Sufi shaykh in Iran; he declared himself Shah and claimed Shi‘ism to be the true religion of his dominion.

28

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Historians of Iranian history have noted that the Safwat al-ṣafā biography was altered to make the text cohere with the new political reality. Now Shaykh Safi’s genealogy led back to the Prophet, Muhammad, through the seventh Shi‘i Imam, Musa Kazim, and endowed on his family the honor of being Sayyid.14 Shah Isma‘il’s support was garnered through a complex amalgam of Shi‘i ideology and Sufi authority, both rendered through Persian and Islamic principles of kingship, as exemplified by the poetry that he wrote (under the pen-name Khata’i) in which Isma‘il called himself the shadow of God and a reborn ‘Ali.15 The charismatic and popular leader was able to gain a great deal of support from the Qizilbash Turkmen tribes as well as his local Ardabili supporters. This heady mixture was to be the brew which nourished, in various ways, the ensuing two hundred years of Safavid dynastic rulership of Iran. Urban Context: Bazaar as Setting for the Public Enactment of Devotion

The history of the shrine of Shaykh Safi was intimately connected to the development of its host, the city of Ardabil (figure 1). The relationship between the shrine and the city was a symbiotic one; the growth and change of one mirrored, and was often caused by, the other. The focus of the city shifted toward it such that the shrine came to occupy the center of the new bazaar area. The influence of the shrine authorities on the economy of the city necessitated the growth of subsidiary services, such as rest-houses and shops within the bazaar, which were either owned or leased to the shrine. Inns, bathhouses and caravansaries were among the most visible physical appendages of the shrine, implanted into the urban fabric of the city. Growth of Shaykh Safi’s zāwīya complex was incremental; surrounding property, mostly consisting of stores, was bought, demolished and new buildings erected that would serve the shrine community. At the time of the building of a new market hall called Qaysariyya, Shaykh Sadr al-din Musa (d. 1397), Shaykh Safi’s son, built a large caravansary nearby. He was succeeded by his son, Shihab al-din Mahmud, to the tawlīyat (administration) of the shrine. Shihab al-din bought a great deal of property near the shrine and built the Imārat Shihābīyya there, which would have been a charitable institution as well as a commercial residence.16 Ardabil and the shrine were intricately connected to each other through shared economic and social goals. These observations highlight the public role of the shrine and also, in more general terms, the character of Sufi shrine cities in medieval Iran. The administration of the shrine’s endowments was undertaken by the mutawallī, an office which, in the case of the Safaviyya order, was

Figure 1  Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1335. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

30

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

hereditary. An idea of what the role of the mutawallī may have entailed is presented in a later, seventeenth-century text, Silsilāt al-nasab al-Safāvīyya: As chief administrator, the mutawallī had the final word in all transactions made by the zāwīya. All of its personnel (with the exception of the nazir?) – mustawfis, mushrifs, mudarrises, sayyids and the various ranks of khadim17 were under his control, and were to recognize him as ‘independent mutawallī’. All financial paper issued by the zāwīya was to be authenticated by his seal; all wages, stipends and salaries were to be paid out under his supervision. The entries in ledgers (ruznāmejāt) could only be entered in the registers (dafātir) when they had been read and sealed by him. The mutawallī was to settle disputes arising among the peasants of the zāwīya’s lands, but only after an inquiry according to the shari‘a in the presence of the ‘ulema. (The estates of the shrine are known to be exempt and free of dismissals and transfers. Daily entries are to be brought every day to the aforementioned and to the mutawallī, and sealed by the mustawfiyan of the shrine.) The governor (ḥākim) of Ardabil was not to interfere in the affairs of the zāwīya, nor was it or its properties to be subject to taxation or duties. The mutawallī was to exercise general supervision over the catering at the shrine, and to inspect it from time to time. In matters of the tax roll (tumār), the mutawallī was to follow instructions from the divan. He was not to deviate in any way from the regulations and the instructions of the founders (wāqifūn). In important matters, he was to consult with the nazir and, in general, show constant evidence of his administrative efficiency.18 Mention is made in the Safwat al-ṣafā of the Rais Sa‘ad (also called the Binan Gate), Vaqid (near the congregational mosque), Naushahr, Gilan, Naule, Maqabir and Asfaris (also called the Tavai Gate in the Safavid land registers) Gates.19 The Rais Sa‘ad Gate was an important site, as the grave of a popular Sufi Pira Ahmad (often mentioned in the Safwat al-ṣafā) was located outside it, and it was in the direction of Kalkhoran. In the north of Ardabil was located the Jewish Graveyard and outside the Naushahr Gate was the ‘well-known’ graveyard of Gangā Bakūl.20 Similarly, the Maqābir (graves) Gate was located near the largest cemetery, Gūristān-i gharībān, where Shaykh Safi had requested to be buried.21 The gates were separators, literally and metaphorically, between the city and its cemeteries. By the sixteenth century, Ardabil was un-walled, but its gates did survive

The Shrine and the City

31

and were important urban markers. Although many of the identities of the individuals after whom these sites are named are no longer known, their mention situates the shrine of Shaykh Safi within the urban context of Ardabil. As the prominence of Shaykh Safi’s zāwīya grew, so too did the importance of the neighborhoods around it. The major area of expansion in Ardabil, at least in terms of the shrine’s holdings, was the area near the Asfaris Gate, where the greengrocers’ and butchers’ bazaars were located, as well as the manādīgāh. Generally, a manādīgāh is a place where public announcements and proclamations were made; in Ardabil, it seems that this central site was located near the Asfaris Gate and the entire neighborhood was named after it. In the fourteenth century the shops here were owned by the clothes traders, who had control over two rows of streets leading to the manādīgāh. With the help of the owners of the neighboring butchers’ bazaar, they established a new covered bazaar called the Qaysariyya at an intersection near the zāwīya of Shaykh Safi.22 At the intersection of Ardabil’s main public streets was the congregational mosque. The site for Shaykh Safi’s dreams and many other miraculous events, this was an old and significant monument that was built during the Seljuk era.23 Unlike the shrine which was initially at the outskirts of the town, the mosque was centrally located. In addition to this primary mosque, there were a number of smaller mosques in the bazaar itself. These were named after prominent benefactors and local notables. Often small mosques were named after trades or tradesmen, for example, the mosque of the whipmakers and the mosque of Haji Mahmud, the shoemaker, which was near the Asfaris Gate.24 Provision was made for the visiting Sufis and pilgrims in the form of numerous inns and caravansaries owned by the estate of the shrine. Many of these were in the Ardabil bazaar and surrounding area, and had been either endowed to the foundation by private patrons or purchased by the mutawallī.25 As at other shrines, hospitality was raised almost to an ideological level, and was a facet of the Safavid order’s earliest characteristics. For example, Ibn Bazzaz relates a story in which Shaykh Safi ordered the servant to light a lamp (shama’) for an expectant visitor in the guesthouse (mihmānkhāna) of the zāwīya, ‘famous as the jāmakhāna’. At other times, the Shaykh was found entertaining jinns and spirits in his private quarters!26 In the Safwat al-ṣafā and in later Safavid histories, the authors often boast of the multitudes of people visiting the shrine of Shaykh Safi such that all the rest houses in Ardabil would be filled to capacity. In order to accommodate the ever-increasing groups of pilgrims and disciples of Shaykh

32

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Safi, a number of inns (khān) and caravansaries (sarāī) were built.27 A Sufi hospice was built and endowed to the zāwīya ‘near the Asfaris Gate, at the entrance to the city of Ardabil’, by the Commander Shams al-din Daula Beg Juvayni (d. 1284), who was a vizier of the Ilkhanid prince, Abaqa (d. 1281).28 Included with this endowment (and possibly adjacent to it) was a bathhouse (hammām) which was attached to the ‘hāzira of the Asfaris gate’. The hospice and the bathhouse provided services for the residents and were also a source of income for the shrine’s estate. By the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the shrine had continued to expand and prosper. An engraving from Adam Olearius’ Moskowitische und Persische Reise: Die holsteinische Gesandtschaft beim Schah (first published in 1647), which is an account of his travels with the Holstein embassy, shows Ardabil circa 1637 as a thriving and populous town (figure 2). The shrine is shown in the center of the town, with a large market (the original ‘Qaysariyya’ perhaps) and bazaars in its immediate vicinity. He wrote: The city is somewhat, but very little, bigger than that of Scamahie but hath no Walls; No House but hath Its Garden, so that, seen at a distance it seems rather a Forest, than a City. Yet are there no other Trees about it than Fruit-Trees, inasmuch as the Country produce … The Market-place, or Maydan, is large and noble, as being above three hundred paces in length, and a hundred and fifty in breadth, and having, on all sides, Shops so orderly disposed between that no Merchandise, no Profession but hath its particular quarter. On the right hand as you come into it you find, behind the Sepulchre of Sheikh-Sefi [Shaykh Safi], and the last Kings of Persia a mesjid or mosquey in which lies interred Imamzade, or one of the children of their twelve saints. Malefactors and Criminals may retire thither for a certain time, and thence easily get to the Monument of Sheikh-Sefi, which is their great Sanctuary. As you come out of the Market-place, you come to a place which they call Bazar, where the first thing you meet with is a great square arched Building called Kaiserie, where are sold all the precious Commodities of the Country, as Gold and Silver Brocades, and all sorts of precious stones, and silk stuffs. As you come out thence, you enter, by three Gates, into so many streets, cover’d over head, all beset with Shops, where are sold all sorts of Commodity, There are also in these streets, several Caravanserais or Store-houses, built for the convenience of forein [foreign] Merchants, as Turks, Tartars, Indians, &c. We saw there also two Chinese, who

Figure 2 ‘Ardebil’ from Adam Olearius, Offt begehete Beschreibung der newen orientalischen Reise (1646). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University.

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

34

had brought thither to be sold, Porcelane [porcelain], and several things of Lacque [lacquer]…There are also in the City a very great number of public Baths, and Metzids, the chiefest: whereof is that which they call, Metzid Adine, which is seated upon a little Hill, as it were in the middle of the City, and has a very fair Steeple. There, the grateful Devotions are done, on holy-days, and particularly on Friday, from which it derives the name.29 Olearius’ description resonates with the manner in which Ardabil is characterized in the Safwat al-ṣafā, which is not to suggest that it did not undergo profound changes in both urban form and meaning over the course of the three hundred years that separated these texts. Nonetheless, in both, the shrine is clearly represented as an important center of the fabric of the city, surrounded by prosperous bazaars and commercial activity. In that manner, the shrine of Shaykh Safi provides insights into the structure of shrine cities in the medieval and early modern period, and the continuities that may be observed despite significant historical changes that were taking place in Iran at that time. Comparative Perspectives

The shrine of Shaykh Safi provides a vivid example of a dynamic social institution that encompassed both public and private functions. It was a retreat for mendicants but also the site for religious practice shared by a diverse clientele. Scholars have made the case for a cultural and architectural language which developed in a way that made it familiar to ascetics, scholars, and pilgrims.30 From the perspective of architectural history, we may add that shrines provided an ‘inter-textuality’ of space and function such that every shrine, albeit at a different location and representing a different Sufi order, would be familiar to the student as well as to the pilgrim visiting it for the first time. Although written in regard to the shrine of Ahmad Yasavi (built 1389–1405) during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Devin DeWeese’s description is also applicable to other medieval and early modern shrines: ‘[The shrine] provided a focus of identity and patronage for familial groups who claimed hereditary rights to the shrine’s management. It served as a ritual and devotional center for Sufi communities and was the linchpin in a network of shrines in the region bound together, and defined territorially, not only by a pilgrimage cycle, but by narrative traditions that identified other shrines with relatives or associates of Yasavi. Finally, the shrine served as a focus of narrative

The Shrine and the City

35

and ritual traditions that mediated knowledge and experience of Islam and Sufism among various constituencies.’31 Shrines also served to concretize and differentiate, through rituals and the buildings in which they were enacted, the particularity of a Sufi order. Despite the commonalities that made movement from one to the other possible, shrines were not homogeneous throughout the Islamic world, but rather distinguished by their striking differences.32 It is through specific details about their making and the manner of representation of the various institutions that the precise nature of society and the role of the Sufi shrine may be grasped. It is necessary, then, to situate the particularities of a shrine organization within its urban, local and regional context in order to better understand the role of pilgrimage and visitation in the early modern period. Shrine complexes shared a number of common architectural features. The Ilkhanid shrine of Shaykh Nur al-din ‘Abd al-Samad (d. 1300) at Natanz has inscriptions dating it to 1305 and 1325, and comprised of three major components, namely, the Shaykh’s tomb, mosque and khānqah. In the inscriptions, the tomb is called the qubba (domed structure) as well as a mazār (a tomb which would become the center of a burial and pilgrimage site) pointing to its architectural and functional attributes.33 In contrast to this ensemble was the contemporaneous shrine complex of Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 874) built in 1300–11, which comprised of an entry iwān, a mosque with minaret, a jamā‘tkhāna (gathering place), a structure called the ‘gunbad-i Muhammad’ (‘dome of Muhammad’), another called ‘gunbad-i Ghazan Khan’ (‘dome of Ghazan Khan’) and dervish cells surrounding the courtyard. The grave of Abu Yazid was in the center of the courtyard.34 Unlike these examples, the shine of Shaykh Safi did not have a mosque, perhaps as smaller mosques, named after trades and local merchants, dotted the Ardabil bazaar. The locus of most shrines was the funerary structure built as a grave for the shaykh. Most often the commemorative function would supersede the ritual functions and the site would evolve into a popular pilgrimage site. In the Safwat al-ṣafā a distinction is made between the hāzira of the Shaykh (presumably the area surrounding the tomb where the Shaykh and his disciples are buried) and his marqad (the actual cenotaph). Quite often though, the term hāzira is used to describe the entire complex, as in the ‘blessed hāzira’ or buildings that are obviously domed, such as the ‘pure domed hāzira’ (hāzira-i qubba-i tāhira) of Shaykh Safi’s son, Muhiy al-din.35 There have often been attempts to classify terms such as marqad, mazār, buqa’, āstāna, qubba, hufār and hāzira; clearly all refer

36

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

to burial spaces but, other than qubbā, none yield any architectural details regarding the size, materiality or form of the edifice referred to. Although Lisa Golombek has argued on the basis of her research at the shrine of Khwaja Abdullah Ansari (d. 1089) in Gazurgah (built in 1425–7) that the term hāzira refers specifically to an uncovered burial enclosure, this is contradicted by foundation inscriptions and texts such as the Safwat al-ṣafā.36 As both Bernard O’Kane and Eva Maria Subtelny have separately argued, in medieval Iran there was a freedom of terminology about commemorative structures which warns us against looking for specific architectural detail.37 Their variations accentuate the fluidity in function that was an inherent part of shrine institutions. Shaykh Safi, while being unusually successful and popular, was not the only Sufi in fourteenth-century Azerbaijan. As evinced in the Safwat al-ṣafā and in later pilgrimage manuals of the region, a number of Sufi shrines were located in cities like Tabriz and Maragha, and in villages like Sarav.38 These places were akin to the knots in an intricately woven net spread over the religious landscape. They were points of light for the believer in search of enlightenment and havens of safety and protection for the common wayfarer searching for rest in a strange town. As in northwestern India, the region was divided into spiritual territories (wilāyat) with clear boundaries for each Sufi brotherhood. In Tabriz there were a number of zāwīyas, arranged according to the neighborhood, named after local shaykhs, or after famous patrons, such as that in the Rab‘-i Rashidi.39 The zāwīya of Shaykh Safi can thus be compared to others of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, such as the khānqah in the Rab‘i Rashidi in Tabriz, where Shaykh Safi was a frequent guest. The khānqah was a place for Sufi gatherings and a residence for the shaykh, his disciples and guests. There was a large iwān for the meetings, a winter room, a summer room and a shāhanshāhī, where the mutawallī would place the guest to watch the devotional rituals.40 A study of the symbiotic relationships between Sufi institutions would reveal complex social dynamics. Their most important function was, no doubt, to act as an informal support system for the Sufi brotherhoods. For example, in Tabriz, Shaykh Safi often stayed at the Rāshidīyya khānqah and at its adjoining hospice (‘imārat), which had been established as a pious foundation by the famous Ilkhanid vizier, Rashid al-din. In Sultaniyya, Shaykh Safi stayed at the zāwīya of a Pira Ahmad Saqa; and, on his way to Qarabagh, he stayed at the khānqah of an Amir Damishq Khwaja. In Urumiya he stayed at the zāwīya of a Pira Muhammad Adman, where there convened a meeting of spiritual leaders from Ardabil, Maragha and

The Shrine and the City

37

Sarav.41 There would be gatherings for sama‘ (recitation, in some cases accompanied by dance) and qawwali (sung poetry) at these zāwīyas and khānqahs, with Shaykh Safi participating in them.42 Once again Ibn Bazzaz uses these lists of sites as a way of instructing the reader about the everyday praxis of the Safavid order and its relationships with other Sufi groups. These affiliations, in turn, helped legitimize Shaykh Safi’s presence within the larger regional landscape of religious identity, an aspect that would be exploited to great advantage by his Safavid descendants. A central gathering place, often comprising of a long rectangular hall divided by alcoves on either side, was also a necessary component of Chishti shrines in medieval India, such as that of Shaykh Nizam al-din Awliya (d. 1325) in Delhi.43 The jamā‘tkhāna of Chishti shrines was a large hall with rooms on either side, one of which was for the shaykh to retire in the midday. In the front was a large courtyard surrounded by a verandah, some parts of which were walled up and made into rooms for the senior inmates. Opposite the main hall was the gate-room adjoining the kitchen. A small room with wooden walls was built on top of the hall, where the shaykh lived (as at the Rab-i Rashidi); a low wall ran on top of the roof, raised on the courtyard side to provide shade, as this is where the shaykh met students and well-wishers.44 Anatolian tekkes provide another important comparison to Iranian ones, especially those of the Bektashi order that flourished through Ottoman patronage.45 The most prominent space in these multi-functional ensembles was the maydān (open space) or tawhīdkhāna (‘hall of unity’), which was the site of ritual devotion such as sama‘ and dancing. A significant feature in most Bektashi tekkes was the gallery surrounding the maydān which was reserved for viewing the rituals. The central spaces were used as winter mosques and there would be dervish cells for meditation and a residence for the shaykh. Kitchens and stores provided sustenance for residents and visitors to the tekke. Similarly, at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, communal life was emphasized along with rituals of visitation and pilgrimage, a trend which continued during the imperial Safavid period. Several towns and villages were distinguished by the presence of a holy man, or Sufi shaykh. The relationship between the shaykh and the town was like that of a patron saint and the city in early Christianity.46 However, one not need look so far to find parallels. In Samarqand, the complex called Shah-i Zinda was begun in 1334 on a hill overlooking the city. The focus of the funerary ensemble was the tomb of Qussam b. ‘Abbas, a cousin of the Prophet. Similarly, Tus was honored by the mausoleum of the eighth Shi‘i imam, Reza, in nearby Mashhad; and the city of Qum was the resting place

38

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

of the shrine of his sister, Fatima Ma‘suma, who was buried outside its gates. The shrine of Khwaja Abdullah Ansari was built north of Herat and was an important pilgrimage place where many from the Timurid royalty were buried. Thus, in its evolution as a shrine city, Ardabil mirrors other medieval cities of Eastern Islam, in which the shrine gradually became not only the center of the city, but often its raison d’être. The Narrated Shrine: Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili’s Safwat al-ṣafā

The role of the shrine was to define the history of the order from the perspective of Shaykh Safi’s hagiography. Additionally, for those reading the Safwat al-ṣafā biography, descriptions of architectural sites and the events related to them made their own visitation to the shrine more meaningful and overlaid it with the Shaykh’s benevolent aura. The architectural settings framed the story as recognizable spaces where his life had unfolded. The zāwīya was thus a place for the enactment of the rituals of piety as well as an instructional device in the narrative. The sites chosen for attention by Ibn Bazzaz were often kitchens, courtyards, and the khānqah, that is, seemingly mundane sites for everyday uses. The performative aspect of architectural description allowed for didactic instruction just as easily as it aided in the enactment of the rites of devotion. The mythic and the fantastic coalesced in the Safwat al-ṣafā revealing intellectual journeys that were imaginary and yet rooted in reality. Otherworldly beings like jinns are captured and incarcerated by Shaykh Safi in his zāwīya. Animals and inanimate objects interact with him in amazing deeds, or simply as witnesses to his esoteric powers. Gravity is defied as Shaykh Safi floats to the top of roofs or saves children fallen in wells. Whereas these are not uncommon events in the genre of hagiographical writing, their location in the physical environment of the shrine is remarkable. Architectural space is itself transformed by Shaykh Safi’s presence. Roses, fire and floating candles appear miraculously in the retreat, pointing to its special association with Shaykh Safi’s charismatic power. Walls shake from his zealous recitation of the Qur’an; tight spaces and small rooms miraculously expand to accommodate Sufis performing sama‘ and the thousands of devotees that come for pilgrimage to the shrine. The sacred geography of the shrine is thus discovered and displayed in the text of the Safwat al-ṣafā.47 According to his biographer, Shaykh Safi initially built his zāwīya in the village of Kalkhoran, the place of his birth. He later decided to move to Ardabil as per Shaykh Zahid’s suggestion, to build a house and gathering

The Shrine and the City

39

place for his disciples. First, Safi went to the ‘Door of the Beermakers’ (darb-i fuqīyān), which was on the outside of the city, but was unsuccessful in building there. He then tried the Bāgh-i Asa‘d gardens, but the house here was also not completed. He tried a site outside the Naushahr Gate, but here too, the residence was not constructed. He was finally able to build his house and zāwīya on a site outside the Asfaris Gate.48 The location was the site of Safi’s spiritual ecstasy (wajd) and brought great pleasure to him, and it was here that his tomb was eventually built.49 The Safwat al-ṣafā focused primarily on the zāwīya of Shaykh Safi which consisted of his retreat (khalvatkhāna) and residential quarters for his family. The residential quarters also consisted of a foyerthreshold (dihlīzkhana), the women’s quarters (zanānkhāna), guesthouse (mihmānkhāna, ‘known as the jamā‘tkhāna’), a kitchen (matbakh), a store (anbārkhāna), bread kilns (tannūr and habbāzkhāna), a bread shop (nānvakhāna), and a watermill with a rivulet flowing to it (juī-yi asyāb).50 There was also a rivulet flowing from the house’s forecourt to the cistern (hauzkhāna). This cistern, outside Safi’s khalvatkhāna, was the remotest room and a place where the Shaykh often came to meditate.51 The Shaykh would sit in his khalvat and recite the kalima (profession of the Muslim faith) and perform a recitation, sometimes for as long as six consecutive days. At one place his khalvat is described as an arched podium (takht-i chahār ṭāq), which would later become his ‘blessed hāzira’.52 In addition to the Shaykh’s private khalvatkhāna was the more public khalvatsarā, where communal activities took place.53 The importance of these two spaces highlights the two Sufi practices that were pivotal to the Safaviyya order: solitary meditation (chillā) and public recitation (dhikr). The precision that the Safwat al-ṣafā allows in the reconstruction of the shrine during the lifetime of Shaykh Safi is misleading. As mentioned earlier, the aim of the hagiography was not to recreate accurate descriptions, but rather to enhance the didactic stories with physical architecture markers. Among the buildings at the zāwīya, the khalvatkhāna and the khalvatsarā (public retreat) were given the most importance in the Safwat al-ṣafā. There appear to be two such retreats at the zāwīya. In one place, Ibn Bazzaz mentions the Shaykh going from one khalvat to the next. The latter he describes as being a vaulted (four-arched) platform (takht-i chahār tāq), which was later the holy shrine.54 The second, the khalvatsarā, appears to be for collective gathering of disciples (khalvatīyān), who would meditate here, in addition to performing dhikr, sama‘ and Qur’anic recitation.55 There were many instances of the Sufis cooking and eating together in the communal spaces of the shrine, giving us a glimpse into to the daily rituals

40

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

that took place here. The narrating of sites and the rites associated with them was an effective form of instructing readers about Safavid devotion. The performance of the ritual poetry recitation was an act that was very much part of Shaykh Safi’s religious praxis. In the Safwat al-ṣafā, repeated mention is made of the events in which the Shaykh would be moved to a religious fervor (ḥāl) when listening to qawwālī and sama‘. An illustration from the 1582 Tazkirā-yi Shaykh Safi, ‘Shaykh Safi dancing at the words of Shams al-din Tuti in a room in his shrine’, demonstrates the importance of ritual poetry and dance within the Safaviyya order (figure 3). Another story, as told by Ibn Bazzaz, serves as an example of the Shaykh’s devotion and was situated in the khalvat. Owing to the intensity of the sama‛ the roof and walls of the khalvat cracked and so the Shaykh moved to the hauzkhāna (cistern) to perform the sama‛ and from there to the khalvatsarā. Another time, the sama‛ was so fierce that the walls of the entire zāwīya began to shake and vibrate. According to the Safwat al-ṣafā, after the death of his eldest son, Muhiy al-din, Shaykh Safi had stopped participating in the sama‛ until one day he heard a cleric reciting the Qur’an. The Shaykh was so moved that he went into such an ecstatic state that all the creatures that witnessed this event were moved to tears.56

Figure 3  ‘Shaykh Safi dancing at the shrine,’ Tazkireh of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili, 1582 (Shiraz), Collection of the Aga Khan Museum (AKM 00264). © AKTC.

The Shrine and the City

41

The Sufis would partake of their meals in a communal setting called the sufra, where food from the kitchen would be distributed. The kitchen provided succor not for the body alone, but for the spirit. A useful comparison would be the Mevlevi tekke (lodge) in Konya, for which detailed financial accounts remain. There, as no doubt in Ardabil, one of the primary expenses was the kitchen – up to one third of the tekke’s income was expended on the cooking and distribution of food.57 Similarly, food was distributed at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, and consisted of bread and pottage, and on special days, such as ‘Eid, honey and sweets. In Alevi-Bektashi ceremonial, one of the highly venerated sites was the ‘post of the cook’ (asci postu), pointing to the elevated status of this task.58 The kitchen of Shaykh Safi’s shrine, similarly, was its ‘living center.’59 What remains of the kitchen is found in textual documentary since there are at present no architectural remains. According to the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land registers the shrine’s soup kitchen (āshkhāna) consisted of chambers for cauldrons of rice and wheat, as well as a pantry (ayāqkhāna) to its north and a bakery to its northwest. Food was collected in the store (hawījkhāna) for a year, which included rice, meat, honey, grape syrup, salt, wax, onions, wheat, flour, fat, sugar, broth for the harīsa and oil for lighting the candles day and night.60 For the Sufis life at the shrine consisted of set rituals and a wellprescribed schedule. As the endowment deeds stipulate, the provisions were for ‘the Sufi shaykhs and the knowledgeable… who go in the way of piety… on the path of perseverance… for reciting (dhikr) and reading (tilāvat) and prayers (salāvāt) and fasting (saum) and abstinence (zahādat) and mortification (kasr al-nafs).’61 For most visitors to the shrine, the attraction would be to observe, and sometimes engage in, the rituals of the Safaviyya order. Apart from the sama‛ and qawwālī, the Sufis would perform a loud dhikr (dhikr-i jālī) at the threshold of Shaykh Safi’s tomb, in the Chillākhāna or in the courtyard of the shrine. The ḥuffāz (recitors) would perform prayers and recitation from night until day. Ibn Bazzaz writes of how every evening Sadr al-din Musa would come to the ḥāzirā and read passages from the Qur’an, after which he would assemble a ḥalqa-i dhikr, or ‘circle of dhikr’. The courtyard of the shrine was a site for the enactment of more spectacular and antinomian performances, as well. For example, there were a group of Sufis called the jam‛āt-i taubakirān, or group of penitents, who would come to the tomb for pilgrimage. Given the many different types of Sufi practice, one must exercise caution in projecting one general religious experience at such heterotopic spaces. In fact, as acknowledged in Shah Isma‘il’s poetry, ghāzī (warrior) and abdāl (mystics) were all represented at the shrine of Shaykh Safi.62

42

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine The Zāwīya and Haramkhāna

Numerous stories abound in the Safwat al-ṣafā about the construction of the shrine. Shaykh Safi initially built a modest structure whose width and breadth was small but because of its sanctity no one ever felt the tightness. Ibn Bazzaz locates a number of events at this site, for example, one concerning a disciple, Amira Pahliwan (a wrestler) who had requested to build a larger zāwīya (zāwīya -i buzurg), but the offer was turned down.63 Similarly, a disciple named Haji Sam Gilani asked to build a new zāwīya, which would be built of baked brick to replace the older one that Shaykh Safi had built of unburned bricks. Although the newer construction would have been more solid, Shaykh Safi would not allow it, saying that they did not need a building of water and clay; rather, the ‘building of the Sufis is the edifice of the heart (‘imārat-i dil)’, and that he should not waste money on it. However, Haji Sam succeeded in persuading the Shaykh and construction was begun. When the walls reached the height of the roof, he decided that it should be colorfully painted (munnaqash va rangīn), which the Shaykh disapproved of. The site was often subjected to ill-fated events and eventually, after Shaykh Safi’s death, it was demolished.64 The goal of this story is to reveal the humility of Shaykh Safi by utilizing architecture as a stage upon which his piety was enacted.65 There is one extant building from Shaykh Safi’s lifetime that has remained relatively unchanged despite the numerous revisions that the shrine has undergone since its inception. The Haramkhāna commemorates Muhiy al-din, the eldest son of Shaykh Safi and is a sizeable structure within the shrine complex (figure 4). According to a seventeenth-century source familiar with the shrine, it was built by the Shaykh himself to honor the untimely death of Muhiy al-din.66 The building has a square plan and dome and is now attached to the tomb of Shaykh Safi. The architectural evidence supports the claim that the tomb may have been built during the early fourteenth century as the unusual blue circular patterns on the transition zone are very different from other buildings in the shrine complex, and the structure appears to predate later additions (figure 5).67 There is also an inscription band running around the interior circumference of the dome, below the arches, which names the person buried in this space as the son of Shaykh Safi, Muhiy al-din (figure 6). The inscription reads, ‘In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. Everyone upon it dies but the face of the Lord remains, possessed of grandeur and magnificence (al-Rahman, 57:26–7). The owner of this noble, pure and holy abode is the ascetic and godly scion of the shaykhs, the achievers of truth, the lamented and blessed Muhiy al-milla wa al-din, may God sanctify his precious

Figure 4  Ḥaramkhāna, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1300.

Figure 5  Ḥaramkhāna, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1300. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

Figure 6  Ḥaramkhāna, interior view of epigraphy on ceiling.

46

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

spirit.’68 Muhiy al-din’s grave is no longer in the room which is filled with ten other caskets, one of them identified by the shrine authorities as Bibi Fatima, the wife of Shaykh Safi and another one supposedly belonging to their daughter.69 It appears that in subsequent years the room became a dynastic resting place where, along with the immediate family of Shaykh Safi (his wife, daughter and son), the graves of relatives and officials who served during the reign of Shah Isma‘il were also situated. The Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi

Shaykh Safi’s son and successor, Sadr al-din Musa, buried the Shaykh in his zāwīya, expanded the shrine complex, and ordered the writing of Shaykh Safi’s biography, the Safwat al-ṣafā (figure 7). All three moves served to augment the importance of the Safavid order, even in the absence of its founder. Shaykh Safi had requested to be buried in a graveyard west of Ardabil, but after advice from elders and the clerics, Sadr al-din Musa decided to bury him at his zāwīya, in what had originally been his khalvatkhāna retreat.70 The ritual spaces had been the center of the shrine; however, after Shaykh Safi’s death his tomb came to be the focus of the institution. The tomb added an aura of sanctity to the shrine and became a prime destination for pilgrims and visitors. Based on descriptions in Safwat al-ṣafā biography, the tomb of Shaykh Safi was covered by a spherical dome (qubba), which may refer to the extant one which is the form of a tall cylindrical tower with a dome (plate 4).71 The original approach to the tomb tower would have been from the southwest side, which is the direction of the main qibla portal (pointing toward Mecca). The author of the eighteenth-century Silsilāt al-nasab-i safāvīyya, Husayn Ibn Abdal Zahidi, also credits Sadr al-din Musa as the builder of the tomb of Shaykh Safi. According to him, the construction of the tomb took over ten years to complete, meaning about 1335–45. Sadr al-din Musa made arrangements for candles and lanterns to be provided for the holy site, rebuilt the khalvatkhāna, and employed Qur’an recitors for daily prayers and servitors for the upkeep of the shrine.72 The tomb of Shaykh Safi is attached on the southwest side to the Dār al-ḥuffāz by a small annex (called now the Shāhnishīn, or royal loggia). A vast graveyard surrounded the tomb tower and Haramkhāna, known as the Shahīdgāh, the ‘resting place of martyrs.’73 The brick tower stands on a stone base, approximately 1.5 meters high, at a total height of 17.5 meters. It is riveted in plain and turquoise-blue glazed bricks which read ‘Allah’ in large hazarbaf design. Each of these words is about one meter long and

Figure 7  Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1350. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

48

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

meant to be visible from a long distance. There is a small medallion also attached to the drum, facing the courtyard, which identifies the builder of this structure as ‘the servant, the faqīr, the hopeful toward forgiveness of the Eternal Lord (‘afu al-samad), ‘Awz bin [inside circle] Muhammad al-Maraghi’ (figure 8). The cylindrical body of the tomb tower is edged on top by a wide band of epigraphy in white thuluth, with circular floral motifs in light blue mosaic on a dark blue background. This band of epigraphy acts as a transition zone between the lower body of the tower and the beginning of the drum of the dome. The drum itself is of a different pattern than the cylinder, closely resembling the diamond pattern of the dome of the Haramkhāna. The dome of the tomb tower continues the diamond pattern and is topped by a metal finial. At each of the transitions, that is, between epigraphy, tile panel and dome, is a thin line of turquoise mosaic, highlighting in raised relief the change in decorative and architectural articulation. The qibla-portal is framed by a narrow band of tile mosaic in blue, white and brown and has a series of hexagonal undecipherable epigraphic medallions braided into the frame. The frame also has an epigraphic band encircling it, in large white thuluth below and small blue kufic above, which comprises Qur’anic verses that assert the basic tenets of Islam, such as singularity of God and the transitory nature of life, both appropriate verses for a funerary structure (see Appendix B). The interior of the tower is a tall octagonal space, with an unusual transition to the dome. The circular shape encouraged circumambulation (ṭawāf), an act which was requisite of pilgrimage to shrines and tombs.74 Rather than muqarnas or squinches, which were a common feature of Timurid buildings, there are eight hexagonal plates, which come out in shallow relief from the surface of the walls. Above these is an epigraphic zone which encircles the base of the dome, consisting of the entire Surat al-fatḥ (Victory) (plate 5). The dome is painted white and its apex is crowned by a beautiful and intricate sunburst. There are painted medallions below the sunburst which give the impression of being appliquéd onto the white background. The wooden cenotaph of Shaykh Safi lies in the center of the room, along with three other caskets (figure 9). The Shaykh’s casket is carved in the same manner as those in the Haramkhāna and the inscriptions on it attribute the building of the holy tomb to ‘Musa al-Safavi’, referring to Sadr al-din Musa (figure 10). Next to Shaykh Safi’s casket is one inscribed to ‘Munshi’ Sadr al-din and dated ah 793 (1390).75 Visiting the tomb of Shaykh Safi was the highlight of the pilgrimage to the shrine. For the adept, the building was a reminder to concentrate on

Figure 8  Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, detail showing artisan’s signature medallion.

Figure 9  Wooden casket of Shaykh Safi. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

The Shrine and the City

51

Figure 10  Wooden casket of Shaykh Safi. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

the aura of their Shaykh, ‘in order to increase their spiritual strength’.76 Building and visiting a commemorative to a holy figure were acts of piety and devotion. Their significance is best represented by a commentary attributed to a contemporary of Shaykh Safi, ‘Ala’ al-Daula Simnani (d. 1336). ‘The Shaykh said, “It [visitation of tombs] has many uses. One is that when one makes a pilgrimage to someone’s [tomb], one’s concentration increases as often as one goes. When one reaches the tomb and beholds it by sense-perception, one’s sense-perception also becomes engaged with the tomb. He becomes totally concentrated, and this has many uses. Another is that however much spirits lack a veil, and though the whole world is one to them, it keeps an eye on the body with which it [the spirit] has been connected for seventy years and on its resurrection body that it will become after the resurrection, for ever and ever. Its [the spirit’s] connection is greater here than in any other place.”’77 The tomb tower of Shaykh Safi was part of the ritual performance, and was central to the religious experience of the pilgrim. Shrines, such as that of Shaykh Safi, were equated to the Ka’ba in Mecca and pilgrimage to them was considered an obligation.78 In his eulogistic poem written in 1570 describing the shrine, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi notes that the towering dome rises above everything else, standing like a proud sentinel.79 The

52

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

tomb tower is compared to a beacon, whose sunburst pattern, imitating the rays of the sun, illuminates the world. The dazzling interior was not just metaphorical, but as Adam Olearius described, it was a brilliant and luminous space. ‘It is behind that rail or partition, that the sepulcher of Shaykh Safi is to be seen, built of white marble, … It was covered with crimson velvet, and raised three feet from the ground, being nine feet in length, and four in breadth. From the roof, there hung certain lamps of gold and silver, and on both sides, two huge candlesticks of massy gold, in which were set great wax candles, lighted in the night time.’80 The gold and silver candles would not only emit light, but reflect it, adding to the marvelous vision. The architecture was a facet of the sacred ethos of the shrine; although meanings associated with the rituals may have been altered in time, the wonder inspired by the architecture continued to fascinate and move observers and pilgrims alike. Dār al-ḥuffāz, or Hall of Readers

During the construction of the tomb of Shaykh Safi, Sadr al-din Musa widened and enlarged the area where the recitors and pilgrims sat, and ordered that all around this place the titles of Safi and the date of construction of his tomb be written. This report, from the Safwat al-ṣafā, may refer to the extant Dār al-ḥuffāz of the shrine, above the entrance of which is the name of Shaykh Safi and in the margins are dedications naming his son, Sadr al-din Musa as its founder (figure 11). Although the Dār al-ḥuffāz became the main entrance into the sacred precincts the joint between it and the tomb tower reveals that it may have been a later addition (figure 12). This observation is lent credence by the textual sources that state that Sadr al-din built the tomb first and then some years later the Dār al-ḥuffāz.81 This building, which was reputed to have been built by Sadr al-din Musa to commemorate his father’s death, was extant during the sixteenth century with its original epigraphy. The entrance into the Dār al-ḥuffāz is a tall arched iwān portal which is entirely decorated in turquoise blue, lapis lazuli, white and red mosaic. The entrance of the portal, also arched, is flanked on either side by two narrow white marble columns. Epigraphy adorns the frames of the portal and the entrance, as well as a number of panels which are inserted into the overall composition. The hemispherical arch of the portal is a muqarnas half-dome with its apex ending in a ribbed sunburst pattern. Smaller versions of this are repeated on the sides flanking the entrance, which look like niches for holding candles or lamps. The façade facing the court is also decorated

The Shrine and the City

53

Figure 11  Dār al-ḥuffāz, entrance portal, 14th–15th centuries. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

and tiled, but in a more restrained manner. There are two horizontal bands of windows, which are rectangular in shape; their height is greater than the width, accentuating the vertical illusion already achieved by the tall and narrow entrance portal. Above the windows is a thin band of floral mosaic, above which is a wide epigraphic band. The cornice of the Dār al-ḥuffāz rises above the epigraphy in the form of, first, a flat row of arch patterns with floral motifs and second, a three-dimensional representation of the arches in the form of ascending muqarnas relief. This articulation provides a beautiful terminus for the building and masks the roof behind.82 The function of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, as a site for recitation and prayer, was reiterated on the epigraphy on the cornice (plate 6), which reads: ‘It was set up as a meeting place (majlis) for his exaltation, the saint, and planted as a tree of goodness whose roots are firm and its branches [reach] in the sky. It is for the recitation of the Qur’an and is surrounded by God’s angels.’ On the cornice the text reads, ‘Oh Lord! Revive us by the Qur’an and perish us by the Qur’an, and resurrect us by the Qur’an and permit us [on] the path by the Qur’an and [allow] our entrance into Paradise by the Qur’an and [let there be] no separation between us and between the Qur’an. Oh Lord! Bless our recitations from your book toward the spirits

Figure 12  Detail, space between Dār al-ḥuffāz and Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi.

The Shrine and the City

55

of our fathers and our mothers and toward the spirits of the inhabitants of the graves, [by the] intervention of the Prophet of God.’ The large hall of the Dār al-ḥuffāz serves as a sanctified threshold to the tomb of Shaykh Safi, and architecturally, a beautiful processional into the tomb tower itself (figure 14) Dhikr and sama’ were considered part of the Sufis’ spiritual and intellectual education. Alongside these the novice was expected to have a good knowledge of the order’s past, learned through biographies, such as the Safwat al-ṣafā, and popular narratives. The primary criterion was to know the genealogy and chain of transmission that made one order distinct from another.83 The mystical tradition of a particular order, in this case, the Safaviyya, was recorded not only in books and oral histories, but sometimes on the walls that enclosed the ritual and daily life of the Sufis. The rituals of dhikr and remembrance were foundations of the Safaviyya order and their centrality was reiterated through the epigraphy on the Dār al-ḥuffāz which served as an aide mémoire for those who could read, and as a guide to those to whom the epigraphy was narrated. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was a microcosmic city with its varied clientele and the diverse services it provided. The Safwat al-ṣafā biography and the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land registers help to reconstruct the structures and the relationship of the shrine with the city of Ardabil. It should, however, be remembered that the knowledge we have about the early history of the shrine is mediated through these rather different texts and not through extant architecture. In fact the primary use of the buildings within the Safwat al-ṣafā was to fill in the details of Shaykh Safi’s biography. Particular sites were mentioned as markers locating events related to the Shaykh’s spiritual and material authority. On a textual level, however, the architecture described provides information about the rites of devotion and daily practice undertaken at the shrine. The rituals and spatial hierarchies witnessed at the shrine of Shaykh Safi are important resources for understanding Sufi devotion in medieval Iran after the Mongol conquests. The ‘narrative’ of the shrine gives a detailed, if at times idealized, vision of the Safaviyya order. It is through these descriptions that one can situate the shrine of Shaykh Safi within the context of other Sufi institutions in Iran, Anatolia and even India. The meeting places, meditation halls, residences and other ancillary services all served a common purpose: the formation of a vibrant cultural institution similar to its contemporaries, yet clearly marked for distinction in its future role as the dynastic shrine of the Safavid rulers of Iran.

Figure 13  Section through Dār al-ḥuffāz and Tomb Tower.

2 MYTH AND CHARITY THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE SAFAVID SHRINE (1501–84)

All the roads, likewise, leading to and from the town, abound with regular rows of young trees, which, as they had been lately planted, must needs, in the process of a few years, strike the eye very agreeably. The most beautiful part of the town is the Maydan, or Square, where the sepulchral monument of Safi stands.1 The advent of Shaykh Isma‘il to the throne in Tabriz in 1501 signaled a turning point in the architectural history of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Not only were the Safaviyya order’s political and economic fortunes irreversibly altered, but so too was the shrine’s physical character. Ardabil and the shrine were once again linked to imperial power, a trend which had begun during the lifetime of Shaykh Safi himself. However, now there was a profound difference: the Shah of Iran was also the Sufi pīr and the shrine was simultaneously a dynastic memorial and a spiritual retreat. Early Safavid views of the shrine’s history, in particular the foundation myths regarding its origins, were crucial in formulating the history of the Safavid rulers themselves. At this time the Sufi shrine was re-imagined through a Twelver Shi‛i identity, and the rise of the Shahs was presented as preordained and divinely sanctioned. In this religious context, the shrine of Shaykh Safi was deemed comparable with Shi‛i shrines and, for example, those of Imam Reza (d. 817) in Mashhad, Iran, and that of Imam Husayn (d. 680) in Karbala, Iraq.2 The fifteenth-century chronicler, Ghiyas al-din Muhammad Husayni Khwandamir (d. c. 1537) writes that when Isma‘il returned to Ardabil from exile in Lahijan to regain his rightful place as head of the order, ‘his threshold (dargāh) became a resting place for the great of Iraq, Fars

58

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

and Azerbaijan.’3 In the accounts of 1496 another chronicler, Hasan Beg Rumlu (b. 1530), writes how Isma‘il returned to Ardabil, ‘to remove heresy from the lands and to bow to the spirits of his ancestors.’ A lot of military support was rallied for him here, as he moved from village to village gathering troops, and then returned to circumambulate the ‘holy shrine of the great shaykhs.’4 Similarly, Sufis and Qizilbash devotees from Anatolia and Syria came to the shrine for pilgrimage and to join Isma‘il’s faction. Before the victory over the Shirvanshah in 1499/1500, Isma‘il thus visited the grave of Shaykh Safi and prayed for aid against the ‘infidels.’5 The shrine of Shaykh Safi was the spiritual and ideological center of the early Safavid Empire. For the itinerant rulers whose seat of government moved from Tabriz to Qazvin and finally to Isfahan at the end of the sixteenth century, Ardabil served as a permanent reminder of their origins and was the city to which they returned to honor their ancestors. The shrine was praised in poems and chronicles, patronized with generous endowments, and visited by a multitude of believers from near and far. Charity and devotion were the primary functions of the shrine institution, and these were elevated to a singular priority by the Shahs. Provisions such as food and shelter were made for travelers and pilgrims through the construction of inns, rest-houses and public baths. The kitchen, kilns, bakeries, and storehouses were stocked in order to serve the most basic aspect of charity, namely, feeding the poor. The generosity of the patrons was reflected in the popularity of the shrine and the manner in which architecture came to play an important role in the fashioning of the Safavid imperial image. In presenting the history of the Safavids and the Ardabil shrine, sixteenthcentury chronicles often appropriated and recomposed earlier texts such as the Safwat al-ṣafā biography by Ibn Bazzaz.6 The Safwat al-ṣafā was an important source for the reconstruction of the medieval shrine and the rituals that it housed, as demonstrated in the previous chapter. The shrine is represented at two stages of its initial development – first as the Sufi lodge of Shaykh Safi and second as his commemorative shrine. The text was popularized and translated into Turkish soon after Isma‘il’s ascension for dissemination among his Qizilbash followers, by orders of the governor, Durmish Khan Shamlu.7 The manuscript was edited in 1533 by Abu al-Fath al-Husayni, under orders of the second shah, Tahmasb I (d. 1576) such that the Safavid genealogy led back to the seventh Imam, Musa Kazim.8 The Safwat al-ṣafā was thus significant not only as a document of its own time but also construed as an important guide for the Safavid patrons. The manner in which it was appropriated by sixteenth-century

Myth and Charity

59

chroniclers sheds light on Safavid attitudes toward the ancestral institution. At stake was the conceptualization of their ancestral history, which in turn affected the preservation and alteration of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Another type of text, the endowment deed (waqfīyya), was no less effective in the dissemination of Safavid history and ideology. This was exemplified by the 1570 and 1629 Ṣarīḥ al-milk land registers which were written in order to list the holdings of the shrine. The 1570 register was compiled under direct orders of Shah Tahmasb by his court poet and chronicler, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi. Although this appears to be a rather unusual task for a man of such pedigree – no doubt much of the actual inventory was undertaken with the assistance of a local caretaker – ‘Abdi Beg’s selection points to the Ṣarīḥ al-milk’s significance as a highly visible object of imperial documentation. The endowment of wealth, property, and commodities to the shrine were acts both political and religious. They must be viewed in the cultural and economic context of the givers and the receivers, as signs of public and private devotion. The effects of the gift were sometimes general, that is, in the form of monetary bequests used for the welfare of the resident Sufis and visitors to the shrine. Sometimes the endowments were more material and meant to embellish the interiors of the shrine, such as magnificent candle holders and silver doors. The money received from a benefactor could be used at the discretion of the shrine administration, or for specific functions stipulated in the text of the endowment. The continuity of the tradition of gifting did not preclude the possibility for innovation and change based on personal ambitions, economics and the redefinition of Safavid society. Early Safavid historians utilized the origins of the Safaviyya order to legitimize this radical and unprecedented political movement. Focusing on the life of Shaykh Safi and the growth of his order, the authors’ foretold the Shi‘i and imperial future of the Safavid dynasty. Isma‘il’s familial and spiritual genealogies provided the foundations for his right to rule Iran, while the shrine in Ardabil provided its physical context. In the postMongol and Timurid period veneration of Imam ‘Ali and the descendants of Muhammad was a common aspect of Sunni and Sufi devotion. During the sixteenth century, however, Shi‘i identity came to define the Safavids. Shah Isma‘il introduced Twelver Shi‘ism as the official creed by inviting Shi‘i scholars, such as al-Karaki (d. 1534), from regions like Jabal ‘Amil, to his court.9 As Rula Abisaab has written, ‘the Safavids sought a conferred sense of religious leadership derived from the adoption of a coherent Shi‘ite belief system by their subjects … The making of a shari‘a-based society meant a standardized religious praxis, which neither

60

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the Qizilbash nor the erudite Iranian notables were equipped to instill in the new dynasty.’10 This could only be accomplished by inviting expert scholars and by the establishment of institutions where the study and propagation of Shi‘i sources of authority could be undertaken. Through such moves, Shah Isma‘il initiated a transformation of Iranian society in a manner that was also reflected in the architecture and ceremonial of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Foundation Myths of the Shrine

Shaykh Safi’s life was typical of a religious mystic and became an archetype for ensuing generations; his persona, as depicted by the Safavid historians, casts light on the ideals of manhood and spirituality cherished in the sixteenth century. The Safwat al-ṣafā immortalized the founder of the Safaviyya order while also animating the spaces he inhabited (plate 7). The biography describes a number of dreams and visions about the life of Safi which were repeated in subsequent narratives and came into wide circulation.11 One example is Amir Khwandamir’s Habīb al-siyār, which was dedicated to Shah Isma‘il’s vizier, Habib Allah Savaji, and completed in 1524.12 Although the focus of the last third of the Habīb al-siyār is on the post-Mongol period of Iranian history and the rule of Amir Timur, a large segment is devoted to early Safavid history until the death of Shah Isma‘il. Building upon Ibn Bazzaz’s story of how Safi came to choose Ardabil as the site of his khānqah, Khwandamir frames the story within the context of the future prosperity of the order. Beginning with the Qur’anic phrase, ajaibu da‘ī Allah (‘respond to Allah’s summoner’) he quotes Shaykh Safi’s mentor, Shaykh Zahid Gilani (d. 1301), as advising him to go to Ardabil for, ‘No matter how high the bird of my heart has flown, it has found no place better than Ardabil for you to reside. Now, Safi, you must dwell in this land in order that your threshold be a nest for birds from the world above. You must lead the people on the highway of the right religion and the path of the rightly guarded nation because God has entrusted you to the people and the people to you.’13 In a later segment on world geography, Khwandamir notes that after Tabriz, Ardabil was the most important city in Azerbaijan, for it was the resting place of Shaykh Safi, the holy ancestor of ‘his Lordship [Shah Isma‘il]. It is the best city in the universe and the destination (qibla) of pilgrimage of all mankind … and is a place of asylum and security.’14 Ardabil, through such distinguished associations – with Muhammad and ‘Ali – was represented as a holy site, equal in importance to older pilgrimage sites, like those in Mecca and Mashhad.

Myth and Charity

61

Qazi Ahmad Qummi’s Khulāsāt al-tavārīkh, which was completed during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas (Isma‘il’s great grandson) in ah 999 (1590), is another important example of how Ardabil and the shrine were reconceptualized through Shi‛i religious ideology. Quoting notable clerics and sayyids (descendants of the Prophet, Muhammad), Qummi (b. 1546) records a number of traditions that augmented the importance of Ardabil as a Shi‘i center. There is, for example, the story told that a sayyid saw a dream in which he saw Muhammad praying in the neighborhood of the Asfaris Gate in Ardabil (‘which is now the illumined grave, pure sanctuary and khānqah of Shaykh Safi’). When asked the reason for his presence, the reply was that Muhammad was praying for Shaykh Safi, ‘who will spread and illumine my religion.’15 Whereas this event may be seen as a general sign of Safi’s piety, other narratives point to a more Shi‛i reading. Qummi cites ḥadīth attributed to Imam ‘Ali, ‘We have in Ardabil a treasure not of gold or silver but of the sperm of man in the womb of woman whose name is the name of the prophet of the mountains (Isma‘il) … If you see him, come and follow the man of the red headdress…’16 The red headdress (al-‘ashābat al-hamra‘) is a reference to Shah Isma‘il and highlights the hat’s significance as a marker of Isma‘il’s followers rather than those of his father Haydar. Associating religious figures like Muhammad and ‘Ali to Isma‘il’s victories was a legitimizing device that gave credence to the Safavids’ claims to divinely-inspired rule. Khwandamir’s son, Amir Mahmud, in Irān dar ruzgār-i Shāh Isma‘il vā Shāh Tahmāsb (completed 1550), repeated much of what his father had written earlier but also elaborated on the scene of Isma‘il’s ascent to the throne ‘to install the religion of ‘Ali.’ The first imperial act was the khutbā (sermon) in the name of the twelve Imams. At this time the call to prayer (‘azān) and the profession of faith (kalima) were altered to cohere with Shi‘i practice.17 Taking their lead from the redacted Safwat al-ṣafā, Safavid historians utilized the prominence of the shrine in Ardabil as a way of enhancing the prestige of the Safavid imperium. One of Safi’s dreams was particularly popular among Safavid historians: In the dream, Safi saw himself seated in the dome of the congregational mosque (jami‘) of Ardabil. Within, he saw a sun rising which illuminated the entire world. The sun appeared to be his own face. His mother, to whom he later retold the dream, explained it to mean that he would become a great shaykh and his piety would be a guiding light for all.18 Rewording the dream, Khwandamir saw it as a prophecy foretelling the rise of Shah Isma‘il and the Safavid dynasty.19 Shah Tahmasb’s chroniclers also utilized early Safavid history as a way of legitimizing the new ruler’s authority and as a way of reconfiguring

62

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Authors such as Hasan Beg Rumlu situated Isma‘il’s victorious return in various sites located in Ardabil and in the shrine precincts themselves. In naming those who supported Isma‘il’s return to Ardabil and by identifying the physical sites, Rumlu composed a vivid description of this significant event. In the Safwat al-ṣafā specific architectural sites had been highlighted as those associated with Shaykh Safi. For early Safavid authors like Rumlu, who were augmenting and extending Ibn Bazzaz’s work into the world of the sixteenth century, the tomb of Shaykh Safi was the central architectural monument in the site. Through its repeated mention, the commemorative function of the shrine as a site of pilgrimage and asylum, and most importantly, as the dynastic mausoleum, was repeated again and again. Upon ascending the throne, Shah Isma‘il issued a royal decree that the body of his father, Shaykh Haydar bin Junayd be brought from its burial in Tabaristan (a province on southern shores of the Caspian Sea) to be re-interred at the holy Safavid shrine.20 With this act, it may be argued, Shah Isma‘il set forth a new conceptualization of the Safavid order, in which dynastic continuity was maintained at all cost. Although the precedent for burying Safavid family members had been set by Shaykh Safi himself with the construction of the tomb for his son, Muhiy al-din, Isma‘il’s conscious preservation of Safavid history (through the preservation of Haydar’s body) was unique. Haydar could have been buried in what would come to be known as the Shahīdgāh (Place of Martyrs) cemetery or in the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā (Dome of the Princes) that is mentioned in the 1577 Ṣarīḥ al-milk of ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi (figure 1). According to Shirazi’s description, the arched structure was attached to the southeastern side of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and was roofed by a lofty bluetiled dome.21 The very title of the structure, Dome of the Princes, points to the shrine’s commemorative function and its role as an imperial institution, and reflects the conflation of two important foundations of the early Safavid Empire: Sufism and divinely-sanctioned kingship. Charity and the Economic Foundations of the Shrine

An important complement to the historical chronicles was the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register compiled in 1570. The register was an inventory made by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi with the assistance of the mutawallī (caretaker of the shrine’s endowments) of the shrine and lists the properties for which endowment deeds existed. It begins with praises of Shah Tahmasb’s lineage and the introductory chapter is followed by a poetic description of

Myth and Charity

63

Figure 1  Tomb of Shah Isma‘il, interior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Chapter Four deals with poetry and its role as ekphrastic architectural description in greater depth. In this section the concern is with the manner in which the waqf summaries were utilized to paint a picture of the shrine’s wealth and significance. The endowment deeds represented the ambitions of those making pious gifts as well as the powerful institution that was the recipient. The documents are synopses of the original endowment, but they also sometimes include direct quotes from the official document. The list consists primarily of property holdings in the form of shops in the Ardabil bazaar and agricultural land on the outskirts of the town. In addition, the register singles out numerous important officials and governors of the region, the political elite as it were, as important patrons of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. The deeds are arranged both thematically and chronologically in order for the author to demonstrate that the shrine’s prosperity was not gained solely as a result of its recently acquired imperial status, but through a long and vital history of patronage linked to philanthropy. Any study of exchange and endowment necessitates an initial inquiry into the conceptual bases of charity. According to Marcel Mauss, the ritualized gift exchange may be seen as part of an image-enhancing drama that marks social hierarchy. The gift is thus a form of self-aggrandizement,

64

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

meant to create a hold over the one who received it. ‘The underlying motives are competition, rivalry, show, and a desire for greatness and wealth.’22 This system also carried over to exchanges between people and their gods, where the gift may be seen as a form of petition or tribute. In the Islamic context, waqf is a pious endowment made to God in the form of charity benefiting the poor and needy, and whose esoteric reward is reaped by the donor in the afterlife. Made for perpetuity, this gesture is meant to continue the generous intentions of the giver beyond his or her lifetime, and to ensure the continuity of the charitable institution which was the vehicle through which the gift was made. Modern scholars have looked at waqf in relation to various social institutions, such as mosques, hospitals, shrines and madrasas.23 In Ardabil, endowment was made in order to establish social hierarchies and to forge political alliances which resulted in the prosperity of the shrine institution.24 The gifting of wealth and property to the shrine of Shaykh Safi were acts both political and religious. The gifts to the shrine can be viewed within the cultural and economic context of the givers and the receivers, as signs of public and private devotion. The effects were sometimes muted, that is, in the form of monetary bequests used for feeding the poor and the welfare of the resident Sufis. The generosity of a donor was also displayed through gifting precious objects to the shrine, such as magnificent candle holders and silver doors that embellished the interiors of the buildings. The objects helped mark, in a very public way, the piety of the giver and the prosperity of the institution to which it was endowed. They were also often incorporated into the ritual life of the shrine, such as serving food and pouring libations (figure 2). Waqf has a symbolic as well as utilitarian purpose, for both the donor and the recipient. There are two kinds of waqf: waqf khayrī, which are clearly religious in intent and made to public institutions like mosques or hospitals; waqf ahlī, which are family endowments bequeathed to one’s descendants. In the early modern period under consideration here, the vehicles for such benefaction varied: people could bequeath money to a range of public institutions ranging from small madrasas to hospitals (māristān), from local Sufi zāwīya to large imperial foundations like the Ottoman kulliye, which consisted of a mosque, madrasa, resthouse, commercial baths, and a funerary tomb of the founder.25 In general, waqfs could be inherited, bequeathed or even transferred to another party. The administrators of the waqfs of Shaykh Safi’s shrine were mostly members of the extended Safavid clan who were also in charge of purchasing commercial property with money from the shrine’s estates.

Figure 2  Bowl, dated 1590/1. Courtesy of the State Hermitage Museum, 1r 2260.

66

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Like the redacted Safwat al-ṣafā hagiography, the property documents of Shaykh Safi’s shrine were viewed by the Safavids as historical documents that affirmed the institution’s regal associations. Shaykh Safi’s reputation earned him the respect of many of the rulers of Azerbaijan, who visited his zāwīya and made endowments to its estate. The Safaviyya order was one of the most influential during the Ilkhanid period; according to the contemporary historian, Hamd Allah Mustawfi, the Mongols held Shaykh Safi in much respect and he was able to restrain them from molesting the local people.26 The shrine was a place of asylum and security for all who entered it. The fame of the shrine was such that there were supplicants coming to it by the thousands, from near and far. Stories are told where Safi prayed for the harvest, saved children from accidents, and negotiated on behalf of the villagers with government and tax officials. His role as an arbitrator and mediator was renowned, and many people came to his zāwīya for advice and counsel. As its prominence grew in the fourteenth century other functions were appended to the original zāwīya, including an ‘imārat, soup kitchen, and resthouses for Sufis, pilgrims and the destitute.27 The shrine also had a madrasa attached to it which provided a more formal education to students and disciples.28 The shrine of Shaykh Safi was a site for the enactment of rituals of piety such as prayer and charity, and gifts were made in the name of God and also in the name of Shaykh Safi. The earliest deeds recorded in the 1577 Ṣarīḥ al-milk are from the lifetime of Shaykh Safi himself, in which he purchased property in and around Ardabil.29 For example, he bought a water mill near his zāwīya and a bathhouse called the Bathhouse of the Shaykhs, which was endowed for the shrine. Shaykh Safi also had many properties outside of Ardabil which were either gifted to him or he had himself bought and made into perpetual endowments for the shrine.30 According to the Ṣarīḥ al-milk deeds all of Shaykh Safi’s properties were designated for the administration of the shrine and the welfare of its residents. This is witnessed in the waqf of Alghar, which was first purchased by Shaykh Safi in 1310, ‘and Hazrat [..] endowed all of the possessions and land, moveable personal property and [immovable] estates for the Muslim comers and goers and residents of and travelers to the Holy Safavid shrine that is in the Abode of Guidance (dār al-irshād), Ardabil. And the endowments [are for] the Muslims, from the rich and the poor, and the dwellers and residents of the aforementioned city, and the travelers that [must] reside by night there. This shrine is known and famous [for it].’ These documents set the tone for the concern with charity and

Myth and Charity

67

public welfare that would define the shrine’s raison d’être to later Safavid clients and patrons. The waqf would sometimes mention specific purposes for which it was established, as in the case regarding income from another village ‘that was endowed for the mausoleum (turbat) of the Hazrat … Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq. For the carpets and mats and for the candles and oil that is used in the lamps … Provision was made for vases and drinking vessels for the resident mendicants and Sufis and ‘ulema and for the meals for the residents and for the travelers and wayfarers and the poor. And this custom is a constantly observed rule here. After that [Sadr al-din Musa] recorded that the conditions of the lofty court (sharth-i dīvān-i ‘āla) in the time of the waqfiyya on the aforementioned shrine was [written] in the days of [my father]. The candles and lamps and oils, and the meals for the residents and for the travelers and wayfarers and the relations and passersby were in the customary manner, as established by my father.’ According to the registers both these deeds were recopied by Sadr al-din Musa just before or after his father’s death in 1334.31 The need to establish a tradition is underscored by the oftenrepeated phrase, ‘in the days of my father,’ which conveyed a sense of continuity with the past. Shaykh Safi was recognized by the ruling elite for his integrity and religious authority and they made him an important intermediary between themselves and their subjects. Shaykh Safi and his order were rewarded through political protection and tax exemptions.32 The shrine was an ideal site for the enactment of imperial virtues such as piety and generosity, as well as for forwarding the political agendas of those who patronized it.33 The Ṣarīḥ al-milk registers include a set of endowments, called the ‘Ghazani waqfs,’ which refer to the imperial orders of the Ilkhanid prince, Ghazan Hasan (d. 1304) in which a great deal of property, much of it in Tabriz, was gifted to the Safavid shrine.34 In addition, according to the register, Sultan Uljaytu Khudabanda (d. 1316) and Prince Abu Said (d. 1335) came to pay homage to Shaykh Safi as did the vizier, Rashid al-din (d. 1318) who was reputed to have endowed a large soup kitchen at the zāwīya.35 A waqf sealed by Prince Abu Sa‘id regarding the village, Alghar, states that ‘the revenues consumed from grain and berries were received [and used for] the comers and goers and the mendicants and the residents and rich and poor who are in need.’36 Other important benefactors to the shrine were local governors, such as the influential Ilkhanid commander, Shams al-din Juvayni, who had acquired wealth and bought a lot of land in Ardabil.37 He also owned

68

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

a part of the neighboring village of Kalkhoran which he bequeathed to his son in 1283 and which was later bought from his heirs by the shrine estate. To the shrine of Shaykh Safi, Juvayni endowed many stores in the Ardabil bazaar, as well as an important ribāt, a famous bathhouse, and a water-mill.38 According to the entries listed in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk, these waqfs were made to Shaykh Safi’s shrine for blessings from the ‘leader of women, Fatima’ (daughter of Prophet Muhammad) and the ahl al-bayt (family of Muhammad). Furthermore, they were to fund the repair of the ribāt (which would henceforth generate income for the shrine) and the construction of a domed building where the copying and recitation of the Qu‛ran would take place.39 Shaykh Safi’s son, Sadr al-din Musa, continued the relationship between the Safaviyya order and the rulers of Azerbaijan by being a ‘loyal counselor to the kings’ (nāṣuh al-mulūk wa al-salātin) as noted in a 1372 farmān (imperial order) of Sultan Ahmad Jalayir (d. 1410).40 Royal gifts and exemptions also continued during the Qara Qoyunlu and Timurid periods, as seen in a 1413 farmān which was ordered by Qara Yusuf (d. 1433) granting tax exemptions to the shrine. It was addressed to the governors, officials and tax collectors of Ardabil ordering them not to tax the endowed properties of the zāwīya of Shaykh Safi, the income from which went in ‘the construction of fine buildings and bright mosques and khānqahs and zāwīya.’41 Likewise, his opponent Shah Rukh Mirza (d. 1447), in a royal decree dated 1435, promised his protection to the Safavid order of ‘the Shaykh al-Islam and the guide of mankind… Leader of the men and of religion, Ibrahim.’ The Sufis from the shrine had gone to the royal court and promised their loyalty to Shah Rukh (note, he had just defeated the Qara Qoyunlus), which ‘increase[d] [the Sultan’s] confidence in them.’ The shaykhs of Ardabil were intermediaries between the Sultan and the people of Ardabil who they ‘made hopeful of his [the Sultan’s] favor.’ In return, Shah Rukh ordered his nobles and officials not to interfere with the shrine’s administration and not to harass the Ardabilis.42 Symbiotic relations such as these were cultivated by the Safavid shaykhs whose allegiances echoed the changing political geography of Tabriz and Azerbaijan. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk registers were sixteenth-century synopses of earlier waqf documents and were therefore subject to transformations, if not in content, then in their style and interpretation. It is important to note the distinction between these registers and the original endowments that they serve to represent. ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi’s synopses of the deeds altered their significance, while retaining their fundamental details; that

Myth and Charity

69

is, he represented the motivations for endowment by couching them in the rhetoric of Twelver Shi‛ism. In his representation patronage of the shrine foretold the great destiny awaiting the Sufis of Ardabil. The negotiation of social and familial allegiance had been the primary reason behind the close relationship between Shaykh Safi’s heirs and the rulers of Azerbaijan and the local elite. Analysis of the waqf endowments reveals the diversity of the shrine’s clientele and their varied methods of benevolence; for example, women played a significant role in the shrine’s affairs as donors and partners in property transactions.43 Whether donating candlesticks or vast tracts of farmland to the shrine, patrons displayed their concern with gaining divine rewards in the afterlife. The endowment registers reinforced the monumentality of the shrine and, in particular the tomb of Shaykh Safi, both physically and metaphorically. Patronage and Commemoration in the Early Sixteenth Century

The Safavids served as heads of the Safaviyya order and as the kings of Iran through the enactment of well-known rituals of piety. The historian Khwandamir lists a number of benevolent acts undertaken by the predecessors of Shah Isma‘il, such as the Ilkhan, Ghazan Khan (d. 1304), who was known to visit the shrines of holy men and imams and to give generously to sayyids, the ‘ulema and the poor. In addition, he constructed charitable institutions, such as the Shafiyya madrasa, a congregational mosque, khānqah, and a Dār al-siyyāda (‘hall for the sayyids’) in Tabriz. Every year, at his death anniversary an elaborate āsh (soup) was prepared and distributed among the poor and people from near and far gathered for Qur’anic recitations at his tomb.44 A similar portrait is painted of the Timurid king, Shah Rukh Mirza, who was always ‘in attendance of dervishes and hermits and wherever he went he first visited the shrines of saints. Due to his lofty spirit charitable institutions like mosques, khānqahs, madrasas, and caravansaries were constructed throughout his dominion and choice real estate was endowed for their upkeep.’45 He was especially fond of patronizing the Shi’i sanctuary of Imam Reza at Mashhad where he donated lamps of gold and rewarded the caretakers and inhabitants with generous alms.46 Charity and patronage of religious edifices were deemed a royal prerogative, one in which the Safavids participated whole-heartedly, men and women. Their regal predecessors were often acclaimed for their devotion to holy persons and sites, such as Sultan Husayn Bayqara (d. 1506), who patronized the shrine of Abdullah Ansari in Gazurgah.

70

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

The Ṣarīḥ al-milk registers and the Safwat al-ṣafā biography were crucial documents in establishing the character of Safavid identity. Simultaneously, the sanctity and authority of the shrine was maintained through the preservation of its architectural past. The tradition of gifting to the shrine continued in the sixteenth century and was evidence of the high regard given to institution by the Ardabilis as well as the Safavid court elite. Owing to Shah Isma‘il’s charisma and military prowess, a great number of Anatolian and Turkman tribal leaders had become loyal Safavid followers and flocked to his ancestral home.47 These Qizilbash intimates of Shah Isma‘il made generous endowments to the shrine of Shaykh Safi, the figure whom they venerated and whose descendants were their overlords.48 Many of the administrators, however, were part of the extended Safavid clan and traced their descent back to either Shaykh Safi or his pīr, Shaykh Zahid. The importance of both local bureaucrats and Qizilbash to the Safavid political culture, as glimpsed in the patronage and administration of the shrine, was witnessed throughout the empire. Shah Isma‘il himself established the āsh-i ḥalāl waqf endowment which was a pious foundation for the distribution of food, that was endowed by income collected from villages and properties belonging to the shrine of Shaykh Safi.49 The endowment document in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk records the procurement in 1497 of the village Samasbi by Sultan ‘Ali, the brother of Isma‘il and the mutawallī of the shrine at the time.50 Shah Isma‘il established this property, along with land around Sabalan and villages such as Sultanabad and Sarakjan in nearby regions, exclusively as a charitable fund that would serve as a soup kitchen providing food for visitors and residents alike. Following their leaders’ example, Safavid intimates were also important patrons of the shrine. For example, the lālā (guardian) of Shah Tahmasb, Husayn Beg Shamlu (known as ‘Lala Beg’) had purchased and endowed an entire village to the Safavid shrine in 1503 ‘with its farms and dependencies, with all the divisions from the gardens and sown fields, … [and their] total rights, on the holy, illuminated, blessed Safavid shrine encircled by the light of God, surrounded by the radiance of greatness … After the necessary construction of the environs (raqba) and after the collection of the daily provisions for the needy (muhtāj) among them. [The waqf was established] for food for the comers and goers and the Muslims residents that persevere to devotion and recitation and are engaged in the service of that shrine with veneration (‘ibādat) and struggle (mujāhidāt).’51 The emphasis on jihād and ‘ibādat is telling, as Lala Beg Shamlu had been one of the ahl-i ikhtisās guardians of the Safavid order and caretakers of the shrine in Ardabil before the return of Isma‘il from Lahijan.52

Myth and Charity

71

The sudden accidental death of Shah Isma‘il in 1524 was a traumatic experience that threw the newly formed polity into a state of rivalrous chaos wherein separate cabals of Qizilbash fought for dominance. The young heir, Tahmasb, was merely ten years old at the time and in far-off Herat governing under the guidance of Husayn Beg Shamlu. The tomb of Shah Isma‘il was constructed in a small enclosure adjacent to the tomb of Shaykh Safi. It is most probable that it was the widowed queen who financed the resting place of her consort. Shah Begi Begum, also known as Tajlu Khanum, was a generous benefactor and an active patron of architecture.53 According to both endowment records and historical chronicles, Tajlu Khanum was a well-born and wealthy woman from the Aq Qoyunlu family, whose charity was wellknown. Qazi Ahmad Qummi writes of how she had donated many of her numerous properties to the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma in Qum, as well as paid for the building of the ‘dome of the Jannatsara’ tomb for Shah Isma‘il at Ardabil.54 In short, at the time of Shah Isma‘il’s death in 1524 Tajlu Khanum was the most visible and wealthy patron of architecture in Iran. The tomb of Shah Isma‘il, in contrast to the Haramkhāna and the Gunbad-i Shahzādehā, is a small square enclosure (2.4 × 2.6 meters approximately) the space of which is almost entirely taken up by a large wooden sarcophagus.55 The walls and ceiling of the tomb chamber are ornately decorated and the lower zone covered in dark blue tiles while the upper one is covered in painted and gilded stucco. On one of the walls is a relief of a large hand (panja, representing Muhammad, ‘Ali and Fatima, and their sons, Hasan and Husayn) which was installed recently as its original situation had been the courtyard of the shrine.56 The epigraphy eulogizes Imam ‘Ali, casting him – and by extension Shah Isma‘il – as the ‘victor of the miracles, the purest of the strangers, the parting of the allusions and the bright flame [over] the horizons.’57 A number of Safavid relatives were already buried in the proximity of the tomb of Shaykh Safi – in the familial burial chamber, the Haramkhāna.58 Other Ardabili and Qizilbash elite were buried just outside the holy space in the Shahīdgah cemetery.59 It would not have sufficed to simply inter Shah Isma‘il’s body in the family crypt: the Shah was deserving of a space close to, but distinct from, that of the Shaykh. However, it would also not have been prudent for his burial chamber to compete with that of his illustrious ancestor, hence the modest size of the enclosure.60 Although richly embellished and prominently placed, the tomb of Shah Isma‘il does not overshadow, literally or metaphorically, that of his ancestor.

72

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

The dome of Shah Isma‘il’s tomb juts out from between the domes of Shaykh Safi’s tomb and the Haramkhāna (plate 8). The dome rests on a tall circular drum, both of which are tiled and visible from the courtyard of the shrine and the graveyard.61 There is a wide band of writing at the base of the cylindrical drum, most of which is now destroyed. The fragments which remain show a blue naqshī script on a white background, which gives the names and titles of the twelve Imams, such as Ja‘far al-Sadiq and Musa al-Kazim. The drum has dark blue lajverdi diamond patterns in which is written the name of ‘Ali in turquoise blue Kufic script. Devotion to Imam ‘Ali and the family of the Prophet are thus reiterated in the epigraphy on the exterior of the mausoleum. The dome is topped by a metal finial which, according to Martin Weaver’s survey report of 1971, is made up of three swords’ hilts forming a cage.62 The tomb of Shah Isma‘il was the first Safavid imperial mausoleum, but not the only one, at the shrine of Shaykh Safi.63 On the other side of the tomb tower, near the courtyard, is the tomb of a woman identified in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk as Shah Tahmasb’s mother (figure 3).64 Early twentiethcentury photographs show that there was a small domed chamber in front of the joint between the tomb tower and Dār al-ḥuffāz; however the structure has now been removed to reveal a marble cenotaph.65 It is important to note that the tomb is placed in the mirror location to that of Shah Isma‘il, in the nearest possible location to the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi. This prominent site would only have been reserved for a highly ranked member of the Safavid imperial family, most likely the consort of the Shah. Were the tombs of Shah Isma‘il and his wife markers of a newly formulated dynastic presence, or were they simply continuation of the tradition of burying Safavid family members within the shrine precinct? The original meaning of these sites may never be known, but their role as harbingers of the profound changes that would transform the Sufi shrine into an imperial edifice is without question. The tomb of Shah Isma‘il was a prominent signifier of Safavid identity which relied heavily on its Sufi roots while aligning itself with Shi‛i modes of authority. The mythic history of the shrine was reiterated through diverse texts, including the Safwat al-ṣafā biography, court chronicles, and endowment deeds. Throughout, the architecture of the shrine was utilized to physically localize events and legends related to Safavid history. The tomb of Shaykh Safi was the most highly venerated site within the shrine complex, followed by the Dār al-ḥuffāz and other buildings associated directly with Sufi praxis, thereby monumentalizing the architectural history of the site. Within this framework, any new

Myth and Charity

73

Figure 3  Tomb of ‘Shah Tahmasb’s mother.’

insertion would have powerful consequence and symbolic meaning. In the years following the establishment of the Safavid political rule over Iran, court chroniclers overlaid the mythic past with the imperial present through complex representations of ideology and the cult of Shaykh Safi. Similarly, into the architecture of the historic shrine was inserted the tomb of the founder of the new Safavid political order. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk brought to light the significance of waqf in the political, economic and architectural history of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. The endowments reiterated the singularity of Ardabil and brought it on par with other Iranian cities such as Qum and Mashhad. For example, Ardabil was throughout referred to as the Abode of Guidance, just as Qum was known as the ‘Abode of the Believers’ (Dār al-mominīn). The city and shrine were bound together such that numerous shops, inns and bathhouses in the Ardabil bazaar belonged to the estate of the shrine. Their income, along with that from farms and villages as far away as Gilan, went toward the employment of the shrine’s administrators and the upkeep of its physical infrastructure. Pious endowments were made toward the soup kitchens that

74

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

fed the multitude of pilgrims that flocked to the popular shrine, and also in the form of ‘moveable and immoveable’ commodities, like objects and buildings, respectively. The rulers of Azerbaijan generously patronized the shrine and the Ṣarīḥ al-milk records furthered the imperial connections forged by the Safaviyya shaykhs by representing them in the language of benevolence and regality. Thus the centrality of Ardabil, of charity, and of imperial patronage, came to define Safavid attitudes toward their ancestral shrine. The effects would be most dramatically evinced in the buildings constructed by Shah Isma‘il’s heirs to honor these associations.

3 CONSOLIDATING THE SAFAVID PAST SHAH TAHMASB AND THE ARCHITECTURAL EXPANSION OF THE SHRINE

The elders and the Sufis of the different factions and tribes gathered at the paradisal majlis of the great Shah, which began with recitation and remembrance (zikr va ‘zākirī), which is the norm and custom among the Safaviyya Sufis.1 Architecture and Culture during the Reign of Shah Tahmasb

The shrine of Shaykh Safi played a central role in the history of early modern Iran and in the development of Safavid architecture.2 During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, there had not been a cohesive building program but rather the shrine, like others of its type, grew organically and in a piecemeal fashion. In the sixteenth century, however, the shrine was subject to a series of transformations associated with the changing nature of Safavid Sufism, and a political culture that emphasized the authority of the Shah. The two-hundred-year-old aggregation of disparate buildings was now rectified and the shrine was renovated in accordance with an emerging imperial aesthetic which called for a coherent and monumental spatial arrangement. The Safavid rulers, while retaining their role as head of the Safaviyya order, chose to represent their authority through recognizable forms of Iranian and Islamic kingship, such as the patronage of shrines and palaces. The shrine of Shaykh Safi had been the site of regal attention from the earliest days of the Safaviyya order, as evinced in the pious endowments. For Shah Tahmasb the shrine was also the locus of his political, economic and spiritual power. The changes envisioned by him were couched in

76

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

rhetoric both old and new. On the one hand, the Shah took advantage of his roles as pīr and heir to the Safaviyya lineage, and on the other, he promulgated the new vision of a Shi‛i polity, as interpreted by clerics such as al-Karaki. Although at times these ideologies appeared to be in conflict with one another, together they served the goal of changing the more difficult and heterodox beliefs of the Qizilbash and merging them with a more normative form of religious praxis. The shrine of Shaykh Safi reflected these changes through a new architectural vocabulary that paid great attention to formalism and imperial pageantry. In 1524 Shah Isma‘il died and was succeeded by his ten-year-old son, Tahmasb. Although he was the head of the Safaviyya order, Shah Tahmasb did not visit the ancestral shrine for the first nine years of his rule as he was occupied with defending the unstable borders of Iran on both western and eastern frontiers, against the Ottomans and Uzbeks, respectively. The Shah was the khalīfa (head) of the shrine of Shaykh Safi and, according to Safavid tradition, also its mutawallī (administrator). However, his was a symbolic appointment and the administrative function of this office was fulfilled by a deputy (na‛ib), who was usually a member of the extended Safavid family.3 Shah Tahmasb finally visited the shrine in 1533 and a year later Ibrahim Pasha, the Ottoman grand vizier, occupied Tabriz. According to his memoir, Shah Tahmasb visited Ardabil in answer to a prophetic dream that he had had in Mashhad in which ‘Ali commanded him to make a pilgrimage to the shrine of Shaykh Safi, and after that victory would be his. The Shah, avoiding Tabriz, visited the tomb of his father Isma‘il and the tomb of Shaykh Safi, where he gifted twelve lanterns to the shrine. He then made a pilgrimage to the ‘Tomb of the Shaykhs,’ said his prayers and slept at the former house of Sultan Hayder.4 Shah Tahmasb wrote of another dream in which Shaykh Safi appeared and foretold his impending victory over the Ottoman forces in Tabriz. The shrine was interpreted in the memoir as a talisman where the success of the Shah depended not only on his armies, but on the good wishes of his ancestors. The symbiosis of Shi‘ism and Sufism was brought to the fore during the reign of Shah Tahmasb through the ‘reconstruction’ of history as well as architecture.5 As mentioned previously, in 1533 Shah Tahmasb had ordered that the Safwat al-ṣafā be edited such that the Safavid progeny of Shaykh Safi be portrayed as direct descendants of the Prophet Muhammad through the seventh Shi‘i Imam, Musa Kazim. The move provided the ideological foundation for the Safavid imperium, and henceforth all sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Safavid chroniclers referred to the genealogy fabricated here.6 The timing was not arbitrary; in 1533–34 Shah

Consolidating the Safavid Past

77

Tahmasb issued the first of a series of royal orders (farmān) banning what were considered to be un-Islamic practices, such as gambling and prostitution, under the leadership of the cleric, al-Karaki (d. 1534).7 In addition, the Ottomans had begun a series of campaigns into Safavid territory, with particular ambitions towards capturing Tabriz, which they occupied in 1534 and 1548.8 The revised Ṣafwat al-ṣafa highlights the dependence of the Safavid monarchy on both Sufi and Shi‛i modes of legitimacy. A deep reverence for the ahl al-bayt allowed for Shi‘ism to be established as the religious ideology, and the sayyid designation of the Shahs the appropriate status for the divinely-inspired rulers. These modes of authority were displayed most cogently in the ancestral shrine in Ardabil. Shah Tahmasb, like his father, was a charismatic leader with an aura of divinely-sanctioned authority. During his lifetime, Shah Isma’il’s devout Qizilbash had been known for going into battle with their chests bared, believing in the divine grace of their leader and willing to attain martyrdom on his behalf. Shah Tahmasb was also regarded with such respect that the water from his toilette was seen as being imbued by beneficial effect, or tabarruk. The Venetian visitor to Tahmasb’s court, Michel Membre, wrote of followers coming from Anatolia to request a piece of Shah Tahmasb’s turban or handkerchief, which would then be circulated in the countryside as a source of income for the fortunate supplicant. But the greatest sign of honor and the most valuable gift offered by the Shah was permission to be buried at the shrine of Shaykh Safi.9 Through association with Shaykh Safi and now his royal progeny, the shrine and Ardabil were endowed with an aura of sanctity and regality that extended far beyond its initial regional identity. In his memoir Shah Tahmasb wrote that kingship was a divine responsibility and an honorable and infinite gift of God.10 Imperial and religious authority was unabashedly conflated in Safavid ideology such that at times the two were inseparable in the textual and architectural language of the court. The Shah was revered as a holy man, and the Imams were given royal attributes: for example, ‘Ali b. Abi Talib was called the Shāh-i Najaf in reference to his burial in that Iraqi city.11 The same crossing over of boundaries between royalty and divinity occurred in the spaces inhabited by the Shah. An example is given in the painting, ‘The first sermon of Hasan ibn ‘Ali in Madina,’ from the manuscript, Ahsan al-akhbār fi ma‘rafat aima’ al-athār of 1526, where Shah Tahmasb is situated on the pulpit of Imam Hasan (figure 1).12 The painting shows the Imam standing on a tall pulpit near the qibla iwān of a mosque, surrounded by his followers who are listening in rapt attention to his sermon. His figure is framed by

Figure 1 ‘The first sermon of Hasan ibn ‘Ali in Madina,’ Ahsan al-akhbār fī ma‛rafāt aima’ al-athār, c. 1526, copied by Muhammad al-Husayni al-Varamini. Russian National Library, St Petersburg (folio 373v, Dorn 312).

Consolidating the Safavid Past

79

the iwān which, although meant to be in Mecca, is covered with the floral and geometric motifs of Safavid architectural decoration. An inscription band weaves around the top of the structure and right above the figure of the Imam the name of Shah Tahmasb is highlighted in gold script. Imam Husayn and Shah Tahmasb appear to be conflated, their personas rendered as complementary aspects of both religious and secular authority. The subject of the text is the attributes of Shah Tahmasb who is named the ‘Shadow of God over the two Terrains.’13 Thus the character of the Shah is represented as a role model of dutiful subservience and, simultaneously, one endowed with spiritual charisma. The Shah’s attributes were manifested in all spheres of royal ceremonial. In the Safavid chronicles Shah Tahmasb was noted for his generosity to ‘shrines in Mashhad, in Qum, the Imamzada Abdul Azim in Rayy, and the Holy Safavid shrine’ as well as donating ‘whatever was needed for food and clothing… for the dinner and table, curtains, floorings, such as silken carpets, woolen carpets of fine craftsmanship, and golden candlesticks.’14 In Mashhad, Shah Tahmasb built the fortifications of the city in 1526, at the same time as he had built the minaret at the northern entrance of the shrine of Imam Reza and established a waqf in the name of the Fourteen Innocent Ones, namely the Prophet, Muhammad, his daughter, Fatima, and the twelve Imams.15 In Qum, Shah Tahmasb instituted a waqf at the shrine of Fatima al-Mas‘uma which included money for six ḥuffāz to recite the Qu‘ran in the name of his sister, Mahin Banu.16 In addition to the Shi‛i edifices, Tahmasb also made generous donations to the holy sites in Mecca and Madina, no doubt in order to display a more general Muslim piety.17 It was after the Shah’s second visit to Ardabil, in 1536, that the most intense building activity at the shrine was begun. In the years 1537–41 Shah Tahmasb ordered the demolition of a famous charitable institution in the vicinity of the shrine along with adjacent residences belonging to Safavid clansmen. The goal was to construct monuments that would augment both the shrine complex and the prestige of the Safavid dynasty. During this period entirely new structures were erected, older ones renovated, and the courtyard of the shrine reconfigured to cohere with a new vision of Safavid architecture (figure 2). The changes thus undertaken at the shrine of Shaykh Safi would alter not only the spatial, but conceptual, boundaries of the shrine – away from a Sufism-centered institution focused on the cult of Shaykh Safi and towards a dynastic edifice centered on the person of the Shah. The altered focus did not, however, undermine the customary practices of the Safavid order in which the Shah continued to play a central role.

Figure 2  Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1620. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

81

The preservation of older buildings was a selective process that was based on Safavid interpretations of the life of Shaykh Safi. The redacted Safwat al-ṣafā provided the history of the shrine and the identities of significant monuments which would be repeated by sixteenth-century chroniclers. The mystical experiences of Shaykh Safi were a popular theme in the biography. His sama‛ and ecstasy could easily take place in a faraway city, the Ardabil bazaar, the courtyard of the shrine, or even in a mosque.18 But most often the site for the sama‛ was the maydan-i sama‘, a term used by Ibn Bazzaz to describe a place where the Shaykh and a number of his senior deputies, or khalīfās would gather.19 Groups of chanting Sufis (qawwāl) would assemble and sing ghazals (poetry) which would animate them to ecstasy.20 These musicians were accompanied by a group of drummers employed by the shrine, referred to as the ṭabbalān-i zāwīya. Sufis would also gather in the public Khalvatsarā for the recitation of the Qur’an, which was performed by the hāfizān (recitors). The Khalvatsarā was viewed by Safavid historians, not surprisingly, as an important memorial to the life of Shaykh Safi and a vital component in the history of the Safaviyya order. Not all sites mentioned in the fourteenth-century Safwat al-ṣafā were still extant in the sixteenth century; names were changed, the structures enlarged or incorporated into the changing architectural ensemble. Thus those that did survive, such as the Dār al-ḥuffāz and the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, were preserved both as historical artifacts and functional structures. Among the first orders given by Shah Tahmasb was the renovation of the Khalvatsarā, referred to in the sixteenth century as the Chillākhāna.21 The ‘new Chillākhāna’ as it was called, was a domed building with a square plan and three entrances and still stands today, albeit in ruins (figure 3).22 ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi wrote that it ‘was the one that the lord […] Shaykh Sadr al-din Musa had built. During the reign of Shah Tahmasb, its lofty dome was tiled such that it was second only to the cupola of the Sky. The site of his ascension is marked.23 And that dome is surrounded by forty chambers above and below. On one side is attached the holy courtyard, aforementioned, and on one side it is attached to the forecourt (‘arsa) of the shrine, which is the place of passage and religious processions of the people. It is attached on one side to the street which separates it from the houses of […] Sayyid Shaykhshah b. Khwaja Hasan Beg Safavi and on one side to the passage opposite the “old retreat” and its dependencies.’24 The forty chambers on the ground floor may have been for private meditation or served as lodging for the Sufis. Those above were offices for the collectors of nazr (pious vows) and donations made by pilgrims to the shrine.

82

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Figure 3  Chillākhāna. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, 14th–16th centuries.

The Chillākhāna gives a good idea of what Shaykh Safi’s Khalvatsarā may have been like and also how Sufi practices had evolved during the sixteenth century. Renovations at the shrine, such as this one, must be then considered through the lens of imperial ambitions and religious changes taking place in the early years of the sixteenth century. The European traveler, Adam Olearius, was in Iran in 1637 and described the Sufi dhikr that he witnessed at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, writing: [I saw] a very fair and spacious vault, arched above, paved without, with green and blue stones, and within hung with tapestry. In the midst of this vault, there were two fair brass candlesticks with lights in them. All along the walls sat several priests, clothed in white, who sung as loud as ever they were able, expressing a great humility, and an extraordinary devotion, by a continual moving from one side to the other; which motion was performed by them all at the same time, and with the same shaking, and that with so much exactness, that a man would have thought they had been all fastened with the same cord, and that they had been all drawn at the same time. This place is called the Chillākhāna, in regard that Shaykh Safi retired thither every year, to fast, eating only, for forty days together, but one almond a day…25

Consolidating the Safavid Past

83

Religion and Ideology: Dār al-ḥadīth and Jannatsarā

New structures were built during Shah Tahmasb’s reign that profoundly changed the shrine’s architecture and its rituals of devotion. The first was a building known in the sixteenth century as the Dār al-ḥadīth (Hall for Hadith) and was adorned with the honorific titles of Shah Isma‘il (figure 4). The second was the Jannatsarā (Paradisal Palace), embellished with the titles of Shah Tahmasb. The buildings flanked the old Dār al-ḥuffāz and complemented each other on both a formal and semantic level. Together, they added new architectural and functional dimensions to the shrine complex. They were complementary to the Chillākhāna where Sufi rituals such as meditation would take place, and the Dār al-ḥuffāz where recitors gathered to read the Qur’an day and night at the threshold to the tomb of the founder.26 At the Dār al-ḥadīth, by contrast, scholars could study and transcribe ḥadīth and laws for the purpose of disseminating the new religious doctrine.27 At the Jannatsarā Sufis and Qizilbash could gather to enact rituals of piety and devotion to the Shah. At his ascension Shah Isma‘il had ordered that the Friday sermon be in the name of the twelve Imams and as a sign of his religious persuasion and intent to convert Iran to Shi‛ism and to move away from the ghulāt-inspired movement which had brought him to power. Often translated as ‘extremism,’ in the early Safavid period ghulāt came to represent the particular blend of millennialism and charisma mobilized by Shah Isma‘il at his advent.28 Modern historians have also pointed to Shah Isma‘il’s attempt after his ascension to achieve this goal by attracting Shi‘i scholars to his court. The Dār al-hadīth could be viewed as the manifestation of Shah Isma‘il’s policies of bringing ‘ulema from Arab lands to propagate the Shi‘i doctrine. This tradition continued during the reign of Shah Tahmasb, as evinced by the biography of a leading Safavid jurist, Mir Sayyid Husayn Mujtahid Jabal ‘Amili, who held the office of muddaris and shaykh al-Islām in Ardabil where he set about ‘establishing the shari‘a.’29 According to Hossein Modarressi Tabataba’i, ‘Qur’an, tradition (sunna), the consensus of the Shi‘i jurists (ijmā‘) and reason (‘aql) form the sources of Shi‘i law.’30 Prophetic ḥadīth were also given a great deal of importance by clerics and theologians in formulating religious edicts. The novel situation of a Shi‘i dynasty in Iran, after centuries of Sunni rulership, required modifications in the law in order to accommodate legitimate rule, bringing up issues such as land taxation, the limits of the jurist (faqīh), and the validity of Friday prayer in the absence of the Imam.31 The Dār al-ḥadīth served as a representative of the madrasa institution

Figure 4  Dār al-ḥadīth. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

85

at the shrine from where the new laws were disseminated.32 Unlike the traditional four-iwān type of madrasa, here the whole is represented by a fragment – one single iwān symbolizing the evolving religious policies of Safavid Iran. The modest size of the Dār al-ḥadīth suggests that the building could not accommodate more than fifteen people and may have had a primarily symbolic role.33 The western corner of the Dār al-ḥadīth is attached to the wall of the Chillākhāna while the other sides remain detached.34 The façade has a central iwān portal, with two secondary iwāns on either side. The colorful tile-work begins above the stone dado above which is a smaller, single band of sandstone. The entire arch is enclosed by a delicate, wooden, lattice screen with three doors. The two side iwāns are smaller than the main portal and lead, through a wooden door, into rooms that open onto the Chillākhāna and courtyard.35 The arch of each iwān culminates in a muqarnas semi-dome and a sunburst pattern.36 In ‘Abdi beg Shirazi’s description the iwān of the Dār al-ḥadīth is compared to a mihrab (it is, in fact, in the direction to Mecca) that ‘One can call it the Qibla of the ages, prostration before which, may benefit the fortunate.’37 The epigraphy on the main iwān differs from ‘Abdi Beg’s description and might have been changed from the original, for ideological reasons or because it was unrecognizably damaged.38 Only fragments of the original epigraphy remain, but they provide evidence that changes in Safavid religious affiliation, from Sunni to Shi‛i Islam, were not at the expense of traditional Sufi ways of the order. One of the smaller iwāns is of particular interest as it is covered with epigraphic diamonds with mirrored ‘ya Allah, ya Ṣafi’. Above the door is an ornate panel the main text of which reads, ‘With knowledge revive the hearts of the wise ones and cleanse the bosoms of the worshippers’ (plate 9). The phrase refers to the Sufi quest for mā‘rifat, or mystical knowledge, that is reinforced by the exhortation to cleanse the hearts of the believers in order to receive knowledge through instruction and prayer. The secondary, smaller text on the panel reads, ‘The Prophet said: The best prayers [are] the perfect supplication,’ in reference to the didactic role of supplication at the shrine and, more interestingly, associating the ḥadīth with the function of the building on which it is inscribed. Synchronous to the building of the Dār al-ḥadīth was the construction of a complementary structure, referred to by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi as the Jannatsarā (plate 10). The Jannatsarā is among the very few precisely dated buildings of the shrine complex: the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register records that in 1537 houses and commercial property surrounding the shrine were

86

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

bought up and demolished for the purpose of a new domed edifice called the Jannatsarā. Four years later, more land was bought for the gardens and orchards of this building. The density of construction around the shrine required that the mutawallī purchase extant buildings in order to construct the Jannatsarā building, its dependencies, and its garden. The most important demolition was that of the ‘Imārat Shihābīyya which had been part of the shrine ensemble since the fourteenth century, most probably endowed by Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud, who had established a generous waqf for charitable activities at the shrine. In addition, a number of houses and inns belonging to the extended Safavi family were bought and demolished.39 The Jannatsarā is situated axially opposite the Dār al-ḥadīth, on the northeastern side of the courtyard (see Chapter 4, figure 5). Like the Dār al-ḥadīth, it has a major iwān portal and two smaller iwāns on either side, and is decorated with a profusion of epigraphy and floral decoration. The interior consists of an octagonal, domed room, with blind arches on alternate walls (figure 5). There are window and door openings on four sides (into the main court, the extended Shahīdgāh and kitchens, and two other sides that are now built up). The arch opposite the entrance (northeastern one) is situated on axis with the entrance and recessed like a large mihrab. It is currently enclosed behind a wooden grill with a door in its center (figure 6).40 On the southern side of the large open space is a small polygonal room with a beautiful brick dome and small stairs that lead to the roof. The roof had collapsed and was repaired in the nineteenth century and again in the twentieth in a manner that is incongruous with sixteenthcentury architecture.41 The Jannatsarā’s construction marked Shah Tahmasb’s advent on the stage of Safavid politics. The initial motivation for building it may be found by turning to Shah Tahmasb’s memoir, the Tazkira-i Shāh Tahmāsb (c. 1562). Writing about the year ah 938 (1531) he recorded a dream in which ‘Ali b. Abi Talib appeared and told Tahmasb that in order to be victorious against the Uzbeks he must perform three tasks, one of which was that ‘after the victory in Samarqand, you or your children, should erect a lofty dome (gunbad) for me, like that of the eighth Imam, ‘Ali al-Reza [in Mashhad].’42 Two years later Shah Tahmasb entered Herat victorious and the province of Khorasan was once again annexed to the Safavid domains.43 The construction of the Jannatsarā was also undertaken after Tahmasb’s 1536 victories over the Ottomans and may be viewed as commemorating the Shah’s successes, not unlike sultanic mosques in Istanbul which were built by the incumbent ruler to commemorate his victories.44

Figure 5  Jannatsarā, exterior view from rear.

88

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Figure 6  Jannatsarā, sketch of interior mihrab.

The titles of Shah Tahmasb were written on his iwān – declaring him the ‘Sultan ibn Sultan ibn Sultan; the turquoise throne, the benevolent capital; the center of peace and religion, Shah Tahmasb; the site of justice and benevolence, Shah Tahmasb.’45 Its name, ‘Paradisal Palace’, points to the imperial associations of the structure as borne out by its monumentality and, most likely, its function. The large assembly hall was built directly adjacent to the Dār al-ḥuffāz and would have served as part of the ceremonials of the shrine. The palatial association was not a trivial one and demonstrates clearly the complexity of the changes which Shah Tahmasb’s architectural commissions brought about.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

89

The allegiance of the Ardabil Sufis was important to Shah Tahmasb and was negotiated with care even as the religious landscape of Iran was moving toward Shi‛ism. This relationship was expressed through a term called sūfīgarī, namely, a conduct which showed allegiance to the Safavid family and their cause. The term was also used by Shah Tahmasb in his memoir when writing about the loyalty of his Qizilbash followers.46 The roles of the Shah as leader and pīr of the Qizilbash required a ceremonial space where the rites of initiation into the Safaviyya order would be enacted. The large cadre of followers and devotees required a shift from the more traditional gathering places at the shrine, such as the Chillākhāna. Another site could have previously been the octagonal, but smaller and less imposing, Gunbad-i shāhzādehā located off of the Dār al-ḥuffāz (see plan). After Shah Isma’il’s advent, the space was used as a burial site and seventy-five years later it would be transformed into the famed Chīnīkhāna. Thus a new structure had to be constructed at the shrine to accommodate both the greater number of people, but also the changing nature of Safavid Sufism itself. It is in this capacity that the Jannatsarā at the shrine of Shaykh Safi may be viewed, that is, as an imperial edifice wherein the ‘Shāhi’ and Sufi aspects of Safavid politics were merged. The epigraphic verses on the Jannatsarā testify to the primary function of dhikr (recitation) which was a fundamental Safavid ritual.47 Ibn Bazzaz had written in the Safwat al-ṣafā that Shaykh Sadr al-din would come to the tomb of Shaykh Safi every evening and read passages from the Qur’an at its threshold. After that he would gather a group of Sufis in a ‘circle of dhikr’ (halqa-i dhikr) for nightly devotions. Sufi traditions must have flourished throughout the sixteenth century as well, as evinced in illustrated manuscripts of the early Safavid period. A British Museum copy of the sixteenth-century hagiography, Majālis al-‘ushhāq (‘Assembly of Lovers’) of Kamal al-din Gazurgahi (c. 1560) is one such illustrated manuscript.48 This manuscript was painted during the reign of Shah Tahmasb and shows the great respect bestowed on Sufi masters and their undisputed place in Safavid religious life.49 Some paintings show the dervishes participating in dance rituals, either at the bazaar or in some polygonal building.50 One such illustration, titled ‘Muhammad Tabakhani dancing with dervishes,’ shows a group of three Sufis dancing inside a faceted (six- or eight-sided) room (figure 7). According to the text, the sama‛ took place in the shrine of Abdullah Ansari in Gazurgah. Interestingly, Shah Tahmasb had been involved in the Namakdan’s construction, a fact evinced by a surviving tiled inscription of 1562–3, which reads: ‘In order to perform pilgrimage (tawāf-i ziyārat); from Shah Tahmasb,

90

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the victorious, came the order for its repair.’51 The repair ordered by the Shah highlights his concern for the preservation of the Timurid shrine in Gazurgah and others like it. But perhaps the most telling visual document of sixteenth-century religious culture is an illustrated manuscript about the life of the Safavid founder, Shaykh Safi (Tazkira-yi Shaykh Safi) which was compiled in 1582, some years after the death of Shah Tahmasb. The paintings illustrate numerous events from Shaykh Safi’s life and demonstrate the significance of Sufism within the broader context of Safavid culture. One of the illustrations shows Shaykh Safi dancing in a large communal setting; the circular arrangement of the figures is reminiscent of the form of the Jannatsarā at the shrine (see Chapter One, Figure 3). Although there is little chance of a literal relationship between the painting made in Shiraz, and the faraway shrine in Ardabil, the illustration does suggest the manner in which Safavid patrons and artists viewed the life of Shaykh Safi and the enactment of Sufi rituals. Namely, Safaviyya rituals were for the most part communal, yet centered on the person of the Shaykh – a trope that was easily transferred toward the persona of the Safavid Shah as the focus of both imperial and religious attention. As with the Safwat al-ṣafā upon which it was based, the Tazkira-yi Shaykh Safi was viewed as a repository of Safavid history, un-problematically couched within the rhetoric of Shi‛ism.52

Figure 7  ‘Muhammad Tabakhani dancing with dervishes,’ Majālis al-ushhāq, Kamal al-din Gazurgahi, 1560. British Library (folio 152a, OR 11837).

Consolidating the Safavid Past

91

The Jannatsarā was the largest assembly hall in the shrine complex and functioned well for both Sufi gatherings and courtly ceremonials. It may be conjectured that in the absence of the Shah, the khalīfat al-khulāfā or head mutawallī would meet the Sufis in the Jannatsarā, where performances of dhikr would take place and later food from the neighboring kitchens would be served.53 The initiation ceremony called chūb-i tarīq could also have taken place here. Michel Membre describes the gathering thus: The first thing that they do when they gather, they all sit in rows in a room, from one end to the other, seated on fine carpets, and they begin to praise God and then Shah Tahmasb. The khalīfa begins first; so all are singing ‘Lā ilāh illā Allāh,’ and they go on with that phrase alone for a whole hour; then they begin to sing certain songs in praise of the Shah, composed by Shah Isma’il and the said Tahmasb, called …, that is, khaṭā’ī;54 and after that is done, there sits one with a tambour, and he begins to call very loudly the names of all those that are there, one by one; then each of one whose name he calls says ‘Shāh bāsh,’ that is, ‘the Shah’s head,’ and all of them give to one who calls the name, money, depending on how much courtesy each one wishes to show. And after that is done, the khalīfa has a substantial wooden stick, and begins from the first to the last; one by one they all come for the love of the Shah to the middle of the room and stretch themselves on the ground; and the said khalīfa with the stick gives them a most mighty blow on the behind; and then the khalīfa kisses the head and feet of the one he has given the blow; then he himself gets up and kisses the stick; and thus they all do, one by one.55 The Jannatsarā would have been a suitable place for Shah Tahmasb to give audience to his devotees, be they dervishes or state officials. As Membre noted, pilgrims would arrive in Ardabil to pay homage to their revered leader, bringing gifts in the form of sacrificial animals and money. The loyal followers would be given the tāj, the twelve-sided headgear characteristic of the Qizilbash, and incorporated into the Safavid army or court.56 A large niche in the northeast side of the Jannatsarā was called the sanctified maqsūra’ in ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi’s Ṣarīḥ al-milk poem, and may indeed have been the royal dais from which Shah Tahmasb presided over the rituals of initiation and allegiance.57 A magnificent pair of carpets, dated 1539–40, is believed to have belonged to the shrine (figure 8). The ‘Ardabil carpets,’ as they are known, are the earliest dated carpets in the world and were woven in wool yarn

Figure 8 ‘Ardabil Carpet,’ 1539–40, Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

93

and silk thread.58 More remarkable is the intricate design, with a large floral medallion at its center. On either end of the carpet is a hanging lamp, one larger than the other. The effect of what appears at first to be a distortion, if viewed from the further end, is that of a perspectival correction. That is, the lamps appear to be identical in shape and size. This discovery points to the fact that there was a preferred viewing side for the carpet, a point that gains validation through one more detail: at the opposite end is a calligraphic cartouche, the writing of which is also directed toward the center and further end.59 The calligraphy consists of a couplet from the poet Hafiz which reads, ‘Except for thy threshold, there is no refuge for me in the world. Except for this door there is no resting-place for my head.’ This is followed by a signature and date, ‘The work of the slave of the portal, Maqsud Kashani, 946 (1539–40).’60 The pair of carpets, if they were indeed made for the shrine in Ardabil, could only have fitted in the Jannatsarā, if placed side by side, and would have been rolled out on special occasions when the Shah was giving audience or presiding over a ceremony. The Jannatsarā was a complement to the older Chillākhāna meditation halls which Shah Tahmasb had renovated in such a way that together they celebrated the traditional Sufi rites and the new cult of Safavid kingship. Architecture as Proclamation: The Courtyard of the Shrine

The Dār al-ḥadīth and Jannatsarā shifted the approach to the shrine and, in doing so, altered its architectural experience as well. Once the denselypacked residential quarters surrounding the Jannatsarā were cleared, the courtyard became the focal point of the sacred precincts. The symmetric layout of the mirroring iwān portals of the Dār al-hadīth and Jannatsarā gave to the courtyard a harmonious effect, making it appear that all the buildings surrounding it were built synchronously even if, in reality, they were not. The shrine was rectified, as it were, from an assemblage of disparate buildings into a more cohesive, two-iwān structure that was centered on the courtyard. The change reflected the architectural form of other great monuments of Safavid Iran, namely the shrines of Imam Reza in Mashhad and that of his sister, Fatima Ma‛suma, in Qum. The courtyard-centered plan was also typical of mosques such as the Great Friday Mosque in Isfahan which was renovated in 1531 by Shah Tahmasb and bears his titles on its qibla iwān (figure 9).61 The replication of the iwāncourtyard relationship at the shrine of Shaykh Safi provides important insights into architectural culture in the sixteenth century in which the

94

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Figure 9  Friday Mosque, Isfahan, 8th–17th centuries. Renovated in 1531 by Shah Tahmasb.

architectural history of Iran was viewed as an important source for selfdefinition by the Safavid dynasty as it evoked previous empires and imperial ideologies.62 The courtyard functioned as the fulcrum of the shrine complex through which key sites, such as the tomb of Shaykh Safi, could be accessed. All the built surfaces connecting them were covered with textual mosaics, demanding to be ‘read’ on multiple levels. For example, the inscriptions on the Jannatsarā and Dār al-ḥadīth, as described by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, served to augment the imperial authority of Shah Tahmasb and his father, Isma‘il, respectively. As the primary entrance into the sacred precincts the monumental portal of the Dār al-ḥuffāz was appropriately embellished with dedicatory inscriptions and Qur’anic verses that reinforced the funerary context of the mausolea within. Although the epigraphic program of both the Dār al-ḥuffāz and tomb tower of Shaykh Safi was likely commissioned during the Timurid period, it played the role of reiterating the duties of the Safavids toward their ancestors and the traditions of the order.63 The words from the Qur’an on both structures acted as talismans imbuing them with sanctity and an aura of holiness.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

95

According to the epigraphy on its entrance portal and cornices, the Dār al-ḥuffāz was a commemorative structure that was built for the recitation of the Qur’an, as mentioned in Chapter One.64 The façade inscriptions also emphasize familial duty by extolling the worshippers to ‘do right of their fathers and their help-meets and their seed,’ and supplicate God to ‘bless our recitations from your book toward the spirits of our fathers and our mothers.’65 Above the window grills the phrases were chosen carefully from the Qur’an and the ḥadīth, and are also forceful assertions to follow the right path, namely, that of Allah and His representative (figure 10). The order to follow the divine call may be seen as a standard assertion, but in the context of Safavid history, it can have another interpretation as well. The epigraphy on the lower bands reads, ‘O our people, respond to Allah’s summoner’ (46:31) and ‘Respond to this call (al-da‘wa)’. It is possible to read these phrases as commands directed toward the Sufis of Ardabil who were the disciples of the Shaykh and, in the sixteenth century, fervent supporters of the Shah. The epigraphy’s significance transformed over time, no doubt resonating in different ways to changing patrons and devotees at the shrine. Between the Dār al-ḥuffāz and the tomb tower is the grave of Shah Tahmasb’s mother. In contrast to Shah Isma‘il’s ornate tomb, which is entered through the Dār al-huffāz and is within the same precincts as Shaykh Safi’s cenotaph, that of his consort remains outside. The placement of the Sultana’s tomb within the courtyard gives it visibility and, in some ways, greater prominence. Seen in relationship to the other buildings commissioned by Shah Tahmasb, namely, the newly renovated Chillākhāna, the Dār al-hadīth, and the Jannatsarā, the tomb of his mother reinforces familial authority and Safavid history as monumentalized through architecture. The most overt proclamatory text in the courtyard was an imperial order that was installed on the wall of the Dār al-huffāz, most likely soon after Shah Tahmasb’s 1536 visit to the shrine (figure 11).66 Similar marble farmāns were placed in Safavid mosques, such as a series of those in the Masjid-i ‘Imad al-din in Kashan. There are four marble farmāns installed in this mosque, dated 1526, 1534, 1571 and 1573.67 The farmān in the courtyard of Shaykh Safi’s shrine functions on a number of semantic levels: as an imperial marker, a decree of contemporary laws, and as a document highlighting trends in Safavid political, economic and cultural history. The farmān begins with rules governing taxation and ‘unlawful impositions’ on the pilgrims and residents of Ardabil who frequented the shrine. For example, the sale of commodities such as rice and meat were

Figure 10  Dār al-ḥuffāz, detail of window panel.

Figure 11  Fārman installed on the Dār al-ḥuffāz, c. 1536/7.

98

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

to be regulated more stringently, reflecting a greater control of the Ardabil bazaar. The farmān ends with a separate concern: the imposition of the sharī‛a, as proclaimed by Shah Tahmasb, ‘requiring that in the aforementioned Abode of Guidance and territories, by rule, that in the royal provinces, taverns, drug houses, electuary-houses, beer houses, houses of pleasure, gaming houses, and the practice of singing and pigeon betting is forbidden. The taxes controllers should remove them from the registers of the office of taxes.’ The order also prohibited shaving the beard, playing the tambour, backgammon and prostitution.68 The farmān was closely related to Shah Tahmasb’s 1534 edict of ‘sincere repentance’ in which the young Shah swore off alcohol and ordered the same throughout his armies and the kingdom. An interesting aspect of both is their insistence on imposing a stricter practice of Islam that moved away from the extremism of Qizilbash devotion. The prohibitions, however, were very selective as there is little evidence of Shah Tahmasb suppressing Sufism in his realm.69 In fact, Shah Tahmasb showed a great deal of respect for Sufi traditions as indicated in a decree addressed to his courtiers in which he wrote, ‘When they are not preoccupied with the affairs of the people, let them read the books of the masters of Sufism and sincerity, like the books on ethics which are like spiritual medicine.’70 Even in the marble farmān in Ardabil concession is made to the older traditions of Sufi practice while seeming to curb its more ‘extreme’ expression, such that qawwālī is banned, but not dhikr; the playing of musical instruments is banned, but not sama’.71 The shrine of Shaykh Safi was the ideal site for the display of Shah Tahmasb’s religiosity and commitment to his role as ‘overseer of holy shrines and lofty edifices … the defender of the law and the religion.’ The farmān on the Dār al-ḥuffāz of Shaykh Safi’s shrine was an important document in the dissemination of Shah Tahmasb’s imperial image and was part of a larger scheme for the shrine complex.72 On the façade of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, near the tomb of his mother, was the panjā (hand print) of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and on the further side, above the farmān, the famous ḥadīth ‘The family of the Prophet is like the ark of Noah; to ride it is to gain deliverance, to oppose it is to drown in destruction.’73 The panjā and hadīth point to the importance of the ahl-al bayt to which the exalted Safavid family also claimed to belong. Once again, the shrine was cast in the light of Shi‛i religious affiliations and the dynastic ambitions of the Safavids, both publicly proclaimed and celebrated.

Consolidating the Safavid Past

99

The Dynastic Shrine

The shrine of Shaykh Safi was renovated and expanded in the sixteenth century in a manner that consolidated its architecture and the history of the Safavid dynasty. Shah Tahmasb’s vision for Iranian society was one that conformed, as he himself did, closely to a normative Shi‛i praxis. This change was not, however, enacted at the cost of popular forms of Sufism, as witnessed in the renovation of older structures like the Chillākhāna. Rather, it served as a reminder of the complexity inherent in a monumental institution such as the shrine and the dynamic and mutable identity of the Shahs. Without doubt, the shrine of Shaykh Safi was an important monument to Safavid political influence as this was, after all, their power base. It then comes as no surprise that Shah Tahmasb’s historians and poets extolled the beauty of the shrine and its centrality in the politics and culture of the sixteenth century. In 1544 the Mughal Padshah, Humayun, was exiled from India and sought refuge at the Safavid court (plate 11). Upon arrival from Lahore, Humayun was first escorted to Herat and then to the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad by the governors Ma‘sum Beg Safavi and Sevunduk Beg Afshar. From here he was brought to Tabriz and escorted by Shah Tahmasb himself to Ardabil. Sixteenth-century chronicles comment on this significant moment in Safavid and Mughal history, in which the Indian ruler was taken by the Shah to the ancestral shrine. According to them, the royal entourage made its way from Tabriz with drums and banners announcing its arrival. When they arrived in Ardabil they turned to the lofty grave of Shaykh Safi, kissed the ground and asked for help from the saint.74 They then performed pilgrimage at the shrine and remained in Ardabil a number of days. Shah Tahmasb’s bringing the Mughal ruler to the spiritual home of the Safavids was predicated on a great deal of pride in this holy edifice, not only in terms of power and prestige but also in terms of aesthetics. The new construction undertaken at the shrine was unique in its dynastic associations, yet could be situated solidly within a culture of imperial patronage. The Safavid shrine was a magnificent ensemble and one of the major architectural complexes commissioned by Shah Tahmasb, on par with his majestic palace in Qazvin. The shrine’s expansion also brought it into comparison with other prominent architectural sites of the time, such as the shrine complex of Imam Reza in Mashhad where Padshah Humayun was first taken. In the city of Tahmasb’s youth, Herat, were famous Timurid monuments, such as the madrasa and mosque complex of the queen Gawhar Shad which had been built in 1417–38.75 In Samarqand was the tomb of Timur himself which he constructed in 1403, a majestic

100

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

funerary ensemble that was renowned for its beauty. Interestingly, a later Mughal historian, Abul Fazl writing in the Akbarnama (c. 1602), noted that Humayun’s visit to Ardabil was not unlike that of Timur himself who was believed to have visited in the fourteenth century!76 Safavid historians would also have been knowledgeable of the magnificent tombs and mosques in the Indian ruler’s own homeland, in particular in cities such as Delhi, which was renowned for its history of monumental, imperial architecture.77 It is within the contexts of these structures that the shrine of Shaykh Safi and its significance to the new rulers of Iran must also be understood. Unlike older monuments that were associated with their predecessors, the shrine of Shaykh Safi was exclusively a Safavid shrine, responsive to the changes effected in the kingdom during Shah Tahmasb’s reign. His presence at the shrine was marked not only through visits and charity to the shrine’s waqfs, but through his entire reconfiguration of the spatial and functional dynamics of the buildings. This already vibrant ensemble was further animated by permanent reminders of the new monarch’s religious policies, such as the marble farmān he had installed in the courtyard. The changes brought about by the institutionalization of Shi‛ism were in order to amend a more doctrinal approach to the existent Sufi rituals. However, the coexistence of Shi‘ism and Sufism at the shrine of Shaykh Safi did not point to an antagonistic relationship, instead, in the early years of the dynasty both these trends were in the process of reinterpretation in accordance with the changing social and political environment of Iran. The three strains of influence – Sufism, sharī‛a-consciousness and royalty – were displayed at the buildings that Shah Tahmasb renovated and built: the Chillākhāna, the Dār al-hadīth, and the Jannatsarā, respectively. The renovation of the Chillākhāna highlights the respect given to the Sufi past and the Shah’s commitment to its perpetuity, that is, the emphasis on sharī‛a was balanced by the respect for and propagation of the older traditions of Safavid Sufism, such as meditation and dhikr. In fact, it appears that many of the traditional heterodox Sufi practices did still continue under Shah Tahmasb, albeit perhaps in an altered form, as the building of the Dār al-ḥadīth and Jannatsarā suggests. However, the entire scheme of the courtyard points most of all to the Shah’s kingly presence, such that the shrine of Shaykh Safi was now truly worthy of his monarchial attention. The architecture commissioned by the Shah was not merely a series of didactic spaces but also settings for pleasure and enjoyment. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was frequented by men, women, and children. The hospitality

Consolidating the Safavid Past

101

of this institution was such that it was visited by Sufis as well as foreigners. The prohibitions in the farmān attempted to curb the lucrative, if unlawful, commerce that surrounded the shrine, including prostitution and gambling. However, less deviant pastimes also took place within the shrine and its grounds. Safavid sources describe an orchard (bāghcha) built by Shah Tahmasb near the madrasa, in which roses were planted and a room built for the storage of flowers. This garden provided flowers for the charitable Sharbatkhāna (a room for the preparation of sweet refreshments) where the rose-water for pious rituals was made.78 The perfumed libations would then be brought out in beautiful porcelain vessels during special celebrations and rituals. Besides the utilitarian purpose of the garden was its aesthetic one: the shady allées of trees and the sweet-smelling flowers provided a pleasant and sensual space for repose and relaxation. The orchard, like the whole shrine complex, ‘became the promenade for the entire city’, a vibrant space connected to the Ardabil bazaar and an appropriate setting for the display of imperial splendor and authority.79

4 AESTHETICS AND IDEOLOGY OF BUILDING THE SARĪḤ AL-MILK OF ‘ABDI BEG SHIRAZI

Oh God, as long as this prosperous portal is adorned by Jupiter and Saturn, May he be fortunate, the King of the World, May his existence be safe from calamity.1 Iran in the sixteenth century was a showcase of impressive architectural masterpieces, from the magnificent Timurid mosques of Herat to the monumental tombs of the Ilkhanids in Tabriz and Sultaniyya. Architecture was the most powerful form of disseminating Shah Tahmasb’s imperial and religious authority, through the monumental buildings he commissioned and the ceremonials staged within them. The ideological dimension of the shrine of Shaykh Safi was augmented by its central role in the aesthetic culture of early modern Iran. Endowment deeds, historical chronicles and descriptive poetry all provide varied responses to the shrine. These texts describe in rich detail the economic and political significance of the shrine, as well as its role in defining the standards of Safavid imperial architecture. At the time of Emperor Humayun’s visit to Ardabil major changes had already been implemented at the shrine. The shrine was among the great public spaces in the empire, frequented by the Shah and his entourage as well as by devotees and pilgrims from near and far. It was re-envisioned by Shah Tahmasb as an imperial setting worthy of the ruler’s presence and generous attention. Yet the shrine was not the sole focus of the ruler’s patronage, for at the same time construction of a new palace complex was underway in the city of Qazvin. In Qazvin, where the new capital was established after Shah Tahmasb’s move from Tabriz in the 1550s, Shah Tahmasb required an appropriately

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

103

grand residence and gardens (plate 12).2 As the second large-scale commission ordered by him, the building of the palace was specifically related in important ways to the shrine of Shaykh Safi as a site for the enactment of Safavid ceremonial. Like the shrine, the palace played a role in the construction of the Shah’s royal image, one that partook of Iranian and Shi‛i symbols of authority. Both projects are also linked through the work of an eyewitness, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, who visited them and documented his observations through rich and evocative descriptions. The Jannāt-i ‘adn (Garden of Eden) is a collection of five poems in praise of Shah Tahmasb’s new palace; the Ṣarīḥ al-milk is a land register of the properties of the shrine of Shaykh Safi, which begins with poetry and prose describing the buildings comprising the precincts. Both were dedicated by ‘Abdi Beg to Shah Tahmasb, and serve as encomia to the patron and his architectural commissions. The poetry concerning Sa‛adatabad (‘Abode of Happiness’), as the imperial palace was called, and the shrine of Shaykh Safi share many commonalities in terms of structure and language, although the former is composed of more than 4,100 verses, while the latter of only forty one. Nonetheless, both poems guide the reader through real spaces and describe them in a language that makes use of literality and allegory. Both works are imbued with Shi‛i piety as well as an acute awareness of the sacral nature of Safavid kingship. ‘Abdi Beg’s poetry on the palace in Qazvin and on the shrine in Ardabil must first of all be seen as literature; yet the manner in which he deploys language and his engagement with the subjects provide us with crucial insights into the nature of architectural production during the early Safavid period. The aim of this chapter is to analyze the poetic description contained in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk in order to better understand the documentary, ideological and aesthetic dimensions of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Most importantly, the method of description utilized by ‘Abdi Beg and his responses to the buildings he lists are indicative of the manner in which architecture was perceived and, perhaps, how buildings were designed in early modern Iran. ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Wasf and Modes of Describing Architecture

‘Abdi Beg Shirazi (‘Novidi’) was born in 1515 and employed in the royal divān at the age of 16. He composed the magnum opus, Jannāt-i ‛adn in 1557–60 in celebration of the grand palaces and gardens built by Shah Tahmasb in the Ja‛farabad suburb of Qazvin.3 In 1565 he was transferred to Ardabil (he died here in 1580–1), where he completed his authoritative

104

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

chronicle of the reign of Shah Tahmasb, Takmilāt al-Akhbār.4 He was also commissioned at this time to compile a list of the endowment deeds and properties belonging to the shrine – known of course as the Ṣarīḥ al-milk.5 This collection, as mentioned in preceding chapters, comprises deeds from the time of Shaykh Safi himself until the reign of Shah Tahmasb.6 The resultant document is a remarkable work of list-making in which annotated abridgements of endowments are tabulated in thematic and chronological order. The register begins with a poetic description of the shrine, which is an important resource for gauging numerous aspects of this recondite complex. The poetry serves to name, literally, the buildings, as well as to give us insight into their significance for those who built and used them. Before looking in detail at the meanings embedded in the poems, it is necessary to place the Ṣarīḥ al-milk within the broader context of ‘Abdi Beg’s work. It is also necessary to briefly consider the genre of descriptive poetry, or wasf, and its implications for the arts in the early Safavid period. Wasf is the art of description, with its origins in the Arabic literary tradition.7 Luxury wares, paintings and buildings may be the subject of this type of poetry, which gives life to inanimate objects through a combination of precise and imaginative depiction. It is an important method of evaluation and appreciation and is sometimes executed in the context of historical chronicles or poetic anthologies. Wasf also provides the historian with an important tool for understanding the cultural contexts within which architecture was produced in the sixteenth century. Modern scholars have pointed to the ideological dimensions of this genre, since the ‘Abbasid period and earlier. The praises for the objects, almost always associated with royalty, were a displaced encomium to their owner, the king. However, panegyrics to the king often followed praises to Allah and His messenger, and if the patron was Shi‛i, to the Imamate. The different strategies used by poets for writing about structures and the paintings, ornaments or epigraphy that covered their surfaces, were part of a tradition in which the boundaries between objects and subjects was blurred, and meanings were veiled and revealed by the use of metaphor and allegory.8 The most common subject for the writers of wasf poetry was the imperial palace, which doubled as the abode of the king and also as a metaphor for the divine throne.9 As an embodiment of supreme authority the palace was imbued with the ruler’s attributes, from awe-inspiring power to sublime beauty. As Julie Meisami writes in the context of ‘Abbasid poetry, ‘The palace-complex, like other constructions, is the visible manifestation of the ruler’s magnificence; hence its emblematic status. Panegyrics composed

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

105

in celebration of caliphal buildings are no mere exhibition of the poet’s mastery of the art of description (though they are that as well), nor are they simply ‘official’ pieces written to order (even though they were); they testify to the cosmic dimensions of caliphal rule. But beneath their magnificence and their cosmic significations there lurks the ever-present threat of mortality and of decay.’10 Poets writing in Persian were similarly concerned with using their descriptive skills in portraying the wonders of the natural and man-made world, shifting the language between literality and abstraction – that is to say, between literal description and allusion – in order to convey the authority of the king and, ultimately, that of God. During the Timurid period poetry was considered the epitome of cultural production and was practiced by the court elite, including the rulers themselves.11 Safavid poets continued conventions laid down in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, in which prominent poets had drawn attention not only to the imperial palaces, but to other architectural monuments and even whole cities. An interesting parallel with ‘Abdi Beg’s oeuvre is that of the fourteenth-century poet, Ibn-i Yamin Faryumadi (d. 1368).12 In the poems, many dedicated to the vizier, ‘Ala al-din Muhammad, Ibn-i Yamin focuses on the palace as a metaphor for his patron’s greatness through paradisal associations which are very similar to those used a century and a half later by ‘Abdi Beg. He refers to the palace (sarāī) as a magnificent edifice, drawing attention to its sky-high portal (iwān) and ceiling (saqf). He writes about its verdant gardens, drawing comparisons with the eternal gardens (jannāt-i‘adn) of Paradise, a term used by ‘Abdi Beg for his compilation.13 Ibn-i Yamin, as one of the earliest writers of Persian poetry in praise of the Shi‛i imams, was familiar to Safavid authors of the sixteenth century, as evinced by the presence of his Diwan in the Ardabil shrine’s library.14 Ibn-i Yamin’s poetry includes praises of local monuments, such as a congregational mosque, a dār al-ḥadīth and a bathhouse.15 The poem, ‘Qasida on the description of the building of the congregational mosque of Sabzvar and praises to its builder, Taj al-din’, is an interesting piece in which the elements of the mosque are described metaphorically.16 The fragmentation of the building into parts was a common practice in Persian poetry, one that is repeated in ‘Abdi Beg’s poems as well. The arches, iwān portals, roofs, fountains and oil lamps are each treated separately, but with the goal of giving a holistic impression of the mosque as a site of splendor and beauty. Although many phrases describing the mosque are similar to those found in his descriptions of palatial architecture (for example, the comparison of the iwān with the celestial Saturn),

106

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Ibn-i Yamin also composes those that are specific to the structure, corresponding to its sacral nature and ritual functions (for example, the description of the maqsūra’s ceiling). Specificity and generality also characterize the poems of ‘Abdi Beg, as he negotiates the tradition of poetic description, with its standard tropes and references, with the task of celebrating the new imperial commissions. Whilst his description of the palace complex of Qazvin and the shrine of Shaykh Safi continue the trends seen in earlier writers of Persian poetry, his mastery is in the manner in which he locates his poetry firmly within the context of each project. In so doing ‘Abdi Beg gives life and meaning to the structures that now are long gone or no longer in use, devastated by the vagaries of time and loss of the rituals enacted within them. The Palace of Contentment

‘Abdi Beg Shirazi was an active participant in Shah Tahmasb’s court; as such his observations of the imperial milieu are representative of literary and architectural trends in Safavid culture. His work, ranging from poetic descriptions to historical chronicles, is dedicated to his patron, Shah Tahmasb. In ‘Abdi Beg’s poetry the imperial and sacral unite to produce meanings that are layered and complex.17 Although they have been used by modern scholars to find specific information about the physical layouts of buildings and gardens, they cannot be taken too literally.18 While important historically, their primary value is in the information they convey about architecture as metaphor and the aesthetic meanings of words, images, and space in the sixteenth-century imagination. The Jannāt-i ‘adn comprises over 4,100 verses modeled structurally on the khamsā (quintet) format of the Iranian poet, Nizami Ganjavi (d. 1209). Unlike Nizami’s quasi-mythical tales, the poems of ‘Abdi Beg are situated in the suburb of Ja‛farabad, which he refers to as the new capital (dār al-saltanāt Ja‛farabad). The Jannāt-i ‘adn collection begins with salutations to the Divine and the family of Muhammad. Following these invocations, the Shah and the Safavid dynasty are praised with fervor equal only to that displayed by ‘Abdi Beg for the Shi‛i creed.19 It is interesting to note that it is not just the description of the imperial palace that begins with pious invocations, but so too do ‘Abdi Beg’s Takmilāt al-Akhbar and the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. In fact, these prefaces are the primary uniting factor in ‘Abdi Beg’s writing, which gathers diverse genres – poetry, history, architecture – into a cohesive body of work, awash with Shi‛ite piety. In casting Sa‛adatabad as

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

107

the paradisal Eden, ‘Abdi Beg transforms the palace into a sacred space and the king’s authority into divine power. This notion is established in the prefaces to his other two works which place Shah Tahmasb in the company of earthly predecessors, from the Ghaznavids onwards, but also augment his authority by invoking the names of Muhammad, ‘Ali and their descendants. Thus it is no surprise that when writing about the sacred shrine of Shaykh Safi, the language honed by ‘Abdi Beg is reused. However, here the already sacred realm is re-imagined as an imperial edifice – one imbued with the aura and authority of Shah Tahmasb. The five poems each focus on a different section of the palace; however, there is a cohesive structure to them both stylistically and thematically. As Paul Losensky writes, ‘Each part focuses on one section of the imperial complex. More importantly, the work as a whole is organized according to two temporal patterns. In the first volume, the palace gardens are represented as an eternal paradise; the next four volumes then take us through the sequence of the seasons from spring to winter. In addition to this seasonal pattern, the middle three volumes focus on three distinct modes of temporality that introduce the eternal palace into cultural, natural, and historical time.’20 Although the palace is described in exaggerated and allegorical terms, it is clear that ‘Abdi Beg has visited the places that are the subject of his poems. The wall-paintings of the Sa‛adatabad palace are described in lively detail as is the diverse vegetation of the gardens that surround it. Similar attention to detail is witnessed when, at the end of the first section (Rawzat al-ṣifāt), he lists the gardens of Safavid princes and court notables.21 ‘Abdi Beg’s poetry may be considered ekphrastic because of the vividness that his words evoke, not only by recreating in imaginative detail the spaces he describes, but also by giving life to the very images painted on them. For example, he describes the western iwān portal in the opening section, the Rawzat al-ṣifāt: Next to this garden of heavenly make which comes like paradise, from divine effulgence, the sky-high aywān rises up, joined by the sun and moon in its orbit. Two aywāns placed one atop the other give people a sign of the two worlds. With the tilework on the façade, the colonnade has become the envy of the blue vault of heaven. On one, designs originating in Cathay [China];

108

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

on the other, the shapes of birds and beasts. With the roses and morning-glories on this, joyous nature gives systemic lessons on gilded illumination, and that other is an enchanting hunting ground, ornamented with wondrous horsemen on either side: A brave rider rushes toward a lion, pillaging life from the lion with his spear. Another, an archer in the hunt, has become a hunter of lovers like eyebrow and lashes.22 In the second part, Dawhat al-azhār, there is a section titled ‘Description of the arts of painting and poetry introduced by the hand and pen of the world-conquering Shah.’23 ‘Abdi Beg writes of the reign of Shah Tahmasb as one in which the art of painting reached its highest accomplishments thanks to the Shah’s patronage of great artists. The Shah is portrayed as a great painter, a fact known historically through his extant works and the writings of contemporaneous historians.24 Linking the arts of depiction with the imperial person glorified ‘Abi Beg’s own literary endeavors and simultaneously reminded the readers that his poem was a royal commission. The Illuminated Shrine

The Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register was written by orders of Shah Tahmasb during the later part of ‘Abdi Beg’s life. It points to the structure of Safavid bureaucracy in which a courtier could move between writing poetry, compiling land registers and chronicling history, with relative ease. More importantly, ‘Abdi Beg’s oeuvre accentuates the broader ideological landscape within which his works were written – one in which the authority of Shah Tahmasb was disseminated on multiple frontiers, from the farmāns installed in mosques and shrines to the poems describing his magnificent new palatial quarter in Qazvin. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk was written at a time when the administration of the shrine was going through major changes.25 The mutawallī (administrator) of the shrine was the general, Ma‛sum Beg Safavi, who was replaced in 1549 by Shah Tahmasb’s brother Sam Mirza (d. 1578). Sam Mirza was married to a woman from the Shaykhavand branch of the family and was given the prestigious government of Ardabil.26 It was during his twelve years as the mutawallī of the shrine of Shaykh Safi that he wrote his compilation of poets and poetry, the Tazkira-yi Tuhfā-yi Sāmī.27 In 1561, Sam

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

109

Mirza staged a coup against Shah Tahmasb and was imprisoned in the notorious Qahqaha fort.28 In 1562 the office of mutawallī and the governorship of Ardabil were bestowed on Shah Tahmasb’s nephew Ibrahim Mirza, only to be reneged the next year.29 The Shah then appointed Zahir al-din Ibrahim Safavi as his deputy mutawallī and it was under his charge that the Ṣarīḥ al-milk was compiled.30 In the introduction ‘Abdi Beg writes that the position of mutawallī should belong to an heir of the Safavid family, in this case, Shah Tahmasb and Ibrahim Safavi.31 The Ṣarīḥ al-milk is an amazing feat of accounting, but also a fascinating social and cultural record. It was doubtless owing to the changes in the shrine’s administration that the Shah sent his trusted courtier ‘Abdi Beg to compile a comprehensive register of the shrine’s holdings. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk was, on the one hand, a functional list of properties and the transactions that accompanied their being gifted to, or bought by, the shrine. On the other hand, the manuscript served as an authenticating device in terms of the shrine’s economic power and the legitimacy of the Safavids to oversee its administration. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk thus was a conveyor of meaning in the form of documentation, ideology, and aesthetics. These three aspects were utilized by the author to illustrate the power of Shah Tahmasb, the wealth of the shrine, as well as the creativity of those who had built and patronized it. Like the Jannāt-i ‘adn that preceded it by a decade, the Ṣarīḥ al-milk begins with a preface, dated 1577, in which the criteria for the writing of the manuscript are laid out within the context of Safavid imperial and religious authority. Praises (ḥamd) open the text, the first page of which is also marked with the seal of Shah Tahmasb (muhr-i mubārak-i shāh-i janat makānī Shah Tahmāsb). Qur’anic verses are interspersed between the praises of God, Muhammad, and the Twelve Imams. ‘Abdi Beg shows his mastery of the art of poetry here, writing long verses naming the Twelve Imams and their attributes. When arriving at the subject of writing the present volume the author relates its importance as an imperial document and continues with praises of his patron, Shah Tahmasb. The ruler’s titles include standard Iranian appellations of kingship (such as al-khāqān al-‘azam) merged with his Shi‛i genealogy (such as haydarī va ṣafāvī va musavī). Following the dedicatory preface, ‘Abdi Beg begins a catalogue of the buildings that together comprise the shrine of Shaykh Safi. This section is written in both poetry and prose, merging concrete details about the location of each structure with allegoric allusions to its grandeur (see Appendix A). Beginning with the broader region, namely, Azerbaijan, the

110

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

author identifies the site as ‘Ardabil, the City of Guidance (dār al-irshād), may God guard it from disasters to the day of the covenant’, and continues with the first poem: Excellent Ardabil! The light of the eyes, the core of the heart! Gabriel’s wings sweep the threshold of your magnificence. Every moment the tidings of devotees reach your pilgrims, That in our gardens ‘is a spring, named Salsabil’ (76:18).32 ‘Abdi Beg portrays Ardabil as a populous site, visited by pilgrims from near and far. The figure of the angel Gabriel and the use of Qur’anic verses sanctify the city that is host to the holy shrine of Shaykh Safi and portray it as a paradisal realm. While these pious associations, which continue throughout the poem, appear appropriate in the context of the shrine, it should be remembered that this was a theme also used by ‘Abdi Beg to describe the imperial palace in Qazvin, a point I will return to shortly. In truth, the documentary goal of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk’s poetic description is very different from that of the Jannāt-i ‘adn by the manner in which prose is woven in with the poems. The impression is not only of an encomium, but a catalogue as well. Thus in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk ‘Abdi Beg creates a hybrid, in which two genres are joined together to create a complex and compelling narrative. The Ṣarīḥ al-milk documents the shrine by taking the idea of wasf at its most literal. Describing the location of each structure in relationship to the next, ‘Abdi Beg allows the reader to recreate almost exactly the physical layout of the shrine precincts. He begins with, The Illuminated zāwīya and the holy ḥāzirā, surrounded with the lights of sanctity, and [they are] ‘Gardens of Eden, whereof the gates are opened to them (Qu’ran, 38:50)’ which [are] adorned and magnified by the sun-splendid cupola and the turquoise dome [of the lord], the pole of the poles, and the glorious children of his holiness, consisting of the revered and holy sanctum (ḥaram), the chillākhānas, firmament founded, and the sky-scraping offices (buyūtāt) and buildings (‘imāratimārat)… The impression that ‘Abdi Beg gives in this poem is that of a learned guide and devotee who is escorting the reader/visitor through the sacred spaces in a narration through time and space. It is necessary to first consider what his words do, that is, what is the effect of his poetic description in relation

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

111

to the buildings he describes. One may then consider the architecture that he draws attention to, that is, what is chosen for description and the language used for it. The goal is to uncover, if only as an approximation, contemporary attitudes toward the shrine of Shaykh Safi and, more generally, the art of building. Moreover, it is necessary to understand what Safavid readers of texts, patrons of buildings and designers of buildings together expected from a magnificent edifice, such that ‘One can call it the Qibla of the ages, prostration before which, may benefit the fortunate.’33 In the Ṣarīḥ al-milk the author takes us from the most sacred space of Shaykh Safi’s tomb to that of his descendants, followed by the Dār al-ḥuffaz, the Gunbad-i Shāhzādehā, Dār al-ḥadīth, the courtyard, Jannatsarā and the Chillākhānas. The order of this list operates on two primary levels: the first is ritual hierarchy and the second, spatial proximity. ‘Abdi Beg starts with the oldest and most important site and literally walks the reader through the shrine precincts, out through the courtyard, by the chambers of the collectors of the pious offerings (nazr), and through the exterior forecourt. He then lists the service buildings of the shrine, again starting with the most symbolically significant, namely the soup kitchen, followed by the bakery, Sharbatkhāna, and so on. He ends with a detailed list of the houses of the extended Safavi clan, many of which were procured by the shrine authorities for the construction of the Jannatsarā. ‘Abdi Beg recreates not only what he sees and walks by, but also the history of the shrine’s disparate pieces. It may thus be noted that the poet eulogizes buildings that are the most sacred and also organizes the itinerary in an ambulant manner.34 Buildings are arranged as one would walk through them, from one to the next. The conceptual center is the tomb of Shaykh Safi, which is illuminated by the ‘lights of sanctity’, from which emanates the religious aura of the holy man as a protective shadow extending over the landscape.35 ‘Abdi Beg remarks on its majestic height and the light shining from the numerous candles that devotees have gifted to it. The reference to the candles is an interesting one as later in the manuscript he lists the various donations to the shrine, including the lamps for the tombs of Shaykh Safi and Shah Isma‘il (figure 1). He writes: Oh you who have cast a shadow upon the sublime sphere; Your sphere is as exalted as the sky over the earth. The golden lanterns of Heaven take their light from your dome. You overshadow the highest heavens, exalted by your shadow. ‘These are the Gardens of Eden which the immortal enter’ (13:23)36 is heard by those yearning for Paradise.

Figure 1  Lamp stand, last quarter of the sixteenth century, State Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg, inv. no. IR 2202.

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

113

The inclusion of this Qur’anic term (jannāt ‘adn) is not unusual or arbitrary. On the one hand, ‘Abdi Beg sets the stage for creating a dialogue between his earlier works, namely the Jannāt-i ‘adn, and the newer Ṣarīḥ al-milk by establishing, in the very first poem, a clever relationship with his previous masterpiece. By this allusion he also allows for the later insertions of poetry and literary tropes first written in the context of the imperial palace. The verses from the chapter al-Rad (‘Thunder’) referring to the Gardens of Eden are also inscribed on the entrance to the Dār al-ḥuffāz (plate 13).37 By quoting a phrase from the building ‘Abdi Beg also establishes his credentials as someone who has visited the shrine and is thus able to comment on it. The description and, by extension, the authority that ‘Abdi Beg conveys is an important aspect of authenticating the work of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. He gives exact locations for the buildings, their orientation and relationship to each other. The tomb of Shaykh Safi is followed by ‘the revered sanctum (ḥaram) and the Dār al-ḥuffāz and dependencies where the residents hear from the lips of Gabriel this oration,’ continuing with the poem: Oh your revered sanctum is like Paradise. The multitudes of your servants share Rizwan’s nature. Your magnificent cupola, like a head raised high, gazes over all domains in every direction. In the universe it has found its height to be no less than heaven. Surely, from the parapet that rubs against heaven’s throne, They raise their hands in Praise of God. The sunburst within its dome displays the banner of the sun in the heart of the dark nights. It has tall crenellations of exaltation that the lassos of accidents are too short to reach. These buildings are followed by the ‘Dome of the Princes attached to the aforementioned Dār al-ḥuffāz on the eastern side, leaning south,’ pointing to the exact direction and location of this structure, that is, it lies to the southeast of the Dār al-ḥuffāz. The ‘revered sanctum’ refers simultaneously to the Haramkhāna and the tomb of Shah Isma‘il, both of which were accessed through the Dār al-ḥuffāz. ‘Abdi Beg describes the dome rising up to the sky, evoking the majesty of the deceased king, an allusion to the heavenly throne of God.38 The pilgrims who visited Ardabil supplicated in devotion not only at the

114

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

grave of Shaykh Safi, but at those of his imperial descendants, notably Shah Isma‘il. Thus real architectural features, such as the location of the structure, the height of the tomb tower, and the sunburst pattern on the interior of Shah Isma‘il’s dome are clearly observed and commented on, similar to the manner in which ‘Abdi Beg documented the palace of Sa‛adatabad. Functional as this narrative may seem, however, the goal was not merely to list the buildings hierarchically but to convey important themes pertaining to Safavid aesthetics and ideology. As Paul Losensky writes in the context of a later Safavid project, ‘[s]ince it is part of the business of poets to recover, explicate, and recreate the implicit meanings of the objects in the world around them.’39 The allusions and allegories that ‘Abdi Beg uses are in the service of an ideology of rulership and ultimately to augment Shah Tahmasb’s authority as a divinely-chosen ruler. This goal is achieved, on the one hand, by direct overlays of imperial and sacred terms, such as the throne of God in reference to the tomb of Shah Isma‘il; on the other hand, it is done by a novel procedure whereby ‘Abdi Beg connects the palace of Shah Tahmasb to the holy shrine of his ancestor, Shaykh Safi, by literally describing them in the same words. Three of the buildings in the shrine that ‘Abdi Beg describes were directly linked to contemporary Safavid history, two of which were newly built by orders of Shah Tahmasb, namely the Dār al-ḥadīth and Jannatsarā. The third, the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā, is an octagonal structure that is directly attached to the Dār al-ḥuffāz and entered through its main hallway. Its name gives hints to its use during the sixteenth century, when it served as the burial space of Safavid family members.40 Although its original function may have related to the rituals of the Sufi order, in the early sixteenth century the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā clearly served a funerary purpose. As ‘Abdi Beg writes, In the universe that dome has no equal, for every brick is connected to the soul. Its air is a gust from the wings of an angel; its mortar [clay] is mixed with the sweetness of life. Light from its empyrean fall on its archway A carpet of the light of sanctity is spread within it. It has passed through heaven into the universal realm. The transit of the heavens are hindered by it. One could assume the building ‘Abdi Beg writes of to be a brick building with arches, whose dome is clad in blue tiles. While these words describe

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

115

well the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā they are too general to be taken literally. Rather, the poet is imagining a sublime space that is permeated with divine light and brushed by the colorful and radiant wings of angels. The poetry praises the uniqueness of the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā which is ironic given that the very same verses were used to describe another magnificent structure. ‘Abdi Beg re-uses the poem he had written originally in the Dawhat al-azhār, the second part of the Jannāt-i ‘adn collection, to describe the great Inlaid Dome (gunbad-i manbatkārī) that rose above the Imperial Portal (iwān-i shāhī).41 He does not use the entire poem, but fragments of it. ‘Abdi Beg turns after the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā to ‘the Lofty Portal (iwān-i ma‘lī) in the direction of qibla (southeast), leaning west, known as the Dār al-ḥadīth that is adorned with the great titles of the exalted noble, the imperial lord, dweller of paradise, Sultan Shah Isma‘il Bahadur Khan.’ He continues: Here is the marvelous portal watched over by Saturn. Did I say portal? It is the vault of heaven! It is appropriate that the world boast of this auspicious, noble portal. This amazing portal was unique in the Universe. It became the mihrab of the horizons from the heads bowed before it One can call it the qibla of the ages, That from bowing to it, benefit the fortunate.42 Once again, the verses are from the Dawhat al-azhār, where they describe the ‘lower’ of the two portals (iwān-i zīrīn) in the grand hall, Khāna-yi Shirvani.43 On the opposite side, was the ‘higher’ portal (iwān-i bālā) and the poems used to describe this are, unsurprisingly, used by ‘Abdi Beg to describe the Jannatsarā which was similarly located opposite the Dār al-ḥadīth. He writes ‘the dome of the sanctified imperial enclosure (maqsura’), Jannatsarā, is opposite the portal of the lofty Dār al-ḥadīth, on whose arch (pishtāq) are written the titles of the Shah (Tahmasb).’ Continuing with the poem, With Divine aid, Mercury wrote Atop the royal portal: ‘Sultan ibn Sultan ibn Sultan, the illuminator of the throne of benevolence, the center of peace and religion, Shah Tahmasb,

116

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

The locus of justice and benevolence, Shah Tahmasb. Oh God, as long as this prosperous portal is adorned by Jupiter and Saturn, May he be fortunate, the King of the World May his existence be safe from calamity. ‘Abdi Beg’s reuse of the earlier poem, written to describe the palace, cannot be interpreted as indolence or simply self-promotion, as the ease and deliberation with which this re-contextualization takes place points to a more thoughtful procedure. He carefully selected and rearranged the verses from the Jannāt-i ‘adn and used them only where the structure described was directly related to the Safavid rulers; he composed new poems when praising other, older, buildings, such as the tomb of Shaykh Safi, the Dār al-ḥuffāz, the courtyard and the forecourt. By overlaying the palace and the shrine, ‘Abdi Beg was assuming a commonality between these two seemingly different types. In reality, as the poems in the Jannāt-i ‘adn suggest and the Ṣarīḥ al-milk confirms, in the early Safavid period the distinction between the sacral and royal was blurred. Both the shrine and the palace were constructions, actual and metaphorical, for the enactment of the royal ceremonial and for the establishment of the Shah’s legitimate rule. The architecture at the shrine of Shaykh Safi was the ideal site for the proclamation of Shah Tahmasb’s imperial vision; ‘Abdi Beg’s poems demonstrate that the spaces performed not only as signs of his presence, but as symbols of his authority. The encomium was written thus in praise of the buildings and, more interestingly, the structure of the Safavid dynasty itself. The Aesthetics of Architectural Space

Architecture, like poetry, exists in a realm of its own, beyond the ideologies that were its initial motivation. How can one describe the experience of architecture? Language, a narration unfolding in time, is an oppositional medium to building, a static object unfolding in space.44 Nonetheless, poets and historians alike can utilize language to draw parallels with the art of building through the use of metaphor and allegory. In so doing, they can provide insight into the manner in which a structure was conceived and the factors determining its reception and use. Thus while we may look to the patrons and builders of the structures for ideas about the program, and we may analyze the functions of the buildings to understand the rituals that took place within them, we must also ask what the architecture meant as a work of art.

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

117

Safavid monuments such as the palace in Qazvin and the shrine of Shaykh Safi were built as works of superb creativity as well as craftsmanship. Nonetheless, in the absence of contemporary treatises that define the terms of architectural design, it is difficult to assess the intentions of the patrons and builders beyond the functional and ideological. Texts such as ‘Abdi Beg’s encomiastic poems provide a rare opportunity to encounter architecture on a semantic and phenomenological level. Certainly, one goal of the poet was to assert his own adroitness in the realm of words and descriptions. For ‘Abdi Beg, the architectural experience of the shrine was the basis of his own literary fantasies and inventiveness. Yet he also undertook to express what he saw on its own terms; his responses to the built environment of the shrine are invaluable in understanding its reception and significance in the sixteenth century. The poetic description in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk is not hierarchical and functional alone; it also conveys important insights about early modern attitudes toward such buildings and their role in Safavid society. For example, in the description of the Chillākhanā, ‘Abdi Beg stresses that the place of Shaykh Safi’s spiritual ascension (jalūs) was marked and that it was built by his son, Sadr al-din Musa. ‘Abdi Beg also notes that it had been renovated and its dome retiled by orders of Shah Tahmasb. These spaces, portrayed in the Safwat al-ṣafā biography as the most important during the lifetime of Shaykh Safi, are here considered as having historical value yet peripheral to the contemporary Safavid religious and imperial ceremonial. Their role as spaces of ritual praxis does not immediately elevate them in status as it would have for previous generations of pilgrims and patrons. A reason for this may be that during the reign of Shah Tahmasb the rituals of the Safaviyya order were curbed, if not yet curtailed. The attention ‘Abdi Beg does not give to the old and new Chillākhānas attests to this change in religious practice as well as political ideology. The poems convey a sense of architectural hierarchy that also moves beyond revealing the ideological motivations of the Shah. Thus, the most monumental and well-embellished structures are called out for attention and praise, while the simpler buildings – such as the offices and residential quarters – are left for a cursory mention at the end of the descriptive section. More so than the buildings themselves the manner in which ‘Abdi Beg treats their ‘elements’ is of particular interest. The domes of the Jannatsarā and the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā are rendered as unique and divinely inspired constructions. Although the poems about them were commissioned first for the palace of Sa‛adatabād, they are general enough

118

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

to adequately describe the beauty of the domes in the shrine of Shaykh Safi. The architectural qualities that the poet extols in his encomiums include the structures’ height and, in this case, the beautiful blue tiles that adorn them. Along with the physical attributes are the metaphorical ones, in which the dome is related to the sky (through color and height) and thus proximity to divine presence. Similarly, in the poem praising the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, the cupola (qubba) is equated with the transcendent sphere, that is, the universe (figure 2). In ‘Abdi Beg’s poetic imagination, iwān portals are on par with domes as sites worthy of special attention. Describing the Dār al-ḥadīth and the Jannatsarā he views them as thresholds into the sublime spaces within, and uses the allegory of a sentinel (pāsbān) for the iwān of the Dār al-ḥadīth. Additionally, its shape is akin to that of a mihrāb found in a mosque. By allusion, the entire structure, a hall for the copying and dissemination of sacred texts, is made equal to the most sanctified institution in Islam, the mosque. The significance of the two iwāns facing each other across the courtyard is also related to texts, in that the names and titles of the Safavid Shahs are inscribed on them: Shah Isma‘il’s on the Dār al-ḥadīth and Shah Tahmasb’s on the Jannatsarā (figure 3).

Figure 2 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi.

Figure 3  Section through courtyard showing Jannatsarā and Dār al-ḥadīth, c. 1537. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

120

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Written in clear and legible script, the presence of text gives ultimate meaning to these structures and buildings, not unlike the Qur’anic verses that sanctify them.45 In these prestigious imperial monuments the poet asserts the power of words over that of spaces; architecture may provide inspiration for the poems, but literature is considered the supreme art. The manner in which ‘Abdi Beg fragments the architecture into its elemental parts gives important clues about the manner in which the buildings were conceived and, perhaps, designed. His focus is not on forms, but rather on shapes and colors: it is not the plan of an entire building that occupies him, but rather its individual parts. For example, he could have commented on the vast octagonal space of the Jannatsarā, but chose rather to pick a poem in which the dome and iwān portal were celebrated. This interest in the visual, rather than the spatial, experience of architecture can be explained in two ways: first, ‘Abdi Beg was a poet, describing what he saw, and therefore less concerned with the spatial forms of the buildings. In the absence of a commonly known notation system in which buildings were conceived in two dimensions (this knowledge was most likely restricted to architects and master builders), even a well-educated person did not necessarily have access to the abstract knowledge of planar representation.46 Second, most buildings constructed in early modern Iran were conceived as parts of whole ensembles, distinguished by their function and architectural elements. This is not to say that Safavid architectural culture, which would include makers and patrons, did not place emphasis on buildings designed as free-standing monuments. However, ‘Abdi Beg’s description of the palace of Sa‛adatabad does not convey a sense of the pavilions as separate structures, although they were clearly understood as distinct entities.47 In addition to grand monuments like the tomb of Uljaytu, in Sultaniyya, ‘Abdi Beg would have seen individual funerary structures that were ubiquitous in western Iran. In fact the tomb of Shaykh Safi was initially one such monument: but by the Safavid period it had been integrated into the body of the shrine complex. The comparison of the shrine complex to a body is an appropriate one, a metaphor also used by ‘Abdi Beg in his poetic descriptions. A common trope in his poems is that of personification, such that the architectural element that he describes is treated either as a sentient being, or a physical part of one. The ‘elemental approach,’ as one may call it, is a powerful one for it makes the abstraction of architecture visible and accessible in very fundamental ways. About the central courtyard ‘Abdi Beg writes:

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

121

Oh you are the suburbs of sublime Paradise. The place of angels is in your archway. The sublime Paradise is a reflection of you. You give testimony to the sublime Paradise. The sky is protected in the portal, garrisoned in that impregnable fort. You are illuminated by the populace, as the eye is by the pupil, For a place is ennobled by its inhabitants. Humans and angels find peace in you; Heaven and earth find comfort in you. Everywhere your countenance, is the likeness of heaven, Everywhere your garden is the ornament of Paradise.48 In this passage ‘Abdi Beg describes a personality, one that has the ability to transform not only the spaces contained within it, but also the people who encounter it. Thus the architecture has character, a human attribute.49 ‘Abdi Beg cleverly utilizes the documentary nature of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk to let the reader know that the courtyard comprises arcades, iwān portals, and a central open space. Yet his poetry adds texture to the functional list by showing that the arcades are places of immense beauty where angels may dwell; the portals soar over the solid, fortress-like walls; and the courtyard is alive through the presence of a multitude of pilgrims. Thus the shrine is presented as a multifaceted and complex organism, and the rituals and architecture are portrayed as complementary parts of the whole. Placed together in the poetry, the arts of building and the acts of devotion coalesce to reveal the nature of architectural culture in the sixteenth century, through the lens of the Safavid dynastic shrine. In the poetic and prose descriptions of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk ‘Abdi Beg recognizes the complexity of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Presenting the architecture as a system of elements, the whole is segmented through varied criteria. One of the poet’s goals was to document the actual buildings that comprised the shrine, by giving the structures a geographical and historical location. Thus not only were they situated, literally, on the cardinal axes and in relation to each other, their construction and renovation histories were described. The role of history in the transformation of the shrine of Shaykh Safi is a crucial one, not only in the manners in which buildings were chosen for renovation (and thus longevity), but also as a way of legitimizing the new constructions undertaken during the reign of Shah Tahmasb. The architectural past was strategically presented as a cohesive part of the contemporary realities of the new shrine complex.

122

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

The ideological dimension was arguably the central concern for ‘Abdi Beg. To extol the sublime beauty of the setting was akin to praising the great patron who had had it built. Thus the shrine of Shaykh Safi served as the portrait of Shah Tahmasb and its grandeur a reflection of his power. The terms by which the shrine is described are overlaid with references to divine sovereignty, an association also attributed to the persona of the Safavid ruler. Other characteristics of the architecture can also be references to the Shah, such as its protective nature, its lofty aspiration, its divinely-inspired splendor, and its ability to unite the earth with the sky and the material world with its spiritual counterpart. Paradisal references, like those used to describe Shah Tahmasb’s palace in Qazvin, are thus aptly used to describe the shrine of Shaykh Safi. ‘Abdi Beg’s poetic description of the shrine is the most intriguing and instructive when considered as an expression of architectural aesthetics. For while the poet’s disciplinary home is in literature and the realm of words, his attitude toward the places that inspire him sheds crucial light on responses to architecture in the early Safavid period. Primarily, buildings are described through their elements, such as domes, portals, arcades, and so on. This approach was not limited to Iran but was prevalent in other sites of the early modern period, at evinced by the work of the sixteenthcentury Italian theorist, Sebastiano Serlio. For Serlio the assemblage of architectural parts referred to antiquity and reinforced architecture’s own history of making.50 The Safavid case, as exemplified in writings of the courtier, ‘Abdi Beg, was similar in the preference given to the elements of architecture, rather than to the composition of the whole. Here, too, the architectural fragments represented both the Safavid past and that of Iranian architecture. However, there was a crucial addition: the architectural elements described by ‘Abdi Beg were the signifiers of royalty and, through abstraction, Divinity. The architecture provides an opportunity for the poet as well as the reader to participate in an experience of Shaykh Safi’s shrine that goes far beyond the ideological agendas embedded in its patronage and construction. Although expressed in literary and visual terms, the buildings’ allegorical reading takes precedence as a form of knowledge about the rituals and structures of the site, and also its place in the broader aesthetic culture of the sixteenth century. The poems fill the spaces with meaning and provide readers and pilgrims with access to one of the most majestic ensembles in Iran. Guided by the poet’s words, their imagination recreates the phenomenal and sublime in the architectural culture of early modern Iran.

Aesthetics and Ideology of Building

123

The shrine of Shaykh Safi was equated, in Abdi Beg Shirazi’s poems, with the grand palaces built by his patron, Shah Tahmasb. The conflation of these two architectural types was implied in the changing Safavid ceremonial in the sixteenth century and the manner in which Divinity and sovereignty were merged in the person of the Shah. The buildings commissioned during Shah Tahmasb’s reign were symbolic of the changes undertaken in order to transform the fabric of Iranian society. His presence at the shrine was marked through visits and charity and through the reconfiguration of the shrine’s central courtyard. The already vibrant institution was further animated by permanent reminders of the monarch’s religious policies, such as the marble farmān he had installed in the courtyard and the construction of the Jannatsarā and Dār al-ḥadīth. Shah Tahmasb’s architectural interventions transformed the shrine into a dynastic edifice that reflected both his religious and imperial aspirations.

5 THE PRINCELY AESTHETIC SHAH ‘ABBAS I AND THE IMPERIAL SHRINE (1589–1629)

There is a large plaza and buildings, decorated like the court of the king.1 With the advent of Shah Tahmasb’s grandson, ‘Abbas I, in 1587, Safavid ideology evolved in a way that further altered the ancestral shrine in both use and architecture. Piety and authority remained part of the imperial ceremonial during Shah ‘Abbas’ reign; kingship was conceived of in such a way that the Shah was portrayed as an Iranian monarch, a Shi‘i believer, and last, though no less important, a Sufi pīr.2 Shah ‘Abbas’ reign saw an increase in the more ceremonial and extravagant trappings of kingship, such as grand New Year (naurūz) festivities in which cities would be decked out and, on his arrival, lavish gifts and honors would be received from and distributed among loyal subjects.3 At the same time as indulging in courtly pursuits, Shah ‘Abbas presented himself as a humble and religious man. His historians describe him as being extremely submissive to his Shi‘i creed and devoted to patronizing holy places, especially the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad and that of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil. Shah ‘Abbas’ familial links to the Prophet Muhammad were a popular topic in contemporary Safavid chronicles. On his mother’s side, which consisted of notable Ma‘rashi Sayyids of Mazandaran, the genealogy went back to the fourth Shi‛i Imam ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Abdīn. On his father’s side there were seventeen ‘kings and dervishes’ and their lineage went back until the seventh Imam, Musa al-Kazim.4 Shah ‘Abbas’ veneration of the ahl al-bayt was evident in the elaborate ‘āshūra mourning ceremonies that took place in Qazvin to commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Husayn, as well as the patronage of numerous tombs of the imāmzādeh (progeny

The Princely Aesthetic

125

of the Imams). He rebuilt the shrine of Sitti Maryam, daughter of Imam Musa al-Kazim, where he was reputed to have doled out food from a silver cauldron he had donated and distributed it among the poor and needy.5 His piety was not, however, restricted to his Imami ancestors, but also enacted at the shrines of Sufi notables. The most visible site of this patronage was the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Shi‘i rituals were observed with great fervor at the shrine and were couched within the dynastic and familial identities of the ruling elite.6 Adam Olearius, who was in Ardabil in 1637, provides a description of an ‘āshūra ceremony which took place in the courtyard of the shrine some years after the death of Shah ‘Abbas (figure 1): The whole city of Ardabil was taken up in these ceremonies and extravagant devotions. In the day time, the children and young lads

Figure 1  ‘Ashūra ceremonies in the courtyard of the Shrine of Shaykh Safi,’ from Adam Olearius, Offt begehete Beschreibung der newen orientalischen Reise (1646). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University.

126

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

assembled themselves in great companies up and down the streets, carrying in their hands great banners, at the extremities whereof were snakes of pasteboard winding to and fro, … [On the tenth day] ceremonies were performed in the court of the shrine of Shaykh Safi, where near the chancery, they had planted a banner, which as it is reported, was made by the daughter of Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad, who caused the iron-work of it to be made of a horse-shoe, which had belonged to one of the horses of ‘Abbas … which Sadr al-din, the son of Shaykh Safi, had brought from Medina to Ardabil. They say, that this banner shakes of itself, as often as they pronounce the name of Husayn, during the sermon that is made in honor of him, and that when the priest makes a recital of the particulars of his death, how he was wounded with seventy-two arrows, and how he fell down from his horse, it may be seen shaken by a secret agitation, but withall so violent, that, the staff breaking, it falls to the ground.7 In official chronicles of Shah ‘Abbas’ court the sentiment toward Sufism was ambiguous, not unlike the double entendres in Shah Tahmasb’s farmān. Whereas the Safaviyya order’s traditions were upheld, Sufis themselves were sometimes treated with disrespect, for example, Shah ‘Abbas’ historian, Eskander Beg Munshi, referred to them pejoratively as ‘brainless simpletons’ and ‘stupid’.8 However, unlike the chroniclers’ polemics against certain Sufi orders, the court artists depicted a society in which Sufis and dervishes had a vital presence (figure 2).9 The allegiance of the Ardabil Sufis to Shah ‘Abbas, sūfīgarī, was an important aspect of his power. This type of devotion to the Sufi pir had also been referred to by Shah Tahmasb in reference to the loyalty of his Qizilbash followers.10 By the seventeenth century this loyalty, once vital and energized, was characterized by Safavid historians as symbolic of rites previously held sacred. In the same manner, buildings at the shrine of Shaykh Safi that once held rituals of initiation or worship were still in use, however, sometimes simply as representations of the Sufi past. In 1611 Shah ‘Abbas ordered that the interiors of the old Gunbad-i shāhzādehā and the Dār al-ḥuffāz be renovated as opulent and luxurious imperial settings. In comparison with Shah Tahmasb’s new constructions, Shah ‘Abbas’ building program was, on the one hand, less physically intrusive and on the other, more dramatic. The vast reconstruction undertaken by Shah Tahmasb was recognizable within the tradition of commemorative architecture. Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations introduced an entirely new palatial idiom, one that was foretold in ‘Abdi Beg’s poetry.

The Princely Aesthetic

127

Figure 2 ‘A gathering of Dervishes,’ c. 1615 (Isfahan). Oriental Institute, St Petersburg.

Through subtle, yet specific, architectural interventions, during Shah ‘Abbas’ reign the significance of the shrine was irrevocably altered in order to cohere more closely with a new vision of Safavid sovereignty, one that drew powerful inspiration from Timurid architecture and history.

128

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

These changes had important repercussions in the religious and architectural landscape of Safavid Iran. Court and Retreat

Ardabil was known in the seventeenth century as the ‘Abode of Guidance’ (dār al-irshād), and also as the ‘city of Heavenly palaces’ (jannāt qasūr), in reference to its spiritual and imperial associations.11 It was perceived as the alternative capital of Azerbaijan owing to its strategic position near the Ottoman border and its proximity to Tabriz, which was often under siege. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was embellished, endowed, and transformed by Shah ‘Abbas into an imperial edifice where he held court several times during his campaigns.12 Shah ‘Abbas visited the city a number of times, often in connection with battles against Ottoman armies on the western frontiers of the Safavid empire. For example, in 1591 an ambassador from Ja‘far Pasha, the Ottoman governor of Tabriz, came to Shah ‘Abbas’ court in Ardabil bearing gifts and niyāz (offering); the same year, Amir Siyavosh, the governor of Kashkar, also came to pay homage.13 The next year, another important official, the governor of Ardabil, Farhad Khan Qaramanlu met the Shah in this ‘land of angels’ to pay allegiance to him.14 The shrine of Shaykh Safi was a popular site for Safavid rulers to display regal authority and their private piety. Shah ‘Abbas’ chroniclers mention numerous acts of charity performed by him at the shrine. In 1611 he ordered that the interior renovations of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā be undertaken. The court astrologer and historian, Jalal al-din Yazdi, took particular note of the Shah’s peregrinations to the holy shrine of Shaykh Safi and noted the remarkable events which took place that year. He wrote in the Tārīkh-i ‘Abbāsī, And toward the end of Jumada II he (Shah ‘Abbas) entered the blessed illumined shrine of the ‘Pole of the Learned’ (qutb al-‘ārifīn) Shah Safi, and after pilgrimage there, he turned to the kitchen. When he arrived near an Arab cauldron, the lid of a nearby pot lifted itself suddenly and crashed down on the pot with such a noise that those who were in the kitchen heard them. The ‘Navāb, Dog of the Threshold of ‘Ali’ placed his forehead upon the ground in a bow of thanks. When he lifted his head, the lid as before separated from the pot and returned itself. This was a source of great wonder. The Navāb gave twelve tomans to the cooks and workers and four silver mortars were built in the kitchen.15

The Princely Aesthetic

129

The miracles related were symbolic of the Shah’s power to unlock the mysteries of the world. The earthly equivalents to this were actual locks, such as that on the tomb of Shah Tahmasb’s mother, which miraculously opened when the ‘blessed hand’ of the Shah touched it. The same happened when Shah ‘Abbas reached the door of Shaykh Safi’s Sharbatkhāna and when he touched the Royal Sharbatkhāna, which the Shah had endowed in the name of his beloved mother. Crowds gathered to view these phenomena, which ‘served to augment the faith of those present.’16 The rituals and miracles described by Yazdi reflected the need to solidify belief in the charismatic powers of the Shah, both as a Sufi pīr and a divinely-chosen emperor. Shah ‘Abbas’ pilgrimage to the shrine of Shaykh Safi was interpreted as his way of ‘rubbing his sins in the dust of the sacred land [Ardabil].’17 Shah ‘Abbas would be given an account of the shrine and would himself oversee its administration. In 1605 he rebuilt the kitchen and donated money to the Dār al-marz (hospital), and in 1611 he built the royal Sharbatkhāna, repaired the madrasa and renovated the interiors of the Chīnīkhāna and Dār al-ḥuffāz. This architectural patronage was undertaken with the goal of gaining divine benevolence, the rewards of which were gifted to his grandfather, Shah Tahmasb. In the same charitable vein, Shah ‘Abbas re-instituted the evening naqqāra, or beating of royal kettle drums, which marked the distribution of food. As a chronicler recounted, ‘it had been two years since the drums had not been beaten at this shrine … it was now ordered that in the custom of the past, the drum, clarion, and trumpet be played, for this was a source of joy and happiness for the men and women of Ardabil.’18 Thus, the morning meals were paid for by the shrine estate and the evening ones were gifted by the Shah, an act which ‘will make Shah ‘Abbas immortal in Persia [such that] they think he is a saint.’19 The attribution of sanctity to royalty was visible in all aspects of Shah ‘Abbas reign; for example, his residence in Tabriz was described in detail by the chronicler, Qazi Ahmad Qummi, who wrote that it was ‘built near the neighborhood of Sahibabad. The walls were in the manner of a fortress and moats and all [apparatus] of royalty. In the center was a pool that was built within the residence; elevated talār were built of wooden posts and on the top of this palace a dome of gold was constructed in the likeness of Imam Reza’s in Mashhad.’20 In 1590–91 Shah ‘Abbas established a new capital in Isfahan, which was centered on a vast plaza known as the Maydan-i Naqsh-i Jahan (‘Representation of the World’ Square). In the course of the next twenty years, Isfahan evolved into one of the most majestic world capitals in the early modern period, with a large

130

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

congregational mosque, covered bazaars, and cosmopolitan urban elites that gave it its particular vibrancy.21 The Safavid royal residences were viewed as venerated sites, as exemplified by the ‘Ali Qāpū gatehouse at the entrance to the Isfahan palace, which was viewed as a sacred threshold where passersby fell to their knees and kissed the hallowed ground (figure 3).22 Just within the gates was a large octagonal structure, known as the Tawḥīdkhāna (Hall of Unity) where Sufis from the Safaviyya order gathered to recite verses from the Qur’an and prayers in praise of Shah ‘Abbas (figure 4). According to a later source it was ‘the duty of the khalīfat al-khulāfā … to follow the rule (dastūr) established in the time of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq, namely, to gather in the tauḥīdkhāna, every Thursday evening, darvishes and sufis and to keep them repeating, by way of loud dhikr (dhikr-i jālī), the pious formula: lā ilāh illā’llāh; on Thursday evenings, he distributes to the darvishes bread, food and sweetmeats, and on other occasions, bread and the customary food.’23 It is possible to project backwards this custom, ‘established in the time of Shaykh Safi’ to the reign of Shah ‘Abbas, when the Isfahan tawḥīdkhāna was built.24 The tawḥīdkhāna was not simply a building but an institution that was part of the Shah’s imperial ceremonial. The architectural resemblance of the Isfahan Tawhīdkhāna to the Jannatsarā at the Ardabil shrine is striking, and gives clues to rituals enacted there in the early seventeenth century. A self-conscious effort to connect with Timurid history and modes of kingship was a characteristic of Shah ‘Abbas’ political ideology. As Sholeh Quinn has noted, ‘In the face of an expanding Ottoman empire from without, and an increasingly powerful religious clergy from within, the historiographical emphasis on Timur appears to be a reflection of the Safavid monarch’s search for new ‘pillars of legitimacy’ to present both at home and abroad.’25 Architectural patronage was similarly defined through fifteenth-century precedents. In 1605 Shah ‘Abbas declared that the shrine’s kitchen be rebuilt, and reminded his devotees that, ‘Since the days of the great king, Amir Timur, this place (the shrine) was a house of peace (bayt al-aman).’26 The reference to Timur is not surprising as Safavid chroniclers often wrote of Timur’s pilgrimage to the shrine of Shaykh Safi where he supposedly met Sadr al-din Musa. According to Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Sadr al-din interceded on behalf of Timur’s Anatolian prisoners in order to set them free.27 Although the primary goal of this apocryphal story may have been to attest to the alliances with Ottoman Qizilbash, the involvement of Timur with the shrine gave it historical pedigree and imperial prestige.

Figure 3  ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, Palace precincts, Isfahan, early 17th century.

Figure 4  Tawhīdkhāna, Palace precincts, Isfahan, early 17th century.

The Princely Aesthetic

133

During Shah ‘Abbas’ reign three specific historical periods served to inspire his historians, namely, the lifetime of Shaykh Safi and the foundations of the Safaviyya order; Timurid rule in Iran; and the consolidation of the Safavid Empire by Shah Tahmasb. Although they were effective in different ways, and to varying degrees, these ‘moments’ defined the manner in which the court of Shah ‘Abbas was conceptualized. The overlay of Sufi, Shi‛i and Iranian modes of kingship was expressed through diverse media, from the textual to the architectural.28 The shrine of Shaykh Safi had been central in the codification of all three and Shah ‘Abbas’ patronage was indicative of its role as a key institution in the Safavid Empire. The Imperial Setting: Dār al-Huffāz and Shāhnishīn

The Dār al-ḥuffāz was constructed in the fourteenth century and provides a rich exemplar of early Timurid architecture and decoration. As the epigraphy on the exterior states, the Dār al-ḥuffaz was built for the recitation of the Qur’an, but also in commemoration of Shaykh Safi. Through its perpetuation of ancestral identity, the building was closely associated with the history of the Safaviyya order. In the late sixteenth century, it served both as a reminder of the Safavid past and, thanks to Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations within, its dynastic future. In the Timurid period, Dār al-ḥuffāz were built as part of funerary assembles and were reserved for the recitation of prayers. The most well-known example was a Dār al-ḥuffāz built during the reign of the Timurid prince, Shahrukh Mirza at the shrine of Imam Reza (plate 14). The structure was described by Khwandamir as a place built for the Sufis and decorated lavishly with floral and Chinese motifs in lapis lazuli and gold. This Dār al-ḥuffāz also had a magnificent iwan ‘wonderfully decorated and adorned.’29 The plan, with its rectangular hall, recessed alcoves and the direct connection to the tomb of Imam Reza, is remarkably similar to the Dār al-ḥuffāz at the Ardabil shrine. However, unlike the Ardabil shrine in which the tomb of Shaykh Safi is the culmination of a linear procession through the Dār al-ḥuffāz, the mausoleum of Imam Reza is imbedded in the body of the shrine complex. The Dār al-ḥuffāz of Shaykh Safi’s shrine is entered through a small foyer where there was a pair of silver-plated doors that were gifted in 1602 by Zulfiqar Khan Qaramanlu (d. 1610) the governor of Azerbaijan (figure 5).30 The governor was an important patron of the arts and his devotion to the shrine was predicated on his status both as a devotee of the Shah and an influential officer of the Safavid Empire.31 Another pair of silver

Figure 5  Silver-plated door at entrance to the Dār al-ḥuffaz, gifted by Zulfiqar Khan Qaramanlu in 1602. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

The Princely Aesthetic

135

doors, dated 1611, was installed at the threshold of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and commemorated the Shah’s visit to the shrine that year.32 The hall of the Dār al-ḥuffāz is rectangular and on each side are two-meter-deep arched alcoves (plate 15). These are double-storeyed and the second level is accessed by a small stairway to the side of the entrance, possibly reserved for women visitors to the shrine. The alcoves are divided into three bays, each covered by an ornately painted dome.33 The Gunbad-i shāhzādehā is located on the southeast side and entered through the second alcove on that side. Adam Olearius wrote about the Dār al-ḥuffāz that: ‘The vault was about four fathoms square and enlightened by a great number of gold and silver lamps; among which there were some, above three feet diameter. On both sides sat twelve hafizan, or priests, having before them, upon desks, great books of parchment, wherein were written, in capital Arabian letters, certain chapters of the Qur’an, which they sung.’34 A painting from the Majālis al-‘ushāq of Kamal al-din Gazurgahi titled, ‘Majd al-din Baghdadi preaching in Khwarazm’ gives a good sense of the space as it may have been conceived of in the sixteenth century (figure 6).35 The text situates the scene at the shrine (zāwīya) of Shaykh Majd al-din Baghdadi. The shrine in Khwarazm, which is no longer extant, appears very similar to the interior of the Dār al-ḥuffāz in Ardabil, which is also a two-storey space with alcoves above and below. The painting depicts an interior where the great Sufi master sits upon a maqsūra preaching to a collection of men and women. On the balcony above sit two more women, listening to his sermon. Upon entering the Dār al-ḥuffāz, the cenotaph of Shaykh Safi is visible at the far end, glowing luminously. Before reaching the sanctuary, there are a number of other thresholds, beginning with the great hall itself which has deep alcoves on either side where Qur’ans and stands were kept. Encircling the interior of the Dār al-ḥuffāz are two horizontal epigraphic bands, which were most likely repaired in the early twentieth century when the roof was also repaired (figure 7).36 The top band, beginning counterclockwise from above the entrance, is the Qur’anic verse, al-Fathaḥ (Victory), which is also written within the drum of Shaykh Safi’s tomb tower.37 The verse summons the believers to follow the apostle, the chosen one of God (Muhammad) ‘sent as a bearer of news and warning so that you may have faith in Allah and his apostle and that you may assist him, honor him and praise Him morning and evening (48:8).’ The guidance of the Prophet is here conflated with the intercession of Shaykh Safi, or perhaps his khalīfa, as pilgrimage to his shrine was a form of gaining heavenly,

Figure 6  ‘Majd al-din Baghdadi preaching in Khwarazm,’ Majālis al-ushhāq, Kamal al-din Gazurgahi, 16th c. Museum of Islamic Art, Berlin.

The Princely Aesthetic

137

Figure 7  View of the shrine of Shaykh Safi showing the collapsed roof of the Dār al-ḥuffāz From Jacques de Morgan, Mission Scientifique en Perse (Paris, 1894).

as well as earthly, rewards. Additional Qur’anic phrases are inserted into panels between the arched alcoves and balconies, also from the Victory verse. The first arch reads: (48:25) ‘These it was who disbelieved and debarred you from the sacred mosque (al-masjid al-ḥaram), and debarred the offering from reaching its goal.’ The verse referring to the masjid al-ḥaram emphasizes the consecrated nature of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, which was considered an ‘inviolable place of worship.’ Allusion to the offering (iḥāda) reminds one of the charitable function of the shrine whereby devotees brought nazr and made pious donations. Recitors would sit in rows along the alcoves in the Dār al-ḥuffāz reading aloud from the Qur’an and religious epics (figure 8). The recitation sanctified the space as did the baraka from the tomb of Shaykh Safi and his descendants. The lower band begins at the arch on the northeastern wall and gives the spiritual lineage of Shaykh Safi, that is, from Shaykh Zahid Gilani until Shaykh Hayder.38 On the opposite side, beginning with the name of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib above the entrance, there are Prophetic ḥadīth which focus on archetypal characteristics of kingship, such as, knowledge,

Figure 8  Dār al-ḥuffāz, drawing showing interior From F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

The Princely Aesthetic

139

justice and charity. Here the family of Muhammad and the Shi‘i Imamate are listed and eulogized. The naming of Sufi and Shi‘i ancestors within the Dār al-ḥuffāz represents the two forms of legitimization sought by the Safavid leaders and marks this edifice as emblematic of that power. The significance of the shrine to Shah ‘Abbas well as to the local townspeople is evinced in the historical accounts of an event of 1618, when Tabriz was occupied by the Ottomans. Shah ‘Abbas brought Osman Agha, the Ottoman ambassador, and Qasim Beg, the commander in chief of Mazandaran, to Ardabil to work out the details of a treaty. Eskander Beg Munshi writes, ‘although the Shah was fully confident that he would be the recipient of God’s favor and of the support of all pure souls in holy places, and although he had great faith in the ability of the holy spirits of the Safavid shaykhs to protect the region, nevertheless, just to be on the safe side, he ordered all civilians to be evacuated from Ardabil and dispersed in the surrounding countryside, where they may be safe from harm.’39 The Italian traveler, Pietro Della Valle, was with the Shah’s entourage in Ardabil in 1618. His description of the events complements Munshi’s, in that he describes the mood of the Shah as well as the Ardabili populace at the time of the Ottoman occupation of Tabriz. Della Valle’s wife, Señora Mani, reported encountering a great gathering of men and women inside, where everyone prayed for success in the impending war against the Ottomans. They were chanting loudly, ‘Oh, may the Turkish army be destroyed so that it doesn’t come to Ardabil.’40 Della Valle writes that on Shah ‘Abbas’ arrival in Ardabil, ‘Qasim Beg came from the Turkish camp reporting that the Turks were in Tabriz. The Shah was so disturbed by the news that he went to the shrine alone. Closing all the doors [in the Dār al-ḥuffāz] he remained inside with the muttawali. After a long devotional prayer to his ancestor, he hugged the grave and started crying and was there for a long time.’ These accounts depict Shah ‘Abbas as a powerful ruler who was the rightful guardian of the Safavid shrine, as well as a humble devotee who swept the floors and prayed in subservience. The Dār al-ḥuffāz is attached to the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi by a semioctagonal alcove, with two window openings on either side.41 Referred to as the Shāhnishīn (literally, ‘throne of the Shah’), the antechamber was the entrance into the mausoleum of Shaykh Safi, the Ḥaramkhāna where his first son was buried, and the tomb chamber of Shah Isma‘il. The Shāhnishīn was built in 1611 by order of Shah ‘Abbas after one of his well-documented pilgrimages to the shrine.42 It was the third subsequent autumn that Shah ‘Abbas had come on pilgrimage to Ardabil and his sixth visit in as many years. Jalal al-din Yazdi describes well the alterations

140

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

undertaken in the early seventeenth century to this space as well as the religious and historical contexts within which they were ordered. Shah ‘Abbas stayed fifteen days in Ardabil, making careful inquiries into the condition of the poor and infirm. A waqf was established for enlarging the door of the Ḥaram and making this of gold and the window in back of the Ḥaram of silver. The platform (suffa) in front of the Ḥaram was thus enlarged by leveling the grave of Rustam Mirza (son of Shah Isma‘il) and a silver grill with a door in the middle was installed to enclose it … On the first of Rajab, four thousand toman were given for the gold and silver doors and windows of the āstāna and kitchen.43 The Shāhnishīn is a luxurious space covered by a double-muqarnas canopy; the whole is adorned with patterns of lotuses and scrolls, painted deep hues of blue and red, and covered in gold leaf (plate 16). From the canopy twelve gold and silver lamps would have been suspended, filling the alcove with light and colors that reflected off the brightly painted vault. Only one of the majestic lamps is extant, and is dated 1614 and inscribed with the name of a mutawallī, Sahib Nazir ‘Ali Khan who no doubt donated it in honor of his patron, Shah ‘Abbas (figure 9). The Shāhnishīn was enclosed by a tall silver grill with a gold door, and access to it was limited to the Shah and chosen administrators.44 The light reflecting off the muqarnas semi-dome and the silver grill filled the space with an ethereal glow, an appropriate site for the location of imperial ceremonies such as the popular rites of allegiance enacted for Shah ‘Abbas’ called pāi-būsī (kissing the feet). In these visitors and devotees would fall to the ground and kiss the foot of the Shah’s throne for it was believed that this threshold was a blessed one. On his pilgrimage to the ancestral shrine Shah ‘Abbas often stayed at the house the governor of Ardabil, which constituted of a big square in front, public gardens, and a private ḥaram.45 When Adam Olearius visited Ardabil a few years after the death of Shah ‘Abbas, he was entertained at this official residence. He wrote that, [Zulfiqar Khan], in the government of Ardabil, a person of infinite wealth, had built it, according to a model he had brought out of Turkey. The figure of it was octagonal, and it was three stories, so raised that Art had not left anything to be desired. Every story had its fountains, which cast their water higher than any part of the house. The walls

Figure 9  Silver hanging lamp, 1614 (Ardabil), inscribed with the name of the donor, Sahib Nazir ‘Ali Khan. National Museum of Iran (invoice number 9822)

142

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

were built of a sort of glittering stones, of all colors, blue, green, red, and all sorts of figures, and all the floors were covered with the richest tapestry the country could afford. All about the house was a spacious gallery, all built with marble, and adorned with painting, representing flowers and leaves. At one of the corners of that gallery, there was a little couch or chair of state, four foot square, covered with embroidered tapestry, having in the midst a quilt wrought with gold and silk, to signify that the king, passing one day through Ardabil, had rested himself there; which made the place so venerable, that, to the end none should come near it, it was encompassed with an iron rail.’46 The place marked by Shah ‘Abbas’ presence was not unlike the Shāhnishīn of Shaykh Safi’s tomb, which was enclosed, by royal decree, behind the silver grill. The seat upon which the Shah had rested was considered too sanctified to be touched by anyone, not unlike the threshold of his exalted ancestor. Similar kissing and genuflection took place at the steps of the Shāhnishīn at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, which were covered in silver by orders of Shah ‘Abbas. The sacrality of the space was reinforced by the epigraphy encircling the apse which begins: Allah Hath fulfilled the vision for His messenger in very truth. Ye shall indeed enter the Inviolable Place of Worship (al-masjid al-ḥaram), if Allah will, secure (having your hair) shaven and cut, not fearing. But He knoweth that which ye know not, and hath given you a near victory before hand. Allah has promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward (48:27–29). Say: O Allah! Owner of Sovereignty (mālik al-mulk)! Thou givest sovereignty unto whom Thou wilt. Thou exaltest whom Thou wilt, and Thou abasest whom Thou wilt. In Thy hand is the good. Lo! Thou art Able to do all things. Thou causest the night to pass into day and the day to pass into the night. And Thou bringest forth the living from the dead and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living. And Thou givest sustenance to whom Thou choosest, without stint (3:26˜27). The allusions to sovereignty were selective and clearly reiterate the presence of the divinely-chosen Sufi and Shah. By building the splendid Shāhnishīn and silver grill which restricted access to the tomb of Shaykh Safi and familial burial places, Shah ‘Abbas was marking his rightful presence as heir to the piety and power of the Safavid dynasty. Although himself not always physically there, he was represented through the

The Princely Aesthetic

143

magnificent architecture. Shah ‘Abbas was the custodian of the shrine as well as the ruler in the name of Shi‘ism, which gave to him an aura of religious as well as royal authority and legitimized his political aspirations. Within the Dār al-ḥuffāz he was surrounded by the names of his ancestors and blessed through the Qur’anic prayers, as he appeared before his devotees and subjects in the manner of a supreme leader. These interiors were the perfect setting in which Shah ‘Abbas’ imperial vision was staged and disseminated. The Princely Aesthetic: Gunbad-i shāhzādehā / Chīnīkhāna

A preoccupation with Safavid history motivated the contemporaneous reconstruction of the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā which was attached to the Dār al-ḥuffāz. In 1608 Shah ‘Abbas had endowed all his private properties and holdings in the name of the Fourteen Innocent Ones.47 This year marked the withdrawal of the last Ottoman troops from Azerbaijan such that finally, after almost twenty five years, the hereditary properties of the Safavids were reconsolidated into the Safavid Empire.48 Divine agency imbued the ruler’s personal devotion and also his patronage of works of art, be they books or buildings. The Shah’s servility toward the Shi‘i Imamate was marked by his titles, ‘Dog of the Threshold of ‘Ali’ (kalb-i āstān-i ‘Ali) or ‘Slave of the Imam ‘Ali’ (bandā-yi Shāh-i velāyet) which was used as a signature on the objects and manuscripts that the Shah endowed to the shrines at Ardabil and Mashhad. To the library (kitābkhāna) of the shrine of Imam Reza in Mashhad, Shah ‘Abbas gifted his Qur’ans and Arabic books on ḥadīth, jurisprudence and interpretation; and to the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil his Persian books which included illustrated histories like the Shāhnāma and books of poetry by Khata‘i (Shah Isma‘il I’s nom de plume). In addition, all the chinaware and fine porcelains that were kept in the imperial Chīnīkhāna in Isfahan were endowed to the ancestral shrine.49 This division reveals the different meanings that the two shrines had for Shah ‘Abbas.50 Whereas Mashhad, with its history and identification with Shi‘ism, was the obvious choice for the books of orthodoxy and learning, the shrine of Shaykh Safi at Ardabil was perceived as the dynastic shrine of the Safavid Shahs. As implied in ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi’s description, the Gunbad-i shāhzādehā had most likely been a space for Sufi rituals that had been converted at the turn of the sixteenth century into a memorial for martyrs that had died during the founding years of the Safavid dynasty.51 According to ‘Abdi Beg, the building had a tiled dome which he compared to the inlaid

144

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

dome (gunbad-i manbatkārī) in Shah Tahmasb’s palace in Qazvin.52 The Chīnīkhāna is an imposing monument and no doubt served well its multiple functions (figure 10). The dome may have been its only decorated element, as its body faces toward the rear of the shrine complex and is hidden from the courtyard by the Dār al-ḥuffāz (figure 11). The Chīnīkhāna is a large octagonal structure made of burned brick and mortar, and oriented on the cardinal axes (east–west), askew from the qibla-orientation of the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi.53 Architectural and archeological evidence has shown that the original building was free-standing, with a primary entrance iwan where currently it is attached to the Dār al-ḥuffāz.54 It thus predates the Dār al-ḥuffāz and was probably one of the earliest structures of the shrine complex. The space was renovated in the beginning of the seventeenth century as a library-repository and renamed the Chīnīkhāna, or Porcelain House (plate 17). Just as the epigraphy in the Dār al-ḥuffāz pointed to the abstract religious and imperial dynastic ambitions of Shah ‘Abbas, the Chīnīkhāna was conceived of as the actual repository of the family’s treasures.55 The central space is square, with the corners beveled and forming narrow arched recesses. The zone of transition is a narrow drum with tiny windows punched in. The vertical section of the room is divided into three registers culminating in the hemispherical dome, which is adorned with stellate shapes.56 The interior was completely renovated and a wooden shell inserted within, which is divided into four primary alcoves. The alcoves are formed of finely carved plaster, with multiple shallow niches in the shapes of vases and ogee arches cut into it, ascending up to the base of the circular dome. The whole is painted and gilded with floral design in red, blue and green.57 Carved into some of the niches are small mirrored phrases, such as, ya Ṣafi, yā ‘Alī (figure 12). Several illustrated manuscripts and precious objects were stored within these cupboards and alcoves (figure 13).58 The decorative style of the Chīnīkhāna is similar to that of the adjacent Dār al-ḥuffāz, with its red, blue and green tones and luxurious gilded relief. The style was common in the early seventeenth century, as witnessed in the contemporaneous renovation of the tomb of the Safavid ancestor, Amin al-din Gibra‛il in nearby Kalkhoran. The gilded and painted stucco decoration in the Chīnīkhāna was also a reference to Timurid imperial monuments such as the Aq Saray palace and Tuman Aga mausoleum in Samarqand. Another interesting parallel may be found in the Zarnigārkhāna of the shrine of ‘Abdullah Ansari in Gazargah, which has been dated to the end of the fifteenth century (figure 14).59 Once again,

Figure 10  Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, plan c. 1620. Drawn by Tala Gharagozlou.

Figure 11  Chīnīkhāna, exterior view from graveyard. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

Figure 12  Chīnīkhāna, details of ceiling carvings.

Figure 13  Chīnīkhāna, interior view showing lower zone and storage. From F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

The Princely Aesthetic

149

Figure 14  Zarnigārkhāna, interior view, 15th–16th centuries. Shrine of ‘Abdullah Ansari, Gazargah. Courtesy of the Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT Photo by Lisa Golombek.

earlier precedents were evoked in Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, in keeping with his broader political ideology. One of the earliest textual mentions of a porcelain house is found in the Bāburnāma, a biography written by the first Mughal emperor, Zahir al-din Babur (d. 1530). In 1497 Babur visited Samarqand and described the buildings and gardens built by the prince, Ulugh Beg. In a garden on the Kohak Hill was a four-door portico (chahārdarā) called ‘chīnīkhāna’. The pavilion was named such, according to Babur, as the entire dado was tiled with porcelain which had been brought from China. Babur does not mention that vessels or objects were kept in this pavilion.60 Similarly, the Timurid vizier, Mir ‘Ali Shir Nava‘i had built a chīnīkhāna in his gardens in Gazurgah, in order to house his porcelain collection.61 The poet Vasifi described a space comprised of richly ornamented arched niches for the display of precious wares. These descriptions bear a striking resemblance to the Chīnīkhāna at the shrine of Shaykh Safi. They also point to the fact that the Chīnīkhāna evolved in a courtly environment and was closely linked to the princely aesthetic of early modern Iran. Two Timurid illustrations made at the court of Sultan Husayn Bayqara

150

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

show wall niches in which vessels are displayed. For example, ‘The Beggar before the King’ (Mantiq al-ṭayr of Attar, Herat, 1483) (figure 15) and ‘A Party at the Court of Sultan Husayn Mirza’ (Būstān of Sa‘di, Herat, 1488).62 Both paintings show a two-storey palace on the left side of the page, with a projecting balcony on the second floor. The interior of the arched opening is ornamented by three vertical rows of niches, containing blue and white vases, bowls and ewers. In the former painting the Sultan sits on a regal dais directly below the balcony. The ensemble, that is, the niched balcony and the dais, frame the royal figure, and are visual cues signifying sovereignty. Interestingly, the niche-motif was also utilized by the successors of the Timurid dynasty, the Mughals of India. The gateway to the mausoleum of Padshah Akbar (d. 1605) at Sikandra is covered with similar niches in the forms of vessels carved in low relief into the stone structure.63 The imperial symbols of the Safavid and Mughal rulers point to the cultural markers of both dynasties, as mediated through their shared Timurid heritage. The Ardabil Chīnīkhāna was ordered by Shah ‘Abbas as a repository and to display the numerous wares that he had endowed to the shrine.64 The room was not a treasury as this function was already filled by the khāzīna, which was a small room off the tomb tower, where gold and silver candles and other ritual objects were kept. As a reflection of the Shah’s personal charisma, the Chīnīkhāna was endowed with a sanctified ambience, owing to its placement in the heart of the shrine.65 There was thus a spatial as well as conceptual connection between the funerary chambers of Shaykh Safi and Shah Isma‘il, and the Chīnīkhāna, all of which were accessed through the ornate and monumental Dār al-ḥuffāz. Together they sheltered the ‘history’ of the Safavids and commemorated it through the collection of precious artifacts and the construction of monumental architecture. The word-play in the Chīnīkhāna is particularly interesting when considered from the point of view of the remarkable porcelains gifted by Shah ‘Abbas. The name of the room referred both to the material of the blue and white wares (porcelain, china) and the original provenance of many of them (China). The surviving porcelains point to the fact the Shah ‘Abbas’ collection consisted of numerous Yuan and Ming wares, notable for their glowing white bodies ornamented with imposing figures of dragons and sphinxes (figures 16, 17). The decoration of the room, in gold and opulent colors gave to it a richness also associated with Chinese architecture. A fifteenth-century report of a Timurid diplomatic embassy describes the monuments of the Ming court as intricately-carved wooden structures,

Figure 15  ‘The Beggar before the King,’ Attar, Mantiq al-ṭayr, 1483 (Herat) inv. 63.210.28 Photo: Malcolm Varon. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A. Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Art Resource, NY.

Figure 16 Meiping (vase) with flowering and fruiting branches, 1425–35 (Xiangxi province, China), inscribed with the mark of Behbud and Qarachagahay. National Museum of Iran (inv. no. 9314).

Figure 17 Chīnīkhāna porcelains, photo from F. Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

The Princely Aesthetic

153

with muqarnas stalactites such as those in the arches of the Chīnīkhāna. Like the beautiful room built by Shah ‘Abbas, the Ming imperial monuments were covered in gold and red paint, such that they glowed like ‘red gold.’66 It is tempting to ponder if the Chīnīkhāna interiors were designed with the magnificent Chinese porcelain collection in mind. Eskander Munshi mentions a royal chīnīkhāna in Isfahan where Shah ‘Abbas’ collection was kept before it was moved to Ardabil. On the fifth floor of the ‘Ali Qāpu gatehouse is a sequence of rooms which have similar decorative motifs to the Chīnīkhāna and may have served as the original site for Shah ‘Abbas’ manuscripts and porcelains (plate 18, figure 18).67 The rooms are orthogonal, and columns support the arched openings. Ornamental niches are cut into the plaster muqarnas semi-domes that rise from these columns, giving a very different effect than that of the octagonal, domed space of the Ardabil Chīnīkhāna. Nonetheless they are both decorated with carved niches, painted and gilded, and were no doubt places where the enjoyment of beautiful books and objects could take place.68 Adam Olearius visited the shrine of Shaykh Safi in 1637 and saw the Chīnīkhāna and the precious objects and books. He calls it the Jannatsarā, but the description leaves little doubt that it is the Chīnīkhāna that he was referring to when he wrote: We were conducted through the same gallery, towards the right hand, into another spacious apartment, which was arched all about and gilt; where we could not but admire the manner of its building, which being near as large as a fair church, was nevertheless sustained by the strength of the roof, and without pillars. This hall is called Tzenetsera, and serves for a library. The books were laid in drawers, shuffled one upon another, without any order, but otherwise well enough kept. They were all manuscripts, some, upon parchment, others upon paper, most in Arabic, and some in the Persian and Turkish languages, but all excellently painted, richly bound, and covered with plates of gold and silver, carved and branched. The books of history were enriched with several representations in colors. In the niches of the vault, there were above three or four hundred vessels of porcelain; some so large, as they contained above forty quarts of liquor. These are only used at the entertainments, which are brought from the sepulcher, to the king and other great lords, who pass that way: for the holiness of that place permits not that they make use of any gold or silver. Nay, it is reported of Shaykh Safi, that he, out of an excessive humility, made use only of wooden dishes.69

Figure 18  Detail of the window in the ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, fifth floor atrium, Isfahan, early 17th century.

The Princely Aesthetic

155

The luxury wares and manuscripts deposited in the newly-constructed Chīnīkhāna were expensive collections associated with royalty. By commissioning the Chīnīkhāna and gifting his collection to it, Shah ‘Abbas was focusing on another facet of imperial benevolence: the collecting of art and the patronage of artistic ateliers.70 The manuscripts and porcelains stored in the Ardabil Chīnīkhāna were inscribed with religious epithets as well as the seal of Shah ‘Abbas (bandā-yi shāh-i velāyat ‘Abbās bar āstāna-yi Shāh Safī namūd, ‘The slave of the “Shah of Sanctity” (Imam ‘Ali), ‘Abbas gave it to the shrine of Shaykh Safi’). Attentive of their legal, historical and cultural value, as well as artist merit, it is not surprising that the books were not allowed to leave the shrine precincts. The Chīnīkhāna’s lavish decoration and pious evocations were perfectly suited in a room where the reading and recitation of books could take place. However, the intellectual and visual pleasure that they, along with the porcelains, naturally evoked was complemented by their role in the religious and ceremonial life of the shrine. The role of the Chīnīkhāna went beyond the housing of precious wares; it was itself a place of pleasure. It can be imagined that the niches that housed the vessels also held the candles and oil lamps that were part of the shrine collection. The light cast from these would illuminate the space causing a wonderful aura. The beautiful interior with its ornately carved and stuccoed ceiling enhanced the poetry and painting in the manuscripts. The gold-leaf on the woodwork was akin to the burnished and illustrated pages. The refinement of the porcelains was reflected in the skilled workmanship of the architecture that was reminiscent of the Chinese art of cloisonné. The octagonal space mirrored itself, repeating the patterns and the architecture on infinite axes. In such a manner, each reference overlapped and expanded the many modes of experience within the Chīnīkhāna. Revival and Renewal at the Ancestral Shrine

The Dār al-ḥuffāz and Chīnīkhāna survive as monumental examples of Shah ‘Abbas’ piety and the grandeur of the Safavid Empire in the early seventeenth century. Although no longer extant, other buildings and rituals that he established at the shrine were no less symbolically charged. Take, for example, the kitchen, the heart of the charitable institution and where the cooking and distribution of alms was undertaken. The large kitchen was endowed by the ruler and contained vast cauldrons that were used for cooking morning and evening meals, and its doors were covered with plates of silver, ‘and all things within it were handsomely ordered …

156

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the great cauldrons were set in a row, and sealed within the wall, along which passed a pipe which, by divers cocks, supplied all the kitchen with water.’71 They were sufficiently impressive that foreign visitors were taken to view them and described them vividly: As you go out of the fine hall of this building, you turn on the right hand into a place which leads to the kitchen, the door of which is also plated with silver. In the midst of it are two great wells and in the wall, which is a good height, there are several holes filled with pots and kettles, and beneath, some large stores. Here they dress victuals for those who have the care and guard of the sepulchre and besides every night they distribute peloe to hundreds of poor people.72 The kitchen’s significance went far beyond the function of food preparation, as characterized by Shaykh Safi himself, who said that the shrine was ‘for the feeding of the poor and to provide service to the old and infirm’.73 The food from here was imbued with barāka, or divine benevolence; in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk a Qur’anic verse was used in reference to the kitchen which stated, ‘And feed with food for love of Him [76:8].’ During ‘āshūra ceremonies almsmen lay in the ashes brought from Shaykh Safi’s kitchen in order to gain blessing.74 When Shah ‘Abbas rebuilt the shrine’s kitchen in 1605 his chronicler composed the chronogram, ‘May the kitchen flourish,’ a blessing extended, through close association, to the Safavid dynasty.75 The Shah’s charisma was conflated with the sanctity of the shrine’s kitchen where he gave generous gifts such as silver mortars and underwrote the daily food distribution. The ‘Royal Sharbatkhāna’ of the shrine was also patronized by Shah ‘Abbas who gave money to it and supervised its administration. According to ‘Abdi Beg, it was ‘near the delightful spring, the opening of which is enclosed. It consists of a pool (hauz) and a building (maḥal) for cooking sweets and a portal facing west.’76 At the Sharbatkhāna Shah ‘Abbas performed rituals that were both miraculous and banal; he donated money to its upkeep and bequeathed the reward from it to the spirit of his mother.77 The imperial associations did not stop there for the Sharbatkhāna was a component of both shrines and palaces. In the eighteenth-century Tadhkirat al-mulūk the belongings of the royal Sharbatkhāna in Isfahan were listed as ‘vessels of gold, silver, china, glazed ware and copper, as well as crystal sugar, candy, medicinal herbs, coffee, tobacco, glass; tops, tubes and other accessories of hookahs; halila, amula, and other preserves; lemon juice, rose-water, etc., spirits (‘araq?), pickles, perfumes, etc…’78

The Princely Aesthetic

157

It was probably from the shrine’s sharbatkhāna that the beautiful vessels used in the āshūra ceremony, described by Olearius in 1639, were brought out and displayed publicly. He wrote: There were set before them, upon a cloth, wherewith they had covered the ground, several vessels of porcelain, with sugared and perfumed water, and, near the table, brass candlesticks, four foot high, with great wax candles in them, also lamps, filled with rags dipped in suet and naphtha. The Governor took up his place at the entrance of the court, on the right side of the gate, and sat upon the ground. Our people had standing before them great wooden candlesticks, or branches, holding each of them twenty or thirty wax candles. There were fastened to the walls thousands of lamps, of plaster, all filled with suet and naphtha, which cast a great light, that the house seemed to be on fire.’79 The splendid architecture, the precious wares, and the glowing illumination that Olearius and others witnessed were reminders of Shah ‘Abbas’ interventions at the ancestral shrine, and also served as markers of the political and ideological transformations that he had established. Shah ‘Abbas was represented through three primary representations of authority, namely as a just and pious Shi‘i and sayyid ruler; a charismatic Sufi pīr; and an Iranian king modeled on Timurid precedents. The luxurious interiors of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and Chīnīkhāna diverged from the humility Shah ‘Abbas had often portrayed, by augmenting the supremacy of the cult of Safavid rulership. Through references to fifteenth-century practices of collecting and patronage, Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations at the shrine helped merge his vision of Safavid sovereignty with the prestigious history of his successors. In replicating Timurid culture through these architectural commissions and the display of his imperial collections, Shah ‘Abbas linked his reign with another Iranian dynasty, one that was also a source of inspiration to his eastern neighbors, namely, the Uzbeks and Mughals. The shrine was thus an interface between Timurid and Safavid architecture, a site both of invention and tradition.80 Shah ‘Abbas’ renovations at the shrine of Shaykh Safi must be considered in relation to his generosity at the shrine of Imam Reza as well as his grandiose architectural feats in the capital of Isfahan. Shah ‘Abbas’ merging of the royal and religious ceremonial resulted in an entirely novel architectural idiom, which expanded out from the shrine of Shaykh Safi to neighboring ones like Amin al-din Gibrail’s in Kalkhoran, and to eastern ones like the shrine of Khwaja Rabi‘ in Mashhad. Both the Dār al-ḥuffāz

158

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

and Chīnīkhāna were evidence of an expanding inventory of sacred and palatial architecture that would mark his reign. By this time, the representations of imperial power were in the form of pomp and ceremony, as well as enactments of piety and humility. Perhaps it was in competition with his neighbors, the great Mughals, whose elaborate rituals of presentation and enthronement were such that they were likened to Sun-gods. Or perhaps it was opposition to the strict, yet highly orchestrated court culture of his Ottoman rivals that induced Shah ‘Abbas to express his reign in great public displays of architectural might, whose meaning was often as ephemeral, yet awesome, as the illuminations he so enjoyed.

6 MARKING THE SACRED LANDSCAPE SAFAVID COMMEMORATIVE ARCHITECTURE IN THE EARLY SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

The family of the Prophet is like the Ark of Noah; to ride it is to gain deliverance, to oppose it is to drown in destruction.1 The shrine of Shaykh Safi was transformed in a little over one hundred years from a modest, if influential, Sufi shrine into a dynastic monument that served as an exemplar of Safavid taste and ideology. Architectural ambiguity was practiced to convey an image of power, temporal and spiritual, exemplified by the renovation of the Chīnīkhāna, which appropriated the princely aesthetic of Timurid art and architectural culture. Imperial grandeur and opulence were displayed at the palaces in Qazvin and Isfahan, as well as at religious edifices such as Imam Reza’s shrine in Mashhad. The program of both types of architecture, devotional and palatial, was thus merged to symbolize the role of Shah ‘Abbas as a charismatic leader and powerful king. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was part of a larger group of architectural institutions that were actively patronized by Shah ‘Abbas. In addition to building mosques and palaces in his capital, Isfahan, the ruler deployed architects and engineers to build roads, bridges and dams, thereby creating an infrastructure that would aid him in effectively governing the empire. Informal devotional networks, established since before the Safavid era, were now concretized through a determined political and economic agenda. Shah ‘Abbas ordered the construction of caravansaries throughout Iran, dotting the landscape with signs of a confident and consolidated empire. Security was provided to those traveling along heavily-traveled pilgrimage and trade routes that the caravansaries served.

160

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

The shrine of Shaykh Safi must also be placed within a broadened context of devotion and religious practice. By the late sixteenth century, the holy sites of Mecca, Madina and Jerusalem were under Ottoman control, as were the burial sites of all but one Shi‛i Imam. In order to shift the focus from these important pilgrimage sites Shah ‘Abbas undertook an agenda of patronizing and renovating a variety of holy sites within Iran’s borders, which included buildings mosques and renovating shrines of both Sufi and Shi‛i shaykhs. The distinction between Sufi and Shi‛i institutions is based on important theological and ritual differences; however, in the early modern period in Iran these distinctions were blurred. Safavid sources do not refer to either holy figures or their shrines as Sufi or Shi‛i, but rather point to their relative religious significance. The Imamate was at the top of this hierarchy and the Safavids nurtured a close association and sought out the shrines of imams and their progeny for their attention. The most important shrine was that of the eighth Imam, Ali Reza in Mashhad, followed by that of his sister, Fatima Ma‛suma in Qum. These shrines, with that of Shaykh Safi, formed a powerful triad of influence and were the primary pilgrimage sites in Safavid Iran. They were supported by an extensive lattice of secondary shrines belonging to Shi‛i figures as well as Sufi shaykhs. The tombs of Imamzadeh Abdul Azim in Rayy and Imamzadeh (Shahzadeh) Husayn in Qazvin were patronized, as was the shrine of Bibi Haybat, believed to be a sister of Imam Reza, in Baku. The latter was often singled out for patronage by both Shah Tahmasb and Shah ‘Abbas, who conquered the town in 1538 and in 1601, respectively.2 What linked all these sites was a concern with dynastic history and the propagation of Safavid ideology. Safavid chroniclers write of the patronage of the shahs but also their deputies and loyal commanders. In fact, the earliest acts of architectural patronage were undertaken in the name of Shah Isma‘il by the governor of Isfahan, Durmish Khan Shamlu, who was a Qizilbash Amir.3 The Harūn-i Velayet tomb commemorates an imāmzādeh, Harun, who was believed to be a descendant of Imam Musa Kazim. The shrine is located in the old center of Isfahan, near the Seljuk Congregational Mosque and was constructed in 1513 by Mirza Shah Husayn, an Isfahani notable and an architect. Diagonally across from the shrine is another Seljuk monument, the Masjid-i Ali, which was also renovated by Mirza Shah Husayn by order of Durmish Khan Shamlu, in 1523. Both edifices are dedicated to Shah Isma‘il ‘Bahadur Khan’, who is named in the foundation inscriptions as a ‘ghāzī’ (warrior for the faith) as well as a just ruler.4 These architectural commissions set the stage for a century of building and renovating

Marking the Sacred Landscape

161

historic sites that would serve well in disseminating the Safavid vision of piety and legitimate rule. The shrine of Shaykh Safi was given a great deal of attention by Safavid rulers in terms of both financial and architectural patronage. Texts – ranging from chronicles, land registers and poetry, to eye-witness accounts of European travelers – are proof of an ongoing fascination with the history and symbolism of the shrine. As such it serves as a resource for studying not only architecture in early modern Iran, but also rituals of piety and sovereignty. Little is known about the Safaviyya order but for what was inscribed in the redacted Safwat al-ṣafā of Ibn Bazzaz; less is known about its survival in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The new construction undertaken by Shah Tahmasb and the subsequent renovations by Shah ‘Abbas provide insights into Safavid Sufism. The religious and imperial ceremonial enacted at the Ardabil shrine was also performed at other sites associated with the dynasty, such as the shrines of Imam Reza and Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud. Together they provide crucial information about politics, ideology and popular culture in early modern Iran. Azerbaijan and the Ancestral Domain: Amin al-din Gibra‛il and Shihab al-din Mahmud

Shah ‘Abbas’s agenda for propagating the Shi’i faith was supplemented by the renovation of local shrines and mausolea throughout Iran. The casting of Azerbaijan as a Safavid dominion was reiterated primarily through the rebuilding and renovation of two monuments, namely, the tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‘il in Kalkhoran and that of Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud in Ahar.5 Shah ‘Abbas rebuilt both at about the same time as the renovations at the shrine of Shaykh Safi. These smaller shrines had very different attributes and functions, but they were united through the Shah’s patronage and his desire to propagate the historical legitimacy of the Safavid dynasty. The historical and architectural evidence both point to the integral role of the tomb of Amin al-Gibra‘il and its association with the Safavid ancestral shrine in Ardabil. The shrines in Kalkhoran and Ahar also reveal a pattern of building and renovating what may be called ‘satellites’ to the main shrines in Ardabil and Mashhad. Multiple clusters of pilgrimage sites were thus knit into a rich and diverse tapestry that invoked Sufism and Shi‛ism as the foundations of Safavid ideology. Kalkhoran was the birthplace of Shaykh Safi and also where his father, Amin al-din Gibra‛il, was buried (figures 1a, 1b). It was part of a pilgrimage itinerary that included the shrine of Zahid Gilani, Shaykh

Figure 1a  Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, Kalkhoran, c. 1605.

Figure 1b  Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, Kalkhoran, rear view, c. 1605.

Marking the Sacred Landscape

163

Safi’s teacher, in Mazandaran, and more locally, shrines in Mishgin and Ahar. Although Shah Tahmasb visited Kalkhoran often, it was not until the reign of Shah ‘Abbas that the mausoleum of Gibra‛il was rebuilt and embellished. The tomb had a generous endowment and a rich collection of carpets as well as precious silver and gold lamps.6 In his seventeenthcentury Silsilāt al-nasab al-ṣafaviyyāh, Pir Husayn Zahidi presented a petition (‘arz dāsht) dated 1601–2 for the repair and embellishment of the tomb of ‘Hazrat Sultan Sayyid Gibra‛il’ in Kalkhoran. In detailing the construction requirements at the tomb of Gibra‛il (and the shrine of Shaykh Safi, the primary subject of his manuscript) Zahidi conveys the close ties between the two institutions. According to the author, the dome of the Kalkhoran tomb had been damaged and was repaired with tiled bricks.7 According to the Tārīkh-i ‘Abbāsī of Jalal al-din Yazdi, in 1605 Shah ‘Abbas visited the tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il after paying his respects at the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil. He spent four days in Kalkhoran where he ordered the renovation of the tomb of ‘Sayyid Gibra‛il.’8 The ‘Sayyid’ honorific bestowed prestige on Gibra‛il who was, in his own lifetime, neither a savant nor a holy man, but a well-to-do landowner. The title elevated his status by associating him with the ahl al-bayt not unlike his burial site which was renovated as an opulent memorial. The tomb of Gibra‛il is situated within a large walled enclosure which includes a cemetery containing memorials to Safavid notables. There is, for example, the free-standing domed tomb of ‘Aws al-Kawāṣ bin Firūzshāh Zarīnkula who was believed to be a spiritual ancestor to Shaykh Safi.9 Another monument commemorates an imāmzādeh, Sayyid Abi al-Qasim Hamza, who was believed to be a son of Musa Kazim. It will be recalled that the genealogy of the Safavids also led back to Imam Musa Kazim, thereby establishing the site as a de facto ancestral cemetery and reinforced its significance as a pendant to the shrine in Ardabil where Safavid elite were buried. The style and decoration of the site make evident its significance and the sustained patronage it received. The tomb is a free-standing building, with a high dome rising over the burial chamber of Gibra‛il. The building differs from the tomb tower style which was more common in the region and is exemplified by the tomb of Shaykh Safi.10 A drawing from the early eighteenth century reveals that there was a tall drum capped by a dome, and both were inlaid with brick tiles, a feature common to Timurid buildings and their revival during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas (figure 2).11 The illustrator of the drawing was the Dutchman, Cornelis de Bruyn, visited Kalkhoran in 1703 and described it as such:

164

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Figure 2  ‘Ardebil,’ from Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn (1703) (London, 1737). Courtesy of Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Yale University.

At the entrance to the village I saw the sepulchral monument of Seid Tzeibrail [Sayyid Gibra‛il], the father of Safi above-named… This monument stands in a garden, surrounded, or enclosed by an earth wall, and two large folding gates, one in the front, and the other backwards. The latter comes out to the road; but the former is in the village. Again, the royal monument is quadrangular, tolerably lofty, and cased with small stones. There is a round tower on the top of it, tho’ but low, which supports a verdant [green] dome, inlaid with gold and azure decorations, surmounted with golden balls. On each of the walls there are fix several windows, the highest whereof are exquisitely well wrought, beautifully painted, and embellished like the dome, and those underneath them, have each an iron grate, and shutters to them within. There are small cavities below the cornice, which are embellished with a rich variety of colours, and in the center of the

Marking the Sacred Landscape

165

structure behind, there is a wooden gate, with a step to it. Above this door, likewise, there is a decoration in the form of a semi-vault, with three small windows in it. This door, I perceived, was fast locked; and that in the front is a very fine portal.12 In the photographs from the turn of the twentieth century it is possible to discern some epigraphy on the drum of the building, most likely Qur’anic passages and a foundation inscription naming the patron, Shah ‘Abbas.13 The tomb is in the form of a rectangle comprising two rooms, one square-shaped and the other three-sided (figure 3). The entrance is through the latter, the façade of which is in the form of a tall iwān. Poetic verses encircle the frame of the wood doorway that leads into the tomb chamber (figure 4). The poetry utilizes metaphorical language that compares the tomb to heavenly sites such as the mythical Sidrat al-muntahā (‘Furthermost Tree’) as well as the earthly Ka‛ba in Mecca. In addition, ‘Shaykh Gibra‛il’ is called a qutb (pole) and hādī (guide), terms associated with Sufi and Shi‛i authority.14 In the central panels of the doors are the names and appellations of the Prophet Muhammad and the Shi‛i Imams, as well as a Shi‛i ḥadīth exhorting the public towards devotion of ‘Ali Abi Talib. The chronogram inserted into the poem, according to abjād, reveals the date, ah 1030 (1620).

Figure 3  Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, plan c. 1605.

Figure 4  Entrance, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il.

Marking the Sacred Landscape

167

Above the door are two window openings, one above the other. On either side are two lion figures, tethered together by a long chain that appears anchored to the window, that have been painted on a white background. While it is difficult to say when these figures were painted on, they reinforce the tomb’s Shi‛i and imperial associations through the image of the lion, both a symbol of kingship and an attribute of Imam ‘Ali (his appellation is haydar, or ‘lion’). Tiles embellish the lower zone of the entrance iwān and above the door is a panel with a Persian poetic couplet rendered in blue, green and white tile mosaic that was typical of the Safavid period. The poem refers to the pilgrims visiting the site as pious supplicants and devotees and exhorts them to pass through the threshold into the sanctified tomb.15 The entrance foyer is a richly embellished anteroom that has a tiled dado running around its lower zone.16 Above is a carved muqarnas ceiling which is covered with intricate floral patterns, in red paint on white plaster (plate 19, figure 5). Through this foyer is the main burial chamber of Amin al-din Gibra‛il which is in the form of an octagon with four deep alcoves, of which the first serves as the threshold into the room. An ornate mosaictile dado encircles the room, above which is an ornate epigraphic band rendered in stucco relief. The epigraphy, consisting of Qur’anic phrases and Prophet ḥadīth, is painted gold on a dark blue background. Both the epigraphy and the wall paintings above it are reminiscent of the opulent decoration commissioned by Shah ‘Abbas in the Dār al-ḥuffaz and Chīnīkhāna interiors of the shrine of Shaykh Safi. This cohesive, imperial, aesthetic speaks to the ambitions of Shah ‘Abbas to create a comprehensive visual and architectural language to represent the Safavid dynasty. The shrine of Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud Tabrizi in Ahar is located about seventy miles northwest of Ardabil and served as an important regional center during the Safavid period (figure 6). Mahmud was believed to be a son of the well-known Sufi shaykh, Shihab al-din (d. 1191), the founder of the Suhrawardi Sufi order. He was also considered a spiritual ancestor to the Safavids through his teacher, Abu Ghanayim Sajasi. There does not appear to be a large or active Sufi order in Ahar during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, instead the cult seems to have been merged with that of the Safaviyya. Shihab al-din Mahmud’s name was included in the spiritual genealogy of Shaykh Safi and his shrine is mentioned in numerous Safavid chronicles. Most interestingly, his name was also inscribed in the Dār al-ḥuffāz at the shrine of Shaykh Safi during the renovations ordered by Shah ‘Abbas. Safavid rulers paid attention to the shrine of Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud and included it as part of their pilgrimage itinerary, alongside

Figure 5  Tomb chamber, interior detail, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il.

Figure 6  Shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar, c. 1610. From Jacques de Morgan, Mission Scientifique en Perse (Paris, 1894).

170

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

the tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il and the shrine of Shaykh Safi. It was thus part of the regal and religious geography of Azerbaijan. Shah Tahmasb wrote in his biography of his pilgrimage to the shrine during the Ottoman siege of Tabriz in 1548.17 He prayed here for his traitorous brother Alqas Mirza (d. 1548) and pleaded with God for victory. That same evening he saw Shaykh Shihab al-din in his dreams, who informed him that ‘all the shaykhs’ were praying for him. Four days later the Ottomans had left Tabriz.18 Qazi Ahmad Qummi reported that Shah Tahmasb gifted ‘to the Shihabiyya āstāna (sanctuary) in Ahar … 10,000 Toman as soyurghal and waqfs and nazr. He gave whatever was needed to be purchased as food and clothing. And for dining, he gave curtains and floorings such as silken carpets, woolen carpets of fine craftsmanship and golden candles.’19 Shah ‘Abbas was similarly a benevolent patron and in 1608 went to Ahar for pilgrimage to the shrine of Shaykh Shihab al-din (figure 7). He made arrangements for extensive architectural renovations, starting with the rerouting of water for building an orchard on its premises. In 1610 an order was given that a masjid, madrasa and kitchen, be constructed at the shrine.20 Shah ‘Abbas’ visits often coincided with his pilgrimage to the ancestral shrine in Ardabil and the chronicles report on them together. The

Figure 7  Shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh

Marking the Sacred Landscape

171

association was also architectural, as the extant buildings clearly show Safavid interventions in their formal and decorative motifs. The shrine of Shaykh Shihab al-din is distinct from both the mausoleum in Kalkhoran and the shrine complex in Ardabil, except in one important way: the interiors are renovated with opulent painting and use of muqarnas detailing, a style that was popular during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas and implemented at the neighboring monuments. The shrine of Shaykh Shihab al-din is both typologically and functionally distinct from the one in Ardabil. It is an aggregate of spaces and functions that are contained within a single primary structure.21 The freestanding building is almost square in plan with an open courtyard enclosed within. The northern façade appears to be the primary one and is in the form of a massive iwān portal, flanked on either side by two semi-circular towers. These towers rise up until the parapet of the iwān although it is possible that in earlier times they were taller and served as minarets, as in eastern Anatolian mosques. At present, the two minaret-engaged columns are clad in turquoise blue glazed brick tiles, while the rest of the building is unadorned brick.22 Blind arches cover the surface of the façade, with three functioning windows and three doors puncturing the surface. The entrance through the northern façade leads into a large hall that has been identified as the khānqah of the shrine, and was most likely used for Sufi ceremonies.23 At present the space is simple and bare, similar to the Jannatsarā at the shrine of Shaykh Safi. No inscriptions have survived either on the northern façade or on the interior of the hall. The other two entrances, on the eastern and southern side, lead directly into the courtyard where the cenotaph of Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud is located. A beautifully carved stone railing surrounds the burial space, interrupted by an equally ornate portal located on the eastern side. Above the arched opening is a stone plaque with the names and appellations of the twelve Shi‛i Imams inscribed into it. In the center of the open-air enclosure is a carved slab of stone which marks the grave of Shaykh Shihab al-din. The shrine is unlike the more common domed mausolea in the region, and exemplifies the architectural variety of devotional buildings in Iran.24 The entrance on the eastern façade is distinguished by the carved stone slabs which were used to frame the wooden doorway (figure 8). The topmost plaque is carved once again with the names and appellations of the Shi‛i Imamate, whereas the lower slab identifies the man to whom the shrine is dedicated: ‘The ruler (ṣulṭān) of the enlightened, the pole of the mystics, the Shaykh Sultan Shihab al-din Ahari, may God bless his spirit.’25 Below the epigraphy, on either side of the arched frame,

Figure 8  Exterior portal with epigraphy panel, shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi, Ahar.

Marking the Sacred Landscape

173

are intricately carved designs of the six-sided Solomonic star or seal. This last symbol fully reiterates the mystical as well as imperial associations of the shrine, as witnessed already in the epigraphic program. The sanctification of the shrine of a Sufi mystic, notably from the Sunni Suhrawardi order, by the names of the Shi‛i Imamate points, on the one hand, to the fluidity of patronage and meaning between Shi‛i, Sufi and Sunni Islam in the early modern period. On the other hand, the overlay of attributes highlights the complex manner in which Safavid imperial ideology made use of religious symbols to create a unique and powerful political rhetoric, especially when considered in comparison with their Ottoman neighbors who professed an orthodox Sunni Islam as part of their political ideology. The status of the shrine of Shihab al-din Ahari in the lexicon of shrines in Azerbaijan is reinforced in another important space in the shrine, the mosque. This large room lies next to the eastern entrance into the shrine. The interior is the most opulent in the complex and is decorated in the same manner as the tomb chamber of Amin al-din Gibra‛il in Kalkhoran. Kite arches are located in the transition zone between the walls and the ceiling which is in the form of an arched barrel vault. The entire upper zone is embellished in painted stucco designed in intricate geometric and floral patterns. Above the mihrab is an epigraphic cartouche of a ḥadīth extolling the benefits of prayer and the recitation of the Qur’an, central activities in a prayer hall such as this. On one side of the mihrab is a framed signature of the famous Safavid cleric, Baha al-din ‘Amili (d. 1621) stating his pilgrimage (ziyārat) to the holy shrine in 1018 (1609).26 The visits of Shaykh Baha‛ī, as he was known, point to the shrine’s centrality within the broader landscape of Safavid piety. As Robert Gleave has written, Shaykh Baha‛ī helped codify Shah ‘Abbas’ religious policies, especially in regard to pilgrimage and public devotion. His renowned book, Jāmī-yi ‘Abbāsī, was dedicated to his royal patron and written in Persian, making it both popularly accessible and imperially sanctioned.27 The striking similarity of the decorative theme of the prayer hall in the shrine of Shihab al-din Mahmud to the interiors of Amin al-din Gibra‛il’s tomb in Kalkhoran and also to the Dār al-ḥuffāz and Chīnīkhāna of the shrine of Shaykh Safi is proof of their interconnectedness, on both physical and conceptual levels. Importantly, the constructions undertaken at all three evince a systematic program of building and renovating sacred sites associated with the imperial dynasty, whether the figures were direct Safavid ancestors or part of their spiritual lineage.

174

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine The Shi‛i Lineage: The Great Shrines at Qum and Mashhad

The shrines in Azerbaijan provided local significance to that of Shaykh Safi, however, the scale of imperial attention lavished on it brought it on par with the monumental shrines of Imam Reza in Mashhad and of Fatima Ma‛suma in Qum. The involvement of women at the shrines, especially the princesses of the Safavid house, was a particularly significant factor in the success of these institutions. In fact, the earliest act of imperial Safavid patronage was at the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma (d. 816–17), the sister of Imam Reza, whose shrine is in Qum.28 The shrine was a favorite site of pilgrimage and retreat for Safavid women from whom it received a number of important acts of benevolent endowment. In 1519 the dome above Fatima Ma‛suma’s tomb was rebuilt and the Golden Iwan in the main courtyard was embellished (plate 20). Shah Isma‘il’s name and titles appear in the inscription band on the iwān which reads: ‘This exalted building and insurmountable, holy precinct’ was built during the reign of the ‘just and all-knowing sultan, Shah Isma‘il’. The name of the Shah is placed directly above the pinnacle of the arch and is highlighted by light blue tile mosaics. The titles reiterate the image of the ruler as the commander the faithful and the protector the land against tyranny. However, he is also depicted as ‘the Guide’ (māhdī), a title borrowed from Shi‛i theology in which it is often reserved for the twelfth Imam who had gone into occultation. The Shi‛i theme is reiterated on the interior walls of the tomb chamber, below the dome, where there is a ḥadīth which reads: ‘The family of the Prophet is like the Ark of Noah; to ride it is to gain deliverance, to oppose it is to drown (in destruction).’29 The same ḥadīth was written above the marble farmān installed in the courtyard of the shrine of Shaykh Safi by orders of Shah Tahmasb. The foundation inscription of the Golden Iwān of the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma names Shah Isma‘il, but it must be mentioned that among the most important patrons of the shrine was his wife, Shah Begi Begum, the daughter of a prominent Qizilbash amir from the Mausillu tribe. In 1523 she made mortmain a large portion of her property, much of it in the areas surrounding Qum, and bestowed it to the shrine. Shah Begi Begum, known also as Tajlu Khannum, was credited with the construction of the tomb of Shah Isma‘il at the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil, as mentioned in Chapter Two. The manner of her patronage reveals the role played by royal women in the cultural and social dynamics of the time. Their charity augmented the piety of their male counterparts and furthered their political ideology. For example, in 1544 Shah Tahmasb instituted a waqf at the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma that provided money for six ḥuffāz to recite

Marking the Sacred Landscape

175

the Qur’an in the name of his deceased sister, Mahin Banu.30 In 1561 his other sister, Sultanum, was buried in Qum (the body was later removed to Karbala). The architectural prominence of the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma would increase even more in the seventeenth century, when ‘Abbas II and Shah Safi were buried there in lavish mausolea, as were the two subsequent rulers, Suleyman and Sultan Husayn.31 The shrine of Imam Reza was the holiest edifice in Safavid Iran and the source of inspiration for Safavid patronage on all levels, from the sub-imperial to the familial (figure 9). For the Shahs their attentions were consistent with their Shi‛i faith, but their patronage also brought them in dialogue with previous Timurid rulers of Khorasan, the province where the shrine is located. The princess, Gawhar Shad, wife of Shah Rukh Mirza, was an active patron and commissioned the architect, Qavam al-din Shirazi (d. 1438), to build a magnificent new congregational mosque attached to the shrine of Imam Reza. In the shrine precincts, she ordered him to construct and renovated numerous structures, such as the Dār al-ḥuffaz (See Chapter 5, figure 4) and Dār al-ṣiyyāda (Hall of the Sayyids) (figure 10).32 Both Shah Tahmasb and Shah ‘Abbas were brought up by their guardians in Herat (also in the province of Khorasan, like Mashhad), and were well aware of the monumental legacy of Timurid Iran. In 1526, merely two years after his accession to the throne, Shah Tahmasb ordered that the shrine be renovated and embellished. According to a contemporary source, huge amounts of gold were brought for the retiling of the dome and the drum above the Ḥaram. In addition, endowments benefiting the pilgrims, officers, and the resident sayyids were established. Historians recorded numerous pilgrimages by Shah Tahmasb to the shrine of Imam Reza, as does the Shah himself in his biography, Tazkira-Shah Tahmasb. In the latter, Tahmasb recalled a visit to Mashhad in ah 939 (1532) where he dreamed of Imam ‘Ali who foretold of his victory over the Ottomans.33 This was about the time that Shah Tahmasb enacted his famed Edict of Sincere Repentance, and the sacred shrine was the perfect setting from which to launch his renewed orthodoxy. Upon his death Shah Tahmasb’s body was brought for burial in Mashhad where it remained until the Uzbek invasion caused fears of defilement; it was then removed to Karbala.34 In 1598 Shah ‘Abbas regained the province of Khorasan from the Uzbeks. As a sign of his thankfulness he undertook numerous well-publicized barefoot journeys to Mashhad, the most notable one being the pilgrimage of 1601 from the capital, Isfahan.35 The visits were performances of supplication and humility, whereby Shah ‘Abbas performed menial tasks such as sweeping the floors and carpets of the sacred precincts. The shrine

Figure 9  Courtyard, shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad, 14th–20th centuries. Courtesy of Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT Photo by May Farhat.

Figure 10  Shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

178

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

of Imam Reza had been looted by the Uzbeks and stripped of precious objects, such as lanterns of gold and silver, candlesticks, and oil lamps.36 The gold tiles on the dome had been removed and the Dār al-ṣiyyāda and the Chirāghkhāna (Room of lamps) were destroyed. Upon Shah ‘Abbas’ arrival an order was given to re-gild the golden dome of the shrine of Imam Reza and to renovate the interiors of the Ḥaram, the holy sanctuary where the cenotaph of the Imam is housed. The re-gilding of the dome was begun in 1601 and completed in 1606, and the epigraphy on the drum was designed by the famous calligrapher, ‘Ali Reza-yi Abbāsī (plate 21).37 Shah Abbas’ vision of kingship was closely aligned with that of his prestigious grandfather whom he honored through emulation and commemoration. Like Shah Tahmasb, ‘Abbas saw himself as the upholder of Shi‛ism and as a humble supplicant whose duty it was to venerate the shrines of Shi‛i figures. Shah ‘Abbas’ devotion to Imam Reza was similarly demonstrated through large public gifts and extensive building projects at the shrine. The most notable of these endowments was the waqf of 1608, mentioned in the previous chapter, in which the Shah bequeathed his personal collection of books and precious wares to the shrines of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil and of Imam Reza in Mashhad. Several new buildings were erected in the vicinity of the Ḥaram, and included the renovation of the old Timurid courtyard and iwāns. As Eskander Beg Munshi wrote, the Shah oversaw the ‘extension of the shrine complex, including lofty porticos and the buildings around them; the painting and decoration of the sanctuary; the building of new roads, and the construction of the large cistern within the main courtyard.’38 As a marker of their close association with Shah ‘Abbas, important courtiers were allowed to build luxurious tombs for themselves within the sacred precincts. In 1610–11 the grand vizier Hatim Beg Ordubadi was buried in Mashad in a vault near the Ḥaram.39 Similarly, the powerful governor Allahverdi Khan (d. 1613), was buried in a large octagonal domed structure which he had designed during his own lifetime.40 The prestige of these ghulām pointed to the changing hierarchies at the court, begun already during the reign of Shah Tahmasb. The shrine of Imam Reza, as that of Fatima Ma‛ṣuma earlier, was an ideal site for the enactment of piety by close relatives and associates of the Safavids. The surrogate patronage enhanced the prestige of the Shah while simultaneously highlighting the power of his empire. In 1617 Shah ‘Abbas ordered the construction of the Khwaja Rabī‛ mausoleum as an architectural pendant to the shrine of Imam Reza, where it has the same relationship as the free-standing tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il

Marking the Sacred Landscape

179

to the shrine of Shaykh Safi. The mausoleum is situated north of Mashhad and commemorates Rabī b. Khuthaym, reputed to be a companion of the Prophet Muhammad, who had settled in Khorasan.41 Shah ‘Abbas’ name is written on the tall drum above the sanctuary, in epigraphy designed by ‘Ali Reza ‘Abbasi who also designed the monumental epigraphy at the shrine of Imam Reza (plate 22). The free-standing structure has the floorplan of a square with chamfered corners (figure 11), much like the hasht behesht (eight paradises) type in contemporary Mughal funerary architecture such as the tomb of Padshah Humayun (figure 12).42 It would be important to consider the architecture and rituals of visitation through a comparative framework by considering imperial patronage of shrines in contemporaneous Mughal and Ottoman court culture. Certainly, Padshah Akbar’s pilgrimage to Ajmer in the latter half of the sixteenth

Figure 11  Tomb of Khwaja Rabī’, near Mashhad. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

180

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

century was well-recorded by his historians as well as the painters of his biography, the Akbarnama (figure 13). The image of humility depicted by Akbar (r. 1556­–1605), illustrated by his simple white tunic and bare feet, preceded Shah ‘Abbas’ notable pilgrimages to the shrines of Imam Reza and Shaykh Safi. Akbar’s pilgrimages may have provided a source of inspiration to the Safavid ruler, who exchanged gifts and correspondence with his Mughal counterparts, despite tensions at their borders.43 Ottoman patronage of shrines was similarly complex, as witnessed in the architectural patronage of two shrines in particular. The first was the tomb of the seventh-century warrior-saint, Ayyub Ansari, in Istanbul, which served as an important site for the enactment of imperial rites of devotion and legitimation. The tomb was ‘discovered’ in the fifteenth century, and consequently became a popular pilgrimage site. Ottoman sultans would process to the shrine on occasions marking enthronements and military victories; however it was the court elite and high-level clerics

Figure 12  Tomb of Padshah Humayun, Delhi, 1562–72. Plan drawn by Mahdi Sabbagh.

Figure 13  ‘Akbar’s pilgrimage to the shrine of Muin al-din Chishti,’ Akbarnama, Abul Fazl, c. 1569–90, Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

182

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

and religious scholars who were buried in its precincts. The royal family would be buried in the imperial funerary mosques that they also patronized.44 Sultan Suleyman (r. 1520–66) also patronized the shrine of the famed founder of the Mevlevi Sufis, Jalal al-din Rumi, where he built a mosque and semāhāne (a domed hall for the sama’, which in the case of the Mevlevis was a whirling dance). While the Sultan, like his Safavid contemporaries, was a patron of select Sufi shrines, these sites were not directly linked to the Ottoman dynasty.45 The tombs of Khwaja Rabi‛ and Amin al-din Gibra‛il mark a new architectural idiom in Safavid Iran. The buildings emulated earlier Timurid tombs of princes and Sufis and, like these earlier models, were prime examples of imperial patronage. In their opulence and patronage they were also on par with the religiously more significant shrines to which they were geographically linked, namely those of Imam Reza and Shaykh Safi, respectively. However, unlike these shrine complexes, which are expansive and aggregate institutions, the form of the satellite tombs is that of a free-standing funerary monument. Their focus is on the singular object and, by analogy, the individual subject who is commemorated. Shah ‘Abbas’ interest in reviving Timurid modes of authority and aesthetics was already evident in his architectural renovations at the dynastic shrine in Ardabil. The new satellite buildings are further proof of this revival and point to the underlying dynastic and religious motivations that provided the impetus for their patronage. For the first time during Safavid rule new mosques were constructed as important sites of the dissemination of political ideology.46 In Isfahan Shah ‘Abbas commissioned the Masjid-i Shaykh Lutfullāh (1603–19) and the Masjid-i Shāh (1611–38), both of which were prominently situated on the Maydān-i Naqsh-i Jahān (plate 23). The former mosque is a small, jewel-like structure which was built in honor of the cleric, Shaykh Lutfullah al-Maysi, whose daughter Shah ‘Abbas had wed. The Masjid-i Shāh, by contrast, was a majestic edifice with a tall portal facing the plaza. Ornately decorated minār towers (used to announce the call to prayer) and a large dome with the name and titles of Shah ‘Abbas were also visible from the Maydān (figure 14). Above marble dados that encircled the interior courtyard were intricately designed floral and geometric mosaic tiles. In the accompanying epigraphy, the mosque was compared to the holy Ka‛ba in Mecca and its patron singled out for praise among the Prophet Muhammad, his daughter, Fatima, and the Twelve Imams.47 A profusion of ḥadīth and Qur’anic texts reiterated the Safavids’ Shi‛i creed while the architecture affirmed the glory of their empire. Although less is known

Figure 14  View of dome, Masjid-i Shah, 1611–38, Isfahan.

184

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

of the ceremonial that may have taken place within this unprecedented monument, which was flanked by two madrasas, its architectural and epigraphic program offered a unique combination of regality and holiness. Shaykh Safi’s shrine was significant in the social milieu of seventeenthcentury Iran, but not exclusive. Over the course of Shah ‘Abbas’ reign the religious authority of the Safavids shifted away from the ancestral shrine in Ardabil to the sanctuaries in Qum and Mashhad. The Qizilbash involvement in the political arena was minimized and the increased power of the clergy and urban bourgeoisie meant that for these new elites the shrine of Shaykh Safi was primarily a symbol of the Safavid past – a representation made concrete in Shah ‘Abbas’ architectural projects at the shrine. His elaborate renovations of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and Chīnīkhāna interiors had the effect of capturing the shrine’s glorious ancestry and putting it on display, much like the objects stored in the Chīnīkhāna. The imperial aesthetic that these projects demonstrated was unique in the manner in which the palatial and devotional were merged, altering irrevocably the shrine of Shaykh Safi. The typology of the palace was also redefined, as witnessed in Shah ‘Abbas’ Isfahan, where the ‘Ali Qāpū Gatehouse and the Tawhīdkhāna together represented the sacral nature of Safavid kingship. During Shah ‘Abbas’ reign Safavid architecture conflated modes of Sufi, Shi‛i and imperial authority, rendering the differences suspect and, to some extent, problematic. Similarly complex were typological, and even sometimes functional, distinctions within architecture itself, which called into question over-simplified definitions of a palace, a mausoleum, or even a mosque. Shrines such as those of Shaykh Safi and Imam Reza may be seen as knots in a spiritual net – capturing the aura and authority of the cult of holy figures. Whether Sufi or Shi‛i, the relationship with the imperial family was always maintained and it dictated the level and manner of patronage undertaken. Such was also the case for the Safavid court, which was defined in an expansive manner to include women as well as ghulāms, who acted as proxies to the Shah. Their acts of architectural patronage, as exemplified at the shrine of Shaykh Safi, allow insights into the complex nature of Safavid society and its modes of expression, in early modern Iran. The broadened sacral and imperial landscape constructed by Shah ‘Abbas was one that spread geographically over the Empire, and was remarkable in the methodical and consistent manner in which his political and religious ideology was disseminated. Architectural culture at this time was equally recondite, yet united in its singular aesthetic and imperial representation of the Safavid dynasty at the height of its power.

Marking the Sacred Landscape

185

The sites chosen for the representation of Safavid power were diverse; the capital cities and the palaces of the Shahs were as important for the display of imperial authority as were the religious institutions that they patronized. Varying forms of representation were utilized to convey an image of kingship that merged the sacral with the imperial, and forged a Safavid identity that made use of multiple forms of authority. Shah Tahmasb’s panegyrist and court poet, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, extolled his architectural commissions in Qazvin and Ardabil, and praised the shrine as an edifice of royal significance. Historians of Shah ‘Abbas depicted his interventions at the shrine of Shaykh Safi through the lens of pious supplication and devotion to the Safavid creed. The architectural renovations referenced Timurid precedents, while also linking the shrine to the broader context of religious patronage throughout the empire. Grandeur and charity were together concretized through architecture and ceremonial, and the dynastic shrine was the ideal stage upon which Safavid ideologies were performed.

APPENDIX A

SARĪH AL-MILK, ZAYN AL-‘ABDIN (‘ABDI BEG SHIRAZI), SHAWWAL ah 977 (1570)

The primary source for reconstructing the shrine of Shaykh Safi during the sixteenth century is the Ṣarīḥ al-milk land register which was compiled in 1570 by the court poet and chronicler, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi.1 This catalogue of waqfs and property transactions was ordered by Shah Tahmasb and must be considered as a historical document which sheds light on the cultural and political environment of Ardabil over the course of over 250 years. This section is a translation of the description of the shrine complex, and served as an introduction to the detailed chancellery documents that followed (see Chapters Two and Four). The text is divided into prose and poetry: the first describes the buildings and the second eulogizes them. Both forms of description are useful in determining the main features of the buildings and, often, the rituals that may have taken place in them. More importantly, they provide important insights into the aesthetic and intellectual environment within which ‘Abdi Beg wrote. In so doing they allow access into the world of architectural representation in which texts were incorporated as viable resources for describing as well as defining architecture in early modern Iran. TRANSLATION

Azerbaijan Ardabil Town City of Guidance, may God guard it from disasters and murrains to the day of the covenant…

188

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Excellent Ardabil! The light of the eyes, the core of the heart! Gabriel’s wings sweep the threshold of your magnificence. Every moment the tidings of devotees reach your pilgrims, That in our gardens ‘is a spring, named Salsabil’ (Qur‛an, 76:18). The Illuminated Zāwīya

and the holy ḥāzirā, surrounded with the lights of sanctity, and [they are] ‘Gardens of Eden, whereof the gates are opened to them (38:50)’ which [are] adorned and magnified by the sun-splendid cupola and the turquoise dome [of the lord], the pole of the poles, and the glorious children of his holiness, consisting of the revered and holy sanctum (ḥaram), the Chillakhānas, firmament founded, and the sky-scraping offices (buyūtāt) and the buildings (‘imārat). Oh you who have cast a shadow upon the sublime sphere; Your sphere is as exalted as the sky over the earth. The golden lanterns of Heaven take their light from your dome. You overshadow the highest heavens, exalted by your shadow. ‘These are the Gardens of Eden which the immortal enter’ Is heard by those yearning for Paradise (13:23).2 Containing

The Revered Sanctum (Haram) and Dār al-ḥuffāz and dependencies where the residents hear from the lips of Gabriel this oration: Poem

Oh your revered sanctum is like Paradise. The multitudes of your servants share Rizwan’s nature. Your magnificent cupola, like a head raised high, gazes over all domains in every direction. In the universe it has found its height to be no less than heaven. Surely, from the parapet that rubs against heaven’s throne, They raise their hands in Praise of God. The sunburst within its dome displays the banner of the sun in the heart of the dark nights. It has tall crenellations of exaltation that the lassos of accidents are too short to reach.

Appendix A

189

Dome

of the Princes (Gunbad-i shāhzādehā) attached to the aforementioned Dār al-ḥuffāz on the eastern side, leaning south (that is, southest of the Dār al-ḥuffāz). In the universe that dome has no equal, for every brick is connected to the soul. Its air is a gust from the wings of an angel; its mortar [clay] is mixed with the sweetness of life. Light from its empyrean fall on its archway A carpet of the light of sanctity is spread within it. It has passed through heaven into the universal realm. The transit of the heavens are hindered by it. The Lofty Portal (iwān)

in the direction of qibla (southeast), leaning west, known as the Dār al-ḥadīth that is adorned with the great titles of the exalted noble, the imperial lord, dweller of paradise, Sultan Shah Isma‘il Bahadur Khan. Here is the marvelous portal watched over by Saturn. Did I say portal? It is the vault of heaven! It is appropriate that the world boast of this auspicious, noble portal. This amazing portal was unique in the Universe. It became the mihrab of the horizons from the heads bowed before it One can call it the qibla of the ages, That from bowing to it, benefit the fortunate. On two sides, east and west, of this portal are covered graves of the lords, children of the Shaykhs [God have mercy on them] and behind the portal is a street that runs between this building and the residences of […] Sayyid Shaykhshah b. Khwaja Hasan Beg Safavi. The Court

between the buildings [such that] the aforementioned portal is in the qibla direction, and the revered Sanctum and the Dār al-ḥuffāz and dependencies are located on the eastern side. The Lofty Jannatsarā is in the northern direction and the Great Gateway (dargāh-yi mā‘lī) and the

190

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

old and new Chillakhānas are on the western side. The subject of these verses […] is such: Poem

Oh you are the suburbs of sublime Paradise. The place of angels is in your archway. The sublime Paradise is a reflection of you. You give testimony to the sublime Paradise. The sky is protected in the portal, garrisoned in that impregnable fort. You are illuminated by the populace, as the eye is by the pupil, For a place is ennobled by its inhabitants. Humans and angels find peace in you; Heaven and earth find comfort in you. Everywhere your countenance, is the likeness of heaven, Everywhere your garden is the ornament of Paradise. Among them, the elevated precinct as sublime as Paradise, the graves of the great majesty […] the mother of the successful lord (navāb-i kamiyāb, that is, Tahmasb) Shah […] is on the eastern side of this court, attached to the ḥaram, situated at the place reserved for the hand (panja) of Hazrat ‘Ali. Dome

of the sanctified enclosure (maqsura’) Jannatsarā is opposite the portal of the lofty Dār al-ḥadīth, on whose arch (pishtāq) are written the titles of the Shah (Tahmasb)… Poem

With Divine aid, Mercury wrote Atop the royal portal (iwān-i shāhī): ‘Sultan ibn Sultan ibn Sultan, the illuminator of the throne of benevolence, the center of peace and religion, Shah Tahmasb, The locus of justice and benevolence, Shah Tahmasb.’ Oh God, as long as this prosperous portal is adorned by Jupiter and Saturn, May he be fortunate, the King of the World May his existence be safe from calamity.

Appendix A

191

And on the north side of this sky-like dome is a large and spacious enclosure known as the Shahīdgāh. Most of the space between the two is taken by the wall of this building and what are currently the custodians’ houses (farrāshkhāna) of the great shrine. And this enclosure is on the east side – one side near the south and one near the north – and the wall of that is near the turquoise dome and extends till the house of Sayyid ‘Ali Beg b. Khwaja Shaykhjan Safavi. From there again is a wall till the house of the heirs of Sayyidi Beg b…. Safavi, that is behind the wall. The wall extends till the mosque (masjid) that is there and on the west of this, attached by the old baths and the flourishing kitchen, some houses and enclosures that were bought in the days of the rule of the Shah (Tahmasb), were leveled. This building (Jannatsarā) was built on that building, which will be mentioned in detail. Retreat (Chillākhāna) Old and New Old

The site of the seat (jalūs) of the lord […] Shaykh Safi al-din is marked there. It is adjoined to the aforementioned court (ḥahat), and on one side to the chambers (hujra) which are between it and the gateway (dargāh) and part of it is attached to the passage (rāhrū) on the northern side of the Jannatsarā and the kitchen and the Shahīdgāh. New Chillākhāna

That the lord […] Shaykh Sadr al-din Musa built. During the reign of Shah Tahmasb its lofty dome was tiled such that it was second only to the cupola of the sky. The site of this ascension/seat is marked. And that dome is surrounded by forty chambers above and below. On one side is attached the holy courtyard, aforementioned, and on one side it is attached to the forecourt (‘arsa) of the Shrine, which is the place of passage and religious processions of the people. It is attached on one side to the street which separates it from the houses of […] Sayyid Shaykhshah b. Khwaja Hasan Beg Safavi and on one side to the passage opposite the Old Retreat and its dependencies (mulhaqāt).

192

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine The Chambers

in which the collectors of nazr (pious vows) are resident. It is adjoined to the Old Retreat and its dependencies, opposite the New Retreat, to which the above chambers belong. There are more than forty chambers. The Lofty Dais (suffa)

of the graves of the amirs and close companions and the covered graves of the children of the shaykhs. The passage leads to it. And here there is a gateway (dargāh) where the porters are sitting and [people] go to it. Opposite this gateway is a gateway that opens onto the forecourt of the shrine. The Wide and Spacious Forecourt

consisting of the aforementioned gateway [extending] till the main gateway (dargāh-i asal). It is surrounded by offices (buyūtāt). It has a stream like Kawsar [springing] from the qibla side (that is, southeast) and the water of that is divided between the Baths and Offices. Its water brings news of Salsabil (Paradise) Its waves are [caused] by wind from the wings of Gabriel. From its clarity the sand at the depths of the water is made apparent, As from the heart are pure thoughts of fidelity. From the depths of the heart [it] gives evidence of its purity, The profound secret of the sky has given a token of purity. Pure as purity itself It is like hearts that manifest the truth. At night, in its depths the water so clear, That a blind man could count the golden scales of the fish. Since the baths are described under baths and shops under shops, it is not necessary to repeat it here. Soup Kitchen (āshkhāna)

that [consists of] a flourishing kitchen with cauldron-houses (digkhāna) for rice and wheat and other related chambers. The pantry (ayāqkhāna) is on the north of this. The miraculous verse tells of it: ‘And feed with food for love of Him (76:8)’.

Appendix A

193

Bake-House (khabbāzkhāna)

is on the north side of the kitchen, leaning west (that is, northwest). Sharbatkhāna (a room for the preparation of sweet refreshments) near the delightful spring the opening of which is enclosed. Consisting of a pool (hauz) and a building (maḥal) for cooking sweets (halva) and a portal facing west. After that [is] the Sharbatkhāna and its dependent chambers. Office (daftarkhāna)

consisting of a threshold (dihlīz) and house and an enclosure that are on the west of the those upper chambers and lower chambers. Between the Sharbatkhāna and storehouse (hawījkhāna). Storehouse (hawījkhāna)

and store with upper and lower chambers, part of which were old and some houses which were bought during the reign of the successful lord (Shah Tahmasb), and added [to it]. The details of them will be written. Bandstand (naqqarakhāna)

under which is the cistern (saqqakhāna). Behind this is the furnace of the bath and some houses belonging to the holy shrine which end at/with the wood-store (haimakhāna) and [the way goes to it]. Wood-store (haimakhāna)

and the land around it. Chamber (hujra)

on the left side of the Main Gateway opposite the Shrine, with an entrance (dākhil) and a threshold (dihlīz). Chamber (hujra)

on right side of the main gateway also opposite the shrine on the side of the storehouse where the graves of the children of shaykhs are.

194

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine The Gateway

The main gateway between the two chambers aforementioned. The place where people place and rub their foreheads. There is to its portal the shape of a mihrab, People turn their faces to it from each direction. Each one who saw this building of eternal disposition, Dismissed the story of the Gardens of Eden. Earlier there was an old mill in this neighborhood by the edge of the river. It was destroyed and now no one knows where it used to be. The Life-enhancing Space

outside the door of the shrine, opposite which is a lane and shops. It extends to the river and consists of some chambers by the river, and a bridge, and a small garden of the madrasa. During the administration (tauliyat) of […] Zahir[an] Ibrahim[an], in the width of this a dais was paved and a square pool built in it. Oh excellent dais of beauty and purity! Gifts of Paradise that are the gift of the sky. In the Universe there is not such a dais, Instead, in the Universe, it is unique. Each one of God’s angels is asking Read to Him the verse ‘al-Kursī’ (‘The Throne’, 2:255). Madrasa Enclosure

beside the madrasa around which is a wall plastered and made of bricks. Bath

known as the bath of the shaykhs that the pole of the poles Shaykh Safi al-din endowed, according to the documents written by Qazi Fazlallah ‘Ubaidi who wrote it during the days of Sultan Shaykh Sadr a-din Musa dated 761 AH (1360). Currently, the aforementioned bath is bounded on

Appendix A

195

one side by the forecourt of the shrine, one side the street of the flourishing kitchen and the bakehouse, and on another side by the pantry and bandstand. Watermill (tahuna)

near the holy shrine that was endowed by Shaykh Safi. One Complete Chamber (hujr biltammām)

Now there is no trace of it; destroyed and there is no information. Detailed List

of the houses and enclosures bought during the reign of the lord (Shah Tahmasb) may God make eternal his kingdom and reign. The Jannatsarā and other buildings and enclosures were made in and on them. (Since the particular deeds of each one of them exist, while now there is no trace or relic of them to be seen, they will be mentioned briefly.) Houses

(of) Khwaja Khan Vahid that were bought for the dome (gunbad) of the Jannatsarā and its dependencies according to a deed dated 943 AH (1536). All the inns (sarāi) existing in the town of Ardabil in the Street of the Shaykhs behind the ‘Imārat Shihābīyya, bounded by the Public Street (shāhra‘-i ‘am) and by the aforementioned building and the forecourt of the kitchen of the holy shrine and by the houses of the heirs of Khwaja ‘Abd al-Aval Safavi … and also … all the houses adjoining the aforementioned houses, bounded by the aforementioned houses and the house of the heirs of Shah Husayn Safavi and by the Public Street and the ‘Imārat Shihābīyya … and also … all the inns bounded by the properties of the aforementioned vendors and above mentioned building on the other sides. Houses

of the same group bought for the gardens and surroundings of the Jannatsarā, by Jaqmal ‘Aliya Tabrizi b. Khwaja ‘Alla al-din Mansur as agent of Amir Ashraf Mutawallī. These are bounded by the public street [on two sides] and by the house of Khwaja Beg Kavi and the Inn of the

196

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

heirs of Hafiz Sa‘di and Shahsavar Sarabi according to the deed dated 949 AH (1542). House

of Sayyid Qasim b. Sayyid Mahmud Garmudi Khatib and Pir Vali b. Shahuli b. Kiya Muhammed Qazvini and his wife, Ma‘sum Pasha bint Sayyid Nizam al-din Garmudi, adjoined to and bounded on two sides by the Public Street also which Amir Ashraf Mutawallī bought for the gardens of the Jannatsarā on 27 Jumada al-Sani, 946 AH (1539). House

of the heirs of Shaykh Tahir who was the steward (suffrāchā) of the shrine that the aforementioned mutawallī … bought. Also for the dependencies of the Jannatsarā, dated 1 Jumada al-Awwal, 947 AH (1540), located beside the flourishing kitchen. House

of Qazi Sanaullah bought by the aforementioned mutawallī on 14 Rabi al-Awwal 948 AH (1541), bounded by the house of Haji Rajab and the enclosure, the kitchen of the shrine, the house of Shaykh Tahir, and the Public Street. Enclosure

and houses of the heirs of the late Sayyid Zayn al-‘Abidin Beg Safavi, by the agent, Mir Ashraf. Deed: Dated 946 AH (1540) that the Sayyid late Darvish Beg sold of the house, garden, and enclosure bounded by the store (anbārkhāna) of the shrine and by the Public Street on three sides. Deed: Dated 947 (1541) that the Sayyid ‘Abd al-Qasim known as Sayyid Mirza sold the whole of the large enclosure near the aforementioned store, the whole of three houses with three chambers above, a kitchen, two thresholds (dihlīz) and a garden attached and bounded by the Store.

Appendix A

197

Qalībgāh

of the butcher store that the mutawallī of the shrine bought in 949 AH (1542) from the heirs of Shah Shuja‘ and included in the enclosure of the holy shrine. Note: After these poetic descriptions of the shrine and its dependencies, the writer turns to Ardabil and the properties owned by the estate in that town. These are divided into five sections: i. Stores (dukākīn), ii. Houses (khāneha), caravansaries (timche) and hospices (ribāṭ), iii. Baths (ḥammāmāt ), iv. Watermills (tahūnehā), v. Miscellaneous (kāghazhātpapers). After describing the properties in Ardabil, the compiler turns to villages in the vicinity of that town that included Kalkhoran, Alghar, Binan, and Masudabad among many others. This makes up about half of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk; the remaining half is concerned with property owned in Tabriz, Toman Mishgin, Chakursa‘d, Khalkhal, Sarab, Karamrud, Maragha, Mughan and Hashtrud in Azerbaijan, as well as properties as far as Gilan, Shirvan and Iraq-i ‘Ajam.

APPENDIX B ARCHITECTURAL EPIGRAPHY

HARAMKHĀNA

Silver door, donated by Khwaja Chubani, ‘during the tawlīyat of Shaykh Abdal’. Stucco panel at entrance: ‘The world is transitory, thus its reward is piety’. Surrounding this is a ḥadīth which begins, ‘As if you were a passerby count yourself the resident of the tombs and if your soul becomes…’ There are six medallions, three of which have been defaced. The other three read ‘‘Ali, Hasan, Husayn’. Dome: ‘In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. [al-Rahman, 57:26–7] Everyone upon it dies but the face of they Lord remains, possessed of grandeur and magnificence… The owner of this noble, pure and holy abode is the ascetic and godly scion of the Shaykhs, The achievers of truth, the lamented and blessed Muhiy al-milla wa al-din, may God sanctify his precious spirit.’1 TOMB TOWER OF SHAYKH SAFI

Circular seal on the trunk of the tower: ‘Built (‘amal) by the servant, the faqīr, the hopeful toward forgiveness of the Eternal Lord, ‘Awz bin [inside circle] Muhammad al-Maraghi.’ Band on top cornice of drum: ‘[al-Imran, 3:18–19] In the name of God the Merciful and Compassionate. Allah is Witness that there is no God save Him. And the angels and the men of learning (too are witness). Maintaining His creation in justice, there is no God save Him, the

Appendix B

199

Almighty, the Wise. Religion with Allah (is) the surrender (to His will and guidance). Those who (formerly) received the Scripture differed only after knowledge came unto them, through transgression among themselves. Whoso believeth the revelations of Allah (will find that) lo! Allah is swift at reckoning. [al-Momin, 40:65] He is the Living One. There is no God save Him. So pray unto Him, making religion pure for Him (only). [al-Ana‘m, 4:102-3] Such is Allah your Lord. There is no God save Him, the creator of all things, so worship him. And he taketh care of all things. Vision comprehendeth him not, but he comprehendeth (all) vision. He is the Subtle, the Aware.’ Qibla Portal (above door in a rectangular tablet): ‘[Muhammad, 47:19 frag.] So know (Oh Muhammad) that there is no God save Allah and ask forgiveness for thy sin.’ Qibla Portal (Frame): ‘Spoke the Lord: [al-Ana‘m, 4:79, 162] Lo! I have turned my face toward Him Who created the heavens and the earth, as one by nature upright, and I am not of the idolaters. Say: Lo! My worship and my sacrifice and my living and my dying are for Allah, Lord of the Worlds. [al-Isra’, 17:80] And say: My Lord! Cause me to come in with a firm incoming and to go out with a firm outgoing. And give me from Thy presence a sustaining Power.’ In blue Kufic: ‘[al-Nisa’, 4:95] Those of the believers who sit still, other than those who have a hurt, are not on an equality with those who strive in the way of Allah with their wealth and lives. Allah hath conferred on those who strive with their wealth and lives a rank above the sedentary. Unto each Allah hath promised good, but He hath bestowed on those who strive a great reward above the sedentary.’ Interior:

Drum: [48:1–end] Surah al-Fatḥah (Victory). Panel on doors: ‘Ya Allah.’ Casket of Shaykh Safi: ‘This is the illumined grave and blessed tomb of the holy shaykh and the wise lord, the revealer of the secret, the khalifa … the pole of the knowledgeable ones, the sultan of the truthful ones, the imam of the holy friends of God, Abi Fath Safi “al-haq va mulla al-din” Ishaq may God renumerate the signs of blessing on the wise…’

200

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

On northern side of the casket is a silver plate on which is written: ‘The builder of this lofty grave and holy sanctuary of the friend of God, the holy Safi “al-haq va al-din” … the servant Musa al-Safavi.’ Silver doors donated by Shah Safi I: ‘During the reign of the king, Safi, his country, gains piety through this splendor, the key of intention.’ DĀR AL-ḤUFFĀZ (HALL OF READERS) Entrance Portal Inscriptions:

Uppermost rectangle: ‘The Prophet said: I am the city of knowledge and ‘Ali is its gate.’2 Margin (beginning damaged; from right corner): ‘In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This shrine (al-buqa’) noble, most holy, lofty threshold of sanctity and the garden of Paradise, was founded by piety [for] the satisfaction of God. It was set up as a meeting place (majlis) for his exaltation the saint and planted as a tree of goodness whose roots are firm and its branches [reach] in the sky. It is for the recitation of the Qur’an and is surrounded by God’s angels. It is the resting place of the exemplar of the saints and the path of the purest of the pure, the Sultan of the nobles of the hearts and commander of the humans and demons, and the proof of the poles, [because] he is between the two Easts and the two Wests. The polisher of the hearts from doubtful deviation, [he is] the perfector of the bosoms from brilliant signs, which girdle the Ka‘ba of Reunion.’ Horizontal band: ‘Men’s existence is by worship and the brightness of proximity and union [is] by the congregation / effulgencies. May he not cease mastery in the exalted degrees of perfection and witness by eyes in the glorious and beautiful appearances/faces. For the end, he endeavors … for … guidance and honor.’ Left side: ‘By the word of God and all people aiming toward Him for perfection. He realized who he is in the shadow of God and donated [a gift] to Him. The beautiful witness of the testimony acceptance of his Lord without idleness, for God’s satisfaction. [What] he invested the shrine with clothes of affection/devotion and [what] delivered Musa from the “stated time”(?) … the successor, the crown prince and the khalifa after him, the

Appendix B

201

essence of saints of God, the righteous commander of justice (sadr al-haq) and the people and the religion, Musa, may he not cease to be a center over the heights of sainthood and a sun over the sky of guidance. As Mahmud stood in his (Musa’s) place, [or, according to Morton, ‘as he stood in his (Safi’s) praiseworthy place’] he founded it [the shrine] for the various groups in Islam, for those who perform pilgrimage [to it] and for those who dwell [in it] and those who kneel and prostrate themselves. (damaged) Oh Lord, grant this country and provide its people with largess and bounty. Those [of them] who believe in Allah and in [Judgement day].’ Middle horizontal band: (in small white letters) ‘[He is] the polisher of the mirrors of the hearts from doubtful deviation and sins. [He is] the perfector of the bosoms by signs. (Large brown letters) The sultan of the shaykhs [is] his distinction and the proof of the poles [is] his glory, the shaykh, Safi.’ Lowest horizontal band [authentic, repaired in 1935]: (small white letters) ‘God made it by clear signs such an abode. Ibrahim by entering it was safe, such as [just as] he made it like the enduring Ka‘ba for mankind’s protection. Its splendor [is] from the greatness of its Lord and Builder.’ Large brown letters (from Morton): ‘The builder of the blessed precinct is the best of the pure in the two worlds, the Sadr al-Haq [the commander of justice] and people and religion. May God let the Muslims enjoy the favors of his blessings and the benefits of his retreats (khalwat) and make his endeavors a proof for him.’ Above the entrance door (on a rectangle, in white): ‘[al-R‘ad, 13:23–4] Gardens of Eden which they enter, along with all who do right of their fathers and their help meets and their seed. (In small brown thuluth) The Angels enter unto them from every gate (bab), (saying): Peace be unto you because you persevered. Ah, passing sweet will be the sequel of the (Heavenly) home (dar).’ Above the entrance door (arch framing is mostly destroyed, except for a fragment): ‘This gate of the all encompassing, the kindness of God, may it descend on the tomb of the illumined shaykh (the best of men), the exemplar of the sublime poles (leaders) the shaykh Safi al-din, sultan of the one who enjoins, the revealer, the … the external words, the famous one in the world, the shaykh, al-Ishaq, may God’s blessing be on him. Whoever enters here is safe.’

202

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Cornice (in white letters): ‘[al-Baqara, 2:128 frag.] Our Lord! … relent toward us. Lo! Thou, only thou, art the Relenting, the Merciful… (prayer for the completion of the Qur’an) Oh Lord! Revive us by the Qur’an and perish us by the Qur’an, and resurrect us by the Qur’an and permit us [on] the path by the Qur’an and [allow] our entrance into Paradise by the Qur’an and [let there be] no separation between us and between the Qur’an. Oh Lord! Bless our recitations from your book toward the spirits of our fathers and our mothers and toward the spirits of the inhabitants of the graves, [by the] intervention of the Prophet of God.’ (In gold above) ‘In the name of God the Merciful and Compassionate, [al-Mulk, 67:17–22] Or have ye taken security from Him Who is in the heaven that he will not let loose on you a hurricane? But ye shall know the manner of My warning. And verily those before them denied, then [see] the manner of my wrath [with them]! Have they not seen the birds above them spreading out their wings and closing them? Naught upholdeth them save the beneficent. Lo! He is Seer of all things. Or who is he that will provide for you if He should withhold His providence? Nay, but they are set in pride and forwardness. Is he who goeth groping on his face more rightly guided, or he who walketh upright on a straight road?’ Window Grills, numbered right to left: Top

1a ‘[al-Rum, 30:15 frag.] The Lord said: They will be made happy in a Garden.’ 2a ‘The Lord said: They have the land of peace (dār al-salām) by their Lord.’ 3a ‘Said … : May Allah be satisfied by them.’ 4a ‘[al-Tauba, 9:21 frag.] The Lord said: Gardens where enduring pleasure will be theirs.’ 5a ‘Said the Prophet: Such is the work of the knowledgeable.’ Lower

1b 2b 3b 4b 5b

‘[al-Ahqaf, 46:31] O our people, respond to Allah’s summoner…’ ‘Respond to this call (al-da‘wa).’ ‘He loves those who work toward [in the way of] Allah.’ ‘Prayer (al-du‘a’) is worship.’ ‘The Prophet said: The best worship is most beautiful.’

Appendix B

203

Shāhnishīn windows – the epigraphy is complex and appears to be of an earlier date: 1 ‘The weak servant of Allah … servant of …’ 2 ‘(frham likatibahi) … he wrote his prayer for Allah’s forgiveness of his father.’ Silver doors at entrance to the Dār al-ḥuffāz: In one flower is written ‘amal Amir Asad Allah Ardabili’ and on a vertical shaft, ‘amal Muhammad Hasan Zargafi, 1027 AH (1617).’ I. Farman of Shah Tahmasb

This order is inscribed on a marble slab measuring 1.31m × 1.15 m and mounted on the façade of the Dār al-ḥuffāz. The slab is located between the third and fourth windows [from right] on the first story. Above the slab is an epigraphy frieze: ‘The Prophet said: The family of the Prophet is like the ark of Noah; to ride it is to gain deliverance.’3 The epigraphy is in white tile mosaic, over a blue (lajverdi) ground. ‘[After praises of God and thanks] As the asylum of Divine grace, the king, the lawful friend of God, blessings of good assistance, his majesty, the defender of God’s purity [defender of the Pure], the light of the new Moon and the sunlight of guidance, the Sign of Union [sanctity], the highest of the high, the lord, sultan of the sultans, by inheritance and right, the shadow of God in the Universe, Sultan b. Sultan Abu al-Muzzafar Sultan Shah Tahmasb al-Safavi al-Husayni Bahadur Khan, may God make everlasting his kingdom and his rule [sultanat] and extend his Generosity and Beneficence forever. He is clear and bright and the purest of the pure, the overseer of holy shrines and the lofty edifices [like the Sidra Tree]. Such that in those illuminated sanctuaries acts of heresy are forbidden. It was ordered that all the officers, pilgrims and residents be exempt from unlawful impositions. The edifying order, Divine decree, the noble requisite that in the Abode of Guidance, Ardabil, and its territories, also, the beneficent rule [be] observed … [those involved in supplying to the bazaar] leather/saddle making, kindling for the bazaar, sheep for the bazaar, rice for the bazaar are exempted from the tax tribute, tax on trades/professions and the manner of requisite accounting [market values] from the residents and foreigners [visitors]; according to the sincere verse, “who enters here is safe” [3:97] caused to be witnessed by the world and accepted by the people. By propagation of the pure [Islamic] law and [the final completion of the order] by knowing and disavowing prohibition, has attained honor.

204

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Requiring that in the aforementioned Abode of Guidance and territories, by rule, [and] that in the [authorized armies] and royal provinces, taverns, drug houses, electuary-houses, beer houses, houses of pleasure, gaming houses, and singing and pigeon betting is forbidden. The controllers of wealth and taxes should remove them from the registers of the office of taxes. Henceforth the dismissals [are] not revealed. No one with orders from the shari‘a authority [amur – affairs?], for example shaving the beard, playing the tambour, backgammon and the heresy of mourning … have … and the young boys [are forbidden from] servicing of commanders in the baths and will not be occupied in perpetuating unlawful activity [and], and not even think in that direction “And whoso changeth (the will) after he hath heard it – the sin thereof is upon those who change it” [2:181] and those opposing man and religion in the place of God and the royal court will be banished [and their names registered in the tablet of God] in the manner of those [upon whom] is the curse of God and His angels and all mankind. From the clemency with regard to the inhabitants here by the good offices and the overflowing [generosity] and the advantages of the royal caliph … the lord defender of the law and the religion, the one lord [on who] is revealed. On the date Dhil-haj, 9** AH. Written by Hasan.’ Interior of Dār al-ḥuffāz

Silver Door: In the reign of Shah ‘Abbas, the upholder of justice and religion, Whose like under this revolving firmament, has never appeared, now or ever before And at the guardianship of Zulfiqar Khan, The chosen slave of this holy threshold of the heavenly throne, In pure silver in this holy threshold, he created a door Whose like is beyond the mind’s eye [When] the steed of my fancy became emboldened, I searched the world for its chronogram When the auspicious wheel of fortune beheld this pleasing talent, From the invisible world this oracle came to him: ‘The silver doorway of the Khan,’ in 1011 (1602).4 They were gifted by Farhad Khan Qaramanlu the governor of Ardabil, during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas, the date inscribed (and in the poetic chronogram) is ah 1011. On the right side of foyer are two wooden doors, on one leaf of which is written, ‘amal Amir Khan’ and on other leaf, the date ah 1020 (1611).

Appendix B

205

Epigraphy on top cornice band: Surāh al-Fathah. Above Shāhnishīn (at southern corner) is the name of the writer (katiba) Muhammad Isfahani Afshar and the date 138 (the custodians have dated it to 1308 (1890)). Intermediary Panels, starting clockwise from southern corner: 1st panel: ‘[48:14] And Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. He Forgiveth whom he will, and Punisheth whom He will. And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.’ 2nd panel: ‘[48:15] Those who were left behind will say, when ye set forth to capture booty: let us go with you. They fain would change the verdict of Allah.’ 3rd panel: ‘Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Ye shall not go with us. Thus hath Allah said beforehand. Then they will say: Ye are envious of us. [Left out: Nay, but they understand not, save a little].’ 4th panel: ‘[48:25] These it was who disbelieved and debarred you from the sacred mosque (al-masjid al-ḥaram), and debarred the offering from reaching its goal. And if it had not been for believing men…’ 5th panel: ‘And believing women, whom ye know not – lest ye should tread them underfoot and thus incur guilt for them unknowingly; that Allah might bring into His mercy whom He will.’ 6th panel: ‘If (the believers and the disbelievers) had been clearly separated We verily had punished those of them who disbelieved with painful punishment.’ Epigraphy on lower cornice band: On the eastern wall starting with the first niche (moving anti-clockwise) are the names of Shaykh Safi and his spiritual tree: Starting with Hazrat ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, the ‘shajarā vā isnād’ of Shaykh Safi al-din, Shaykh Ibrahim (Zahid Gilani), Sayyid (date: 137) Jamal al-din, Shihab al-din Mahmud Tabrizi (Ahari), Abu al-Ghanaim Rukn al-din al-Sajasi, Abu al-Najib al-Suharwardi, Abubakr al-Abarhi, Qazi ‘Umar Bakri, ‘Uman al-Ma‘ni, Muhammad al-Bakri, Ahmad Aswad Dinwari, Shaykh Junayd b. Muhammad al-Baghdadi, Ma‘ruf al-Karkhi, Habib Allah al-Ajami, Shaykh Haydar bin Junayd, ending with the name of Amin al-din Gibra‛il and that of Hazrat ‘Ali b. Abi Talib which occurs above the entrance to the Dār al-ḥuffāz. Western Wall: Continuing from the name of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib are ḥadīth (1st alcove), ḥadīth and prayers to the Imams including al-Zahra (2nd alcove), ending prayers to the Imams (3rd alcove).

206

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Shāhnishīn: Starting from northwest: ‘[48:26–9] Allah Hath fulfilled the vision for His messenger in very truth. Ye shall indeed enter the inviolable place of worship (al-masjid al-ḥaram), if Allah will, secure (having your hair) shaven and cut, not fearing. But He knoweth that which ye know not, and hath given you a near victory before hand … (till the end of al-Fathaḥ) Allah has promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward.’ (3:26–7): ‘Say: O Allah! Owner of Sovereignty (mālik al-mulk)! Thou givest sovereignty unto whom Thou wilt. Thou exaltest whom Thou wilt, and Thou abasest whom Thou wilt. In Thy hand is the good. Lo! Thou art Able to do all things. Thou causest the night to pass into day and the day to pass into the night. And Thou bringest forth the living from the dead and Thou bringest forth the dead from the living. And Thou givest sustenance to whom Thou choosest, without stint.’ Lower band near grill (at southern corner): ‘katiba Mir Asadullah bin Aga Mir Qavam al-din Rawzakhwan.’5 Silver Doors (next to the tomb of Shah Isma‘il): When the reign of the sovereign of the world, ‘Abbas, May the fame of his role last forever, For this holy threshold, this heavenly emblem, A permanent abode of the angels Khan b. Khan Qilij Mihrani Made a votive offering of a door of pure silver For (fixing) its date, a voice from heaven declared: May the gates of good fortune remain open forever.6 DĀR AL-ḤADĪTH (HALL FOR ḤADĪTH STUDY)

In each of the two pendentives of the main iwān, and secondary iwāns, is a mirrored ‘ya Allah/ya Safi’ which is a replica of original epigraphy as seen in Sarre’s photographs. Central iwān (new repair, see Ṣarīḥ al-milk where it says that the portal was adorned originally with the titles of Shah Isma‘il): ‘[al-Jinn, 72:18– 21] And the places of worship (al-masājid) are only for Allah, so pray not to anyone along with Allah. And when the slave of Allah (Prophet) stood up in prayer to him, They crowded on him almost stifling. Say (unto them,

Appendix B

207

O Muhammad): I pray unto Allah only, and ascribe him no partner. Say: Lo! I control not hurt nor benefit for you.’ ‘The best work is Pure.’ Triangle of large iwān: ‘The Prophet said: The last provisions [for Heaven] is piety.’ Right hand small iwān (repaired, most probably new): ‘The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family–pbuhhf) said: He approaches Him best, [and] has comprehension [of] Him in Religion. The Prophet (pbuhhf) said: The search for knowledge is the duty of all Muslims.’ Left hand small iwān (repaired, most probably new]: ‘The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family–pbuhhf) said: In the search for knowledge.’ Epigraphy panel (above the small door in left hand small iwān): ‘[small brown letters] The Prophet said: The best prayers and the perfect supplication; [large white letters], With knowledge revive the hearts of the wise ones and in it, cleanse the bosoms of the worshippers.’ TOMB OF SHAH ISMA‘IL

Exterior drum inscriptions: Titles of the Fourteen Innocent Ones, mostly destroyed. The fragments visible are: ‘Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Musa al-Kazim…’ (visible to the courtyard from between the Tomb Tower and the Dār al-ḥuffāz). Interior: ‘…the victor of the miracles, the purest of the strangers, the parting of the allusions and the bright flame [over] the Easts; the devotee of God, the conqueror, ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, peace be upon him… (Ḥadīth needs to be found).’7 JANNATSARĀ Portal inscriptions:

Right hand iwān (new repair, see Sarīh al-milk where it says that the portal was adorned originally with the titles of Shah Tahmasb): ‘[al-Ahzab, 33:70–71 frag.] O ye who believe! Guard your duty to Allah, and speak words straight to the point; He will adjust your works for you and will forgive you your sins.’

208

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Main iwān: ‘[al-Ahzab, 33:41–3] O ye who believe! Remember Allah with much remembrance. And glorify him early and late. He it is who blesseth you and His angels (bless you), that he may bring you from darkness into light; and He is ever merciful to the believers.’ Left hand iwān (new, original destroyed): ‘[al-Dhariyat, 51:15–16] Lo those who keep from evil will dwell among gardens and wellsprings, Taking that which their Lord giveth them; for lo! aforetime they were doers of good.’ SHRINE COURTYARD

Portal Inscriptions (The present epigraphy is a twentieth-century renovation of the original, which Sarre found in rather bad condition in 1924): Banding above Door: ‘[ ] his name his splendor (God) built this building (al-‘imara) the Sultan, the Just, the Venerable, the Khaqan, the Courageous, the great Controller/Overseer of the lands of Arabia and Iran to spread the religion of the Twelve Imams [ ], to restrain/check the signs/ traces of disbelief (kufr) and excess (al-taghiyān) to defend, raising justice and charity, the builder (bānī) of the rules of peace and religion, the Sultan bin Sultan Abu Muzzaffar Shah ‘Abbas al-Safavi al-Husayni Bahadur Khan, may God make everlasting his kingdom and his rule, and from the universe [keep him?] on the path of charity. 1036 AH (1626).’ Door Frame: ‘In the name of God the Merciful and Compassionate, [al-‘Imran, 3:95–7] Say: Allah speaketh truth. So follow the religion of Abraham, the upright. He was not of the idolaters. Lo! The first Sanctuary [bait – house] appointed for mankind was that in Mecca, a blessed place, a guidance to the peoples; wherein are plain memorials (of Allah’s guidance); the place where Abraham stood up to pray; and whosoever entereth is safe. And pilgrimage to the House is a duty unto Allah for mankind, for him who can find a way thither. As for him who disbelieveth, (let him know that) lo! Allah is Independent of all creatures. [al-‘Imran, 3:129–33] Unto Allah belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. He forgiveth whom He will, and punisheth whom he will. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. O ye who believe! Devour not usury, doubling and quadrupling (the sum lent). Observe your duty to Allah, that ye may be successful. And ward off (from yourselves) the Fire prepared for the disbelievers. And obey Allah and the messenger, that ye may find mercy.

Appendix B

209

And vie with one another for forgiveness from your Lord, and for a paradise as wide as are the heavens and the earth, prepared for those who ward off (evil). [al-Qassas, 28:30] And when he reached it, he was called from the right side of the valley in the blessed field (al-buqa’ al-mubāraka), from the tree: O Moses! Lo! I, even I, am Allah, Lord of the Worlds.’ Wall of words (these are epigraphic fragments that were inlaid into the wall fronting the Dār al-ḥuffāz): ‘[he is] the knower of God, the one who received from God, the companion of God, the great sultan of the shaykhs of the east and the west … the leader of religion … Safi (al-mulk wa al-din) the purest of God in the two world Ishaq. He is the purifier of the hearts of men…’ TOMB OF TAHMASB’S MOTHER

‘This is the tomb of the chaste, the pure, the fountain (source) of pure happiness, the excellent, the virginal sultana [of] the world and the religion, Khaqan b. Khaqan. May God cover her with mercy with His benevolence and forgiveness and rest her in the valley of Paradise. 969 (1561).’8 ‘ALI QAPU PORTAL

‘Built in accordance … this noble, lofty building, in the days of the great khaqan and great sultan, the owner of the lands of ‘Arabia and Persia, the Sultan b. Sultan Shah ‘Abbas the Second al-Safavi al-Musavi al-Husayni Bahadur Khan; may God make eternal his kingdom and sultanate. To attain in the universe his charity and his justice and his benevolence, the attempt (accomplishment) of the great Amir and officer, with the assistance of the benevolent Creator, Nazar ‘Ali Khan Mutawallī.’ At the end, in white script, ‘Written by the incapable beggar Isma‘il Naqqash Ardabili 1052 (1642).’ On the right hand in a corner is written, ‘Built by the incapable beggar for the kindness of God, Yusaf Shah b. Malik Safimani.’

Notes

Introduction   1 Humayun (d. 1556) was defeated by the Lodhi ruler, Sher Shah Sur, in 1540. He would remain in exile until his return to the throne of India in 1555. Simon Digby, ‘Nāṣir al-Dīn Humāyūn Pādishāh’ in Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2009. Brill Online. Yale University. 28 September 2009.   2 A number of Safavid historians report on this visit, in particular Hasan Beg Rumlu, Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, ed. ‘Abd al-Husayn Nava’i, (Tehran), 1349 (1970); 398 (AT). And Amir Muhammad ibn Khwandamir, Iran dar rūzgār-i Shāh Ismā‘īl va Shāh Tahmāsb Safavī (Zayl-i habib al-siyar) ed. Iraj Afshar, (Tehran, 1370/1991); 392.   3 Lisa Golombek and Donald Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, (Princeton: Princeton University, 1988).   4 Andrew J. Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 2006); 11.   5 Kathryn Babayan, ‘The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamate Shi‘ism’, Iranian Studies 27/1–4, (1994): 135–162.   6 Juan Cole, ‘Millennialism in Modern Iranian History’, in Imagining the End: Visions of apocalypse from the ancient Middle East to modern America, ed. Abbas Amanat and Magnus Bernhardsson, (London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 2002); 286–290.   7 See for example, Rosemary Stanfield-Johnson, ‘The tabarra’iyan and the early Safavids’, Iranian Studies, 37/1, (2004): 47–71.   8 This method is exemplified by the work of historians such as Carlo Ginzburg, Clues, Myths, and the Historical Method, translated by John and Anne C. Tedeschi, (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989).   9 The mobility of artists from Iran into India has been considered by numerous scholars, among them Priscilla P. Soucek, ‘Persian Artists in Mughal India: Influences and Transformations’, Muqarnas 4, (1987): 166–181. Complementing that study for western Asia is Lale Uluc, Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans and Ottoman Collectors: sixteenth century Shiraz manuscripts, (Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2006). The latter is a study of Shirazi manuscripts and their patronage by the Ottoman elite. 10 Elke Eberhard, Osmanische Polemik gegen die Safawiden im 16. Jahrhundert nach Arabischen Handschriften, (Freiburg: Schwarz, 1970). 11 ‘Representation is often linked to resemblance and to the more general question of imitation; but, even more importantly, the question of pictorial representation has also always been entangled with philosophical representationalism – according to

212

12

13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22

23 24

25

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine Webster “the doctrine that the immediate object of knowledge is an idea in the mind distinct from the external object which is the occasion of perception”. In the long Western discussion of artistic representation there are typically three factors: a thing, its actual image, and a mental image. This third term, in being called an “image” at all, is likened to a work of art made by the mind, and has a special status; it is itself a representation that is always interposed between anything and its actual image; and it is, moreover, spoken of as if providing the model or “intention” for the actual image’. David Summers, ’Representation’, in Critical Terms for Art History, ed. Robert S. Nelson and Richard Schiff, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2003); 3. These issues have been addressed in Ahmet Karamustafa, God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish groups in the Islamic later middle period (1200–1550), (Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1994) and, more recently, Shahzad Bashir, ‘Shah Isma‘il and the Qizilbash: Cannibalism in the religious history of early Safavid Iran’, History of Religions, 45/3 (Feb., 2006): 234–56. Catherine Bell, ‘Ritual’, The Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion, ed. Robert A. Segal, (Blackwell Publishing, 2006). Blackwell Reference Online. 4 September 2009. C. W. Troll, Muslim Shrines in India, (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989). S. A. I. Tirmizi, ‘Mughal Documents relating to the Dargah of Khwaja Muin al-din Chishti’, ed. C. W. Troll, Muslim Shrines in India, (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989). Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire, (London: Reaktion Books, 2005); 60. Andrew Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 2006) and Kathryn Babayan, ‘The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamate Shi‘ism’, Iranian Studies 27/1–4, (1994): 135–162. For example, on encounters between Islam and Hinduism see Finbarr B. Flood, Objects of Translation: Material culture and medieval ‘Hindu-Muslim’ encounter, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009); 43. On Islam and Christianity, see Sara Ethel Wolper, Cities and Saints: Sufism and the transformation of urban space in medieval Anatolia, (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003). Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan; 334, and ‘Zeynep Yurekli, ‘A Building Between the Public and the Private Realms of the Ottoman Elite: The Sufi convent of Sokollu Mehmet Pasha in Istanbul’, Muqarnas 20, (2003): 159–185. Gülru Necipoğlu, The Age of Sinan; 344. A recent contribution to the study of Safavid palaces is Sussan Babaie, Isfahan and its Palaces: Statecraft, Shi‘ism and the architecture of conviviality in early modern Iran, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008). In that manner, the commemorative site was not unlike those in other early modern contexts, such as the royal mausolea in Westminster Abbey in London which also served the dual purpose of political propaganda and royal burial. Thomas Cocke, “The Repository of Our English Kings”: The Henry VII Chapel as Royal Mausoleum’, Architectural History, 44, (2001): 212–20. Use of the term ‘Safaviyya’ refers to the Sufi order, the term ‘Safavid’ refers to the imperial dynasty. For example, Michel Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia (1539–42), trans. A. H. Morton, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993). Membre writes of pilgrims coming from Anatolia bearing gifts of cattle and money to offer to their spiritual leaders in Ardabil. For an inventory of the shrine’s collections, see Ganjīna-i Shaykh Safī, ed. SayyidYunusi, (Tabriz: Kitabkhana-i Milli), 1969.

Notes

213

26 Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Sites of Pilgrimage and Objects of Devotion: The great Safavid shrines of Ardabil, Mashhad, and Qum’, chapter in Shah ‘Abbas and the Remaking of Iran, ed. Sheila Canby (London: British Museum Press, 2009). 27 For the establishment of ghulām conscription and its repercussions on the arts and culture of Safavid Iran, see Sussan Babaie, Kathryn Babayan, Massumeh Farhad, Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Slaves of the Shah: New elites of Safavid Iran, (London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 2004). 28 In the ḥarem the Queen mother’s influence superseded that of the Qizilbash lālā (a male guardian), which also resulted in overwhelming changes in both courtly culture and imperial patronage. Babayan, ‘The Safavid Synthesis’, 142; Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Gendered Patronage: Women and Benevolence in the early Safavid Empire’, Women and Self-representation in Islamic Art and Society, ed. D. F. Ruggles, (SUNY: New York, 2000). 29 These are referenced in numerous texts, from the land registers to historical chronicles, and will be dealt with at appropriate sites in the book. 30 The importance of the shrine of Shaykh Safi as a crucial exemplar of Timurid and early Safavid architecture has been recognized by modern scholars. Sheila Canby, The Golden Age of Persian Art, (London: British University Press, 1999); 10–13. Robert Hillenbrand, Islamic Art and Architecture, (London: Thames and Hudson), 1999; 235–37. A. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I’, Iran, part I, vol. 12, (1974): 31–64 and part II, vol. 13 (1975): 39–58; Lisa Golombek and Donald Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988). Sheila Canby, Persian Art, (London: British Museum, 2000); Sussan Babaie, ‘Building on the Past: The shaping of Safavid architecture,’ in Hunt for Paradise: Court arts of Safavid Iran, 1501–1576, ed. Sheila Canby, (Milan; London: Thames & Hudson, 2003). John Alexander Pope, Chinese Porcelains from the Ardebil Shrine, (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, Freer Gallery of Art, 1956). Sheila Blair, ‘Texts, Inscriptions and the Ardabil Carpets,’ in Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in honor of Iraj Afshar, ed. K. Eslami, (Princeton, NJ: Zagros Press, 1998). 31 On the patronage of Shi‘i shrines during this period, see Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Sites of Pilgrimage and Objects of Devotion.’ 32 C. E. Bosworth, ‘Árdabil I: History of Ardabil,’ Encyclopedia Iranica, online, http:// www.iranica.com. 33 There has been an upsurge in importance of Ardabil in the past few years owing to its autonomy from the Tabriz government. For a contemporary socio-political study of the city, see Houchang Chehabi, ‘Ardabil Becomes a Province: Center–Periphery Relations in Iran,’ IJMES 29, (1997): 235–53. 34 Zayn al-‘Abdin ‘Abdi, Ṣarīḥ al-milk, (Shawwal ah 977/1570); Mss. 3598, microfilm 10; Iran Bastan Museum. For a biography of ‘Abdi Beg, see Paul Losensky, ‘Abdī Shīrāzī’, Encyclopaedia of Islam 3, edited by Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, John Nawas and Everett Rowson. (Brill, 2009), Brill Online. Yale University. 9 October 2009. Another Sarīḥ al-milk, of Muhammad Tahir Isfahani, was written at the end of Shah ‘Abbas’ reign and was meant to be an addendum to the first. 35 Monika Gronke, Derwische im Vorhof der Macht: Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Nordwestirans im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1993). Another study of economic history is given by Fariba Zarinebaf-Shahr, in which she limits herself to documenting women’s endowments at the shrine. Fariba Zarinebaf-Shahr, ‘Economic Activities of Safavid Women in the Shrine-City of Ardabil’, Iranian Studies 31/2 (1998): 247–61. 36 Mohammed Ali Mukhlis, Fehrist-i binhā-yi tārīkhī-yi Azerbaijan-i Sharqi, (Tehran, 1371/1992); Buyuk-i Jama‘i, Nigāhī ba āsār o abnīya-yi tārīkhī-yi Ardabil, (Tehran, 1374/1995).

214

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

37 S. Jamal Torabi-Tabataba’i, Asār Bāstānī-i Azerbaijan: Asār o abnīya-i tārīkhī-i shahristānha-yi Ardabil, Arsbaran, Kalkhoran, Sarab, Mishginshahr, Mughan, vol 2. (Tabriz: Silisila-i Intisharat-i Anjuman-i Asar-i Milli, 2535 Shahanshahi/1972). 38 Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis, (Berlin, 1924) and Jacques de Morgan, Mission Scientifique en Perse, (Paris, 1894). See also, Martin E. Weaver, ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaikh Safi at Ardebil; Second Preliminary Study’, UNESCO serial no. 2560/RMO.RD/CLP, (Paris, 1971). Weaver was part of a 1970 UNESCO team that was advising the Iranian government about conservation of the shrine in Ardabil, and he provides an engineer’s analysis of the condition of the shrine. 39 The excavation I saw was of what I believe is the old Sharbatkhāna, as described by ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi. 40 Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili, Safwat al-safa (759/1358), ed. Ghulam Reza Tabataba’i Majd, (Tehran, 1994). 41 Shohleh Quinn’s research explores in detail the historiography of Safavid chronicles. See S. Quinn, ‘The Historiography of Safavid Prefaces’, in Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society, ed. Charles Melville (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1999): 1–26. 42 According to Morton, a similar text is the Afzal al-tawārīkh of Fazli Isfahani, in whose first volume (at Eton College) are given many details about the shrine’s administration. Anthony H. Morton, ‘The early years of Shah Isma‘il in the Afzal al-tawarikh and elsewhere’, in Safavid Persia, ed. C. Melville; 27–52. However, I have so far only been able to consult the second, British Library, volume, which is not as helpful in that regard (OR 4678). A third volume was recently discovered by Charles Melville, about which he reports in his article, ‘A Lost Source for the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas: The Afzal al-tawārīkh of Fazli Khuzani Isfahani’, Iranian Studies, 31/2 (1998): 263–266. The volumes cover, respectively, the reigns of the Shahs Isma‘il, Tahmasb, and ‘Abbas I. 43 Hasan Beg Rumlu, Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, ed. ‘Abd al-Husayn Nava’i, (Tehran, 1349); Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Khulāsat al-tavārīkh, 2 vols. ed. Ehsan Ishraqi, (Tehran, 1359– 63); Jalal al-din Yazdi Munnajim, Tārikh-i ‘Abbāsi, ya rūznāma-yi Mulla Jalāl, ed. S. Vahidniya, (Tehran, 1344/1963). 44 Within the context of this shrine, the name Haramkhāna would mean the familial burial chamber. Chapter 1   1 Ṣarīḥ al-milk, Zayn al-‘Abdin (‘Abdi Beg Shirazi), Shawwal ah 977 (1570). Mss. 3598, microfilm 10; Iran Bastan Museum.   2 Ibn Bazzaz, Safwat al-ṣafā (759/1358), ed. Ghulam Reza Tabataba’i Majd, (Tehran, 1994); henceforth SS. Two land registers of the shrine of Shaykh Safi (Ṣarīḥ al-milk) provide additional information. The first is that of Zayn al-‘Abdin ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, compiled in Shawwal 977 (1570); Mss. 3598, microfilm 10; Iran Bastan Museum; henceforth SM1. The second was compiled by Muhammad Tahir Isfahani in Rabi-ul Awwal 1038 (1629); Mss. 3719, microfilm 9-2; Iran Bastan Museum; henceforth SM2.   3 The spiritual genealogy given in the Safwat al-ṣafā is: Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq received his ‘tauba and khirqa and tarbīyat’ from [f.] Sh. Ibrahim Zahid Gilani f. Sayyid Jamal al-din f. Sh. Shihab al-din Mahmud Tabrizi f. Rukn al-din al-Sajasi f. Abubakr al-Abhari f. Abu’l Najib Suhrawardi f. Qazi …‘Umar al-Bakri f. Muhammad al-Bakri f. Ahmad Aswad Dinwari f. Mamshad al-Dinwari f. Junaid b. Muhammad al-Baghdadi f. Sari b. al-Mughlis al-Saqti f. Ma‘ruf al-Karkhi f. Daud Tai f. Habib al-‘Ajami f. Hasan al-Basri f. ‘Ali b. Abi-Talib. SS, 181.   4 Shahzad Bashir, Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: The Nurbakhshiya between medieval and modern Islam, (Columbia: University of Carolina Press, 2003).

Notes

215

  5 On hagiographies and shrine narratives, see in particular, D. DeWeese, ‘Sacred History for a Central Asian Town: Saints, shrines, and legends of origin in histories of Sayram, 18th–19th centuries’, REMMM 89–90 (July, 2000): 245–95, and D. DeWeese, ‘Sacred Places and Public Narratives: The shrine of Ahmad Yasavi in Hagiographical traditions of the Yasavi Sufi order’, The Muslim World, 90/3–4, (Fall 2000): 353–76. On women and Sufism an overview is provided in Amila Buturovic, Hoffman, Rausch, Hermansen, Klinkhammer, ‘Sufi Orders and Movements’, Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures, General Editor Suad Joseph, (Brill, 2009); Brill Online. Yale University. 3 October 2009.   6 His search for the master, the journey to find him, and his return as a transformed and enlightened man is a common trope in diverse tales of heroic figures, such as those of Daedalus and Mahatma Buddha. For an analysis of similar archetypes, see Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1949).   7 During his youth, many of the cities of northwestern Iran had suffered not only at the hands of the Mongols, but had also been destroyed by drought and Black Death. The popular religion of the Sufis provided a solace for the common folk. Perhaps it is within this context that Shaykh Zahid’s and Shaykh Safi’s teachings could be seen – that is, as an ordering of the religion of fourteenth-century Azerbaijan. They prescribed that the dervishes refrain from their current habit of beggary and mendicancy and return to their family, finding for themselves a productive role in society. See SS; 982, 120.   8 There is a long section on the types of sama‘ and the proper way of performing it; SS; 511.   9 In one of the earliest documents registered in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk a building referred to as a ribāṭ was located next to the ḥāzirā of the Shaykh and endowed as waqf to the shrine. 10 Leonor Fernandes, The Evolution of a Sufi Institution in Mamluk Egypt: The Khanqah, (Berlin: K. Schwarz, 1988); 10. 11 Although it is difficult to establish the exact meaning of this symbol in the fifteenth century, certainly for sixteenth-century writers the tāj-i haydarī was proof of the Safavids’ Shi‘i religious identity. R.M. Savory, ‘Junayd, Shaykh’, and ‘Ḥaydar, Shaykh’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. (Brill, 2009). Yale University. 3 October 2009. 12 An inscription found on the Friday mosque of Ardabil refers to a tax grant issued by Sultan ‘Ali Safavi. In A. H. Morton, ‘Three Mediaeval Inscriptions from Ardabil’, Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses für iranische Kunst und Archäologie, München, (1979): 560. 13 R.M Savory, ‘Ṣafawids’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. (Brill, 2009). Brill Online.Yale University. 3 October 2009. 14 Ahmad Kasrawi, as cited in Michel Mazzaoui, Origins of the Safawids (Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1972); 47. 15 Translated in Vladimir Minorsky, The Poetry of Shah Isma‘il, (London, 1942) and Wheeler Thackston, ‘The Diwan of Khata’i: Pictures for the Poetry of the Shah Isma‘il I’, Asian Art 1/4, (1988): 37–63. 16 The early part of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk register becomes silent regarding property transactions after the third generation of Safaviyya shaykhs as it ends with Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud; only a few scattered accounts are given for the next century regarding holdings outside of Ardabil. One reason, put forward by Monika Gronke, is that the shaykhs became more and more economically self-sufficient and began purchasing land in their own name, not for the estate of the shrine. At this point, they created separate

216

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

registers for their private holdings. Another reason may be the volatile political climate of the time which necessitated a more prudent approach to acquisition and display of wealth. Until a better reason for the lacunae is found, these speculations must suffice. M. Gronke, Derwische im Vorhof der Macht: Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Nordwestirans im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert, (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1993). 17 Definitions from A. K. S. Lambton, Landlord and Peasant in Iran: A study of Land Tenure and Land Revenue Administration, reprint (Oxford, 1991): mustawfī: chief revenue officer of a district; mushrif: overseer; Khadim: orderly. 18 I use Martin’s translation, B. G. Martin, ‘Seven Safawid Documents from Azarbayjan’, R. M. Stern, ‘Documents from Islamic Chanceries’, Oriental Studies 3 (1970): 171–206; 187; Silsilat al-nasab al-safaviyya (SNS); 108–110. 19 Also a place called the ‘darb-i fuqīyan’. In the Ṣarīḥ al-milk mention is also made of the Naushahr, Binan, Tavai, and Niyar Gates. Gronke hypothesizes that sometimes there were two names for a single gate. This can be borne out: it appears that Asfaris = Tavai, as the shrine is mentioned as being located at both. 20 According to a much later source, this was where the Anatolian prisoners freed by Timur on the request of Khwaja ‘Ali were settled. Husayn Ibn Abdal Zahidi, Silsilat al-nasab safāvīyya, (Berlin, 1924); 46. 21 M. Gronke, Derwische; 45. 22 M. Gronke, Derwische; 48. 23 For descriptions of this building, which nowadays sits on a hill in the northeastern part of Ardabil, see Buyuk-i Jama‘i, Nigahī ba asar va abnīya-yi tarīkhī-yi Ardabīl, (Tehran, 1374/1995), and Muhammad Ali Mukhlis, Fehrist-i binha-yi tarīkhī-yi Azerbayjan-i Sharqī, (Tehran, 1371/1992). 24 M. Gronke, Derwische, 40. 25 There is mention of a caravansary and inn (khān) of Shaykh Safi; SS, 1062. 26 SS; 403. 27 SS; 1062. 28 SM1, entry (e.) 31; SS; 218. The commander can be identified as Shams al-din Juvayni, the powerful statesman of the Ilkhanid court. He was put to death in 1284 ‘at the gates of Ahar’ (between Tabriz and Ardabil) by Prince Arghun (d. 1291), Abaqa’s son; J. A. Boyle, ‘Dynastic and Political History of the Ilkhans’, in Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 5 (1986), ed. J. A. Boyle (henceforth CHIr); 368. 29 Adam Olearius, The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein, trans. J. Davies, (London: J. Starkey, 1669); 177–8. 30 Sheila Blair, ‘Sufi Saints and shrine Architecture in the Early Fourteenth Century’, Muqarnas 7, (1990): 35–49. 31 The shrine is in present-day Turkestan, and was built to commemorate the Sufi shaykh, Ahmad Yasavi (d. 1166). Devin DeWeese, ‘Sacred places and “Public” Narratives: The shrine of Ahmad Yasavi in hagiographical traditions of the Yasavi Sufi order, 16th–17th centuries’, The Muslim World (special issue on Saint and Shrine Formation in Medieval Islam), (Fall 2000): 353–376; 353. 32 Two contrasting roles played by Sufis may be seen in Julian Barnes, ‘The Dervish Orders in the Ottoman Empire’, in ed. Raymond Lifchez, The Dervish Lodge: Architecture, Art and Sufism in Ottoman Turkey, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), and Francisco Rodriguez-Manas, ‘Agriculture, Sufism and the State in Tenth/Sixteenth-Century Morocco’, BSOAS (1996): 450–71. 33 Sheila Blair, The Ilkhanid Shrine Complex at Natanz, Iran, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986); 21. 34 June Tabaroff, Bistam, Iran: The architecture, setting and patronage of an Islamic shrine, (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1981); 71–99. ‘Gunbad Ghazan Khan’ no doubt refers to the Ilkhanid ruler, who ruled from 1295–1304.

Notes

217

35 SS; 988. 36 Lisa Golombek, The Timurid Shrine at Gazur Gah, (Ontario: Royal Ontario Museum, 1969). 37 Bernard O’Kane, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan, (Costa Mesa: Mazdâ Publishers in association with Undena Publications, 1987); Eva Maria Subtelny, ‘The Cult of ‘Abdullah Ansari under the Timurids’, eds. A. Giese and J. C. Bürgel, Gott ist Schön und Er liebt die Schönheit, (Bern; New York: Peter Lang, 1994). 38 For example, that of Hafiz Husayn Karbala’i, Rawdat al-jinan wa jannāt al-janan, ed. Jafar Sultan al- Qurra’i, 2 vols., (Tehran, 1349/1970). 39 Such as the shrines of Pir Imad al-din and Akhi Khair al-din in the neighborhood called Chahar Minar in Tabriz; RJ; 162, 167 respectively. Sheila Blair, ‘Ilkhanid Architecture and Society: Endowment deed of the Rab‘-i Rashidi’, Iran 22 (1984): 67–90. 40 Blair draws a comparison between this portico and the Shāhnishīn at Ardabil, calling the latter ‘a royal gallery/logia’. Sheila Blair, ‘Ilkhanid Architecture and Society: Endowment deed of the Rab‘-i Rashidi’, Iran 22, (1984): 67–90; 71. 41 SS, Tabriz, 288; Sultaniyya, 286; Qarabagh, 900; Urumiya, 418. These are a fraction of many such examples. 42 SS, sama‘ at the zāwīya of Khwaja Afzal in Sarav, 643; qawāllī, 676. 43 The original shrine was rebuilt in 1562 by the Mughal ruler, Akbar (d. 1605). However, textual sources may be used to reconstruct its fourteenth-century structure, such as that written by his disciple, Amir Khurd (d. 1311) Siyār al-awlīya (Lahore: Intisharat-i Islami, 1974). 44 Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, ‘Some Aspects of Khanaqa Life in Medieval India’, Studia Islamica 8, (1957): 51–68. 45 For numerous examples, see Raymond Lichez, ed., The Dervish Lodge: Architecture, Art and Sufism in Ottoman Turkey, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992). The most recent study is by Zeynep Yürekli Görkay, Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: The shrines of Seyyid Gazi and Haci Bektaş, (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2005). 46 Peter Brown, ‘Town, Village and Holy Man: The case of Syria’, in Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982); 153. 47 Many miraculous events are recorded in chapter six, ‘On the Sama‘ and Ecstasy of Shaykh Safi’ (SS, 641-653); on roses, 645; walls, 652. On jinns, 598. 48 SS, 642, 761. 49 SS, 642, 761. 50 SS, 601, 599, 403, 395, 903, 117, 1092, respectively. 51 SS, 357, 812. 52 SS, 268. 53 These distinctions are based on the contexts within which the terms are used in the Safwat al-safā, and not absolute. In other cases, the khalvatsarā and khalvatkhāna may refer to the same use. 54 SS, 268. 55 SS, 850. There is mention of Shaykh Safi going into ecstasy and performing the sama‘ after hearing a ghazal (sung poem) of Farid al-din Attar; SS, 642. 56 SS, 642, 645, 652, 649, respectively. 57 Suraiya Faroqhi, ‘Agricultural Crisis and the Art of Flute-playing: The Worldly Affairs of the Mevlevi Dervishes’, Turcica 20, (1988): 43–70; 53. Basic items included meat, bread, wheat, honey and various grains. 58 Irene Markoff, ‘Sama‛ and the Alevis of Turkey’, in C. W. Ernst, ed., Manifestations of Sainthood in Islam, (Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993); 100. 59 Soraya Faroqhi calls the kitchen of the Mevlevi tekke its ‘living center’; S. Faroqhi, ‘Agricultural Crisis and the Art of Flute-playing’, Turcica 20, (1988): 43–70; 53.

218

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

60 SNS, 111. 61 SM, e. 85 62 Irene Melikoff, ‘Le Probleme Kizilbas’; 57. Andrew Newman remarks that Isma‘il uses such terms in his poems, ‘which echoed those circulating in the discourses of the various militant, mystical and messianic movements abroad in the region at the time…’ Andrew Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris), 2006; 14. 63 SS, 796. 64 According to Ibn Bazzaz, this was the site upon which the Dar al-ḥuffāz was built. SS, 958. 65 Recent excavations at the site have revealed certain structures that can be dated to the Ilkhanid period and are, indeed, constructed of unbaked brick. Mahmud Mousavi, ‘Excavations in the western part of the monumental complex of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil’, in S. Canby, ed., Safavid Art and Architecture, (London: British Museum Press, 2002). 66 ‘The dome, known as the Dome of the haram was constructed over the grave of [Muhiy al-din]’ in Hussain Ibn Abdal Zahidi, Silsilat al-nasab Safaviyyah, 4; 36. The current name, Haramkhāna, was in use in the later Safavid period although there is no mention of it in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. One reason could be that this room was considered as part of the ‘haram’, that is, the sanctified precincts which included the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi and the tomb of Shah Isma‘il. 67 The decorative scheme is similar to the stucco patterns in a panel on the façade of the khānqah of Shaykh Nur al-din ‘Abd al-Samad in Natanz. Other similarities have been drawn to the Mir-i Arab madrasa in Bukhara. Martin E. Weaver, ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaykh Safi at Ardebil, Second Preliminary Study’, (UNESCO, Paris, 1971), Part II; 18. The transition from the square base to the dome is unique in the shrine, achieved by the use of beveled squinch arches that traverse the corners, is not covered or hidden, but is revealed on the exterior. Similar burial chambers are to be found in contemporaneous fourteenth-century Anatolian examples, which share the square plan and dome, resolved by the same type of transition, such as the mausoleum of Hasan Beg (c. 1348) in Sivas. Reproduced in Oktoy Aslanapa, Turkish Art and Architecture, (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971). 68 From A. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I,’ Iran, 12, (1974): 31–64; and 13, (1975): 39–58. 69 Other than his mother and sister’s grave there are those of a Salam al-din Khalil Allah (d. ah 909); Muhammed (d. ah 753); Sayyid Musa bin Sayyid Hayder (d. ah 792); Murshid Quli Agha; Shaykh Idrees; Sultan Bayezid (d. ah 908). On the first is carved ‘‘amal ustād ‘Usman bin Ahmad al-Maraghi’ and on another (unidentified) is carved ‘‘amal Ustad ‘Imran ‘Ali al-Maraghi’. The writing on both appears in the IlkhanidKufic style, like the casket of ‘Isa al-Safi in the tomb tower. 70 SS, 987. 71 SS, 1054. 72 SNS, 39. 73 As seen in a plan reproduced in Isma‘il Dibaj, Rāhnāmay-i āsār-i tārīkhī-yi Azerbayjān-i Sharqī, (Tabriz, 1343/1964). 74 For two separate discussions of the topic of shrine visitation, see, Ernst, ‘An IndoPersian Guide to Sufi Shrine Pilgrimage’, and Christopher S. Taylor, In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Ziyāra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt, (Leiden: Brill, 1999). 75 In the far end of the room is what is now called the casket of Shaykh Hayder (d. ah 893 according to shrine authorities), but earlier belonged to an ‘Isa al-Safi (d. ah 788). This may indeed be that of Shaykh Hayder, who was slain in Tabarasan, and whose

Notes

76 77 78 79 80 81 82

83

219

remains were brought to Ardabil by orders of his son, Shah Isma‘il. HS; 588. At the entrance is a smaller casket, supposedly the grave of ‘Sultan Shaykh Ibrahim, the famous shaykh Shahpur Sultan Khwaja Siyahposh, grandson of Sayyid Sadr al-din Musa ibn Shaykh Safi al-din’. There is also a pair of silver door facings under the window (opposite the entrance) which were dedicated during the reign of Shah Safi I. The name of the calligrapher, Mir ‘Imad was seen by J. Allan on the doors; J. W. Allan, ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period’, Iran 33, (1995): 123–137; 129. Anne-Marie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 1975); 234. Quoted in Carl. W. Ernst, ‘An Indo-Persian Guide to Sufi Shrine Pilgrimage’, in C. W. Ernst, ed., Manifestations of Sainthood in Islam, (Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993); 60. For example, in a poem by Qazi Ahmad, in which the shrine of Shaykh Safi is called the Ka‛ba and a site for ṭawāf; KT, 617. See Chapter 4 for more on the poem; for the translation see Appendix A. Adam Olearius, The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein; 179. SS, 989. A curiosity of this façade is that the uppermost epigraphic band and the muqarnas cornice appear not to fit the building’s width. An explanation could be that the mosaics were designed elsewhere and brought to the shrine to be assembled, at which point the measurement error was realized. Another reason could be that the frequent earthquakes that were common in this region caused the earlier structure to be damaged, thereby necessitating the added buttressing and the removal and reapplication of the mosaics. This latter explanation is not as satisfactory as the first, as it would imply an increase in the width of the edifice, not lessening as is the case, and also that somehow the footprint of the building was altered, which it is not. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam; 234. Chapter 2

  1 Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn (1703), London, 1737; 237.   2 From 1508–34, eastern Iraq (Iraq-i ajam) was under the control of the Safavids, which included the holy Shi‛i sanctuaries in Baghdad, Najaf, Karbala, and Samarra. Jean Aubin, ‘Irāḳ’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. (Brill, 2009). Brill Online. Yale University. 5 October 2009   3 Ghiyas al-din Muhammad Husayni Khwandamir, Habīb al-siyar fī akhbār afrad al-bashār, (Tehran, 1334/1955); 584.   4 Hasan Beg Rumlu, Aḥsan al-tawārīkh (henceforth, AT), ed. ‘Abd al-Husayn Nava’i, (Tehran, 1349/1970); 42-45. The book was completed in 1577.   5 Amir Mahmud bin Khwandamir, Iran dar ruzgar-i Shah Isma‘il va Shah Tahmasp Safavi (Zayl-i habib al-siyar) ed. Iraj Afshar, (Tehran), 1370/1991; 953.   6 Another example would be the fifteenth-century manuscript by Mirkwand, Rawdat al-ṣafā, 10 vols., (Tehran), 1338/1960.   7 The first redaction of the Safwat al-ṣafā has been dated to 1508. Andrew Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris), 2006; 136.   8 The familial genealogy given in the Ṣafwat al-ṣafā is: Shaykh Safi al-din ‘Abu’l Fath’ Ishaq bin (son of) Amin al-din Gibra‛il s/o al-Saleh s/o Qutb al-din Abubakr s/o Saleh al-din Rashid s/o Muhammad al-Hafiz s/o ‘Awaz s/o Firoz al-Kurdi al-Sinjani ‘Firoz Shah Zarin-kulah’ s/o Muhammad Saharfshah s/o Muhammad s/o Hasan s/o Muhammad s/o Ibrahim s/o Ja‘far s/o Muhammad Isma‘il s/o Muhammad s/o Ahmad

220

  9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23

24

25

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine al-‘Arabi s/o Muhammad al-Qasim s/o Abu’l Qasim Hamza s/o Imam Musa al-Kazim s/o Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq s/o Imam Muhammad al-Baqir s/o Imam Zayn al-‘Abidin Ali s/o Imam Husayn s/o Imam ‘Ali s/o Abi-Talib. SS, 70. Certain scholars have made use of it, such as Monika Gronke, Derwische im Vorhof der Macht: Sozialund Wirtschaftsgeschichte Nordwestirans im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert, (Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag), 1993. For example, Albert Hourani, ‘From Jabal ‘Amil to Persia,’ BSOAS 49, (1986) and more recently, Rula Abisaab, ‘Ulama of Jabal ‘Amil,’ Iranian Studies 27 (1994). There is disagreement among the scholars about the degree and extent of Shi‛i migration into Safavid Iran. For a different point of view, see Andrew Newman, ‘The Myth of Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran,’ Die Welt des Islams 33, (1993): 66–112. Abisaab, ‘Ulama of Jabal ‘Amil;’ 116. Sections of this chapter appear in my article, K. Rizvi, “Its mortar mixed with the sweetness of life”: Ritual and architecture of the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil,’ The Muslim World, Fall 2000. Sholeh Quinn, ‘The Dreams of Shaykh Safi al-Din and Safavid Historical Writing,’ Iranian Studies, 29/1–2 (Winter–Spring, 1996): 127–147; 132. Khwandamir, Habib al-Siyar. Volumes 3 and 4 translated by W. Thackston, Jr. as Habibu’s Siyar, Tome Three: The reign of the Mongol and the Turk, (Cambridge, MA: NELC, Harvard University, 1994); 559/418. Khwandamir, Habib al-Siyar, 653. Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Khulāsat al-tawārīkh, 2 vols. ed. Ehsan Eshraqi, (Tehran, 1359–1363); 11. Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Khulāsat al-tawārīkh; 11. Amir Mahmud bin Khwandamir, Iran dar ruzgar-i Shah Isma‘il va Shah Tahmasp Safavi (Zayl-i habib al-siyar) ed. Iraj Afshar, Tehran, 1370 (1991); 124. SS, 15. Khwandamir, Habīb al-siyar (henceforth HS); 413–14. HS, 588. The description corresponds to the existing Chīnīkhāna, which will be analyzed in Chapter Five. Marcel Mauss introduced the idea of gift exchange in the 1950s, based on his research of the Trobriand Islanders and indigenous societies of Polynesia and Melanesia. Marcel Mauss, The Gift, trans. I. Cunnison, (New York:  W. W. Norton and Co), 1967; 26. For example, Amy Singer, Charity in Islamic Societies, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008); Maria Eva Subtelny, ‘A Timurid Educational and Charitable Foundation: The Ikhlāṣiyya Complex of ‘Alī Shīr Navā‛ī in 15th-Century Herat and Its Endowment,’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 3/1, (1991): 38–56; Suraiya Faroqhi, Peasants, Dervishes and Traders in the Ottoman Empire, (London: Variorum Reprints, 1986). In the case of Ardabil, see Monika Gronke, Derwische im Vorhof der Macht. An example of this was the urban elite of eighteenth-century Aleppo. It has been shown that in addition to the imperial family and Ottoman officials and governors, there was another class that made charitable endowments, here as a form of social mobility: the ayān, or nobles, hailing from local Aleppene families. These families employed the institution of waqf to consolidate family power and raise their social standing ‘through direct material benefits or by vesting the administration of the endowments on the founders’ descendants.’ Ruth Roded, ‘The Waqf and the Social Elite of Aleppo in the 18th and 19th centuries,’ Turcica, 20, (1988). Most often, both khayrī and ahlī types of waqf were merged and their boundaries made indistinct. The benefactor may stipulate that he or his family members are the

Notes

26

27

28

29

30 31

32 33

221

administrators of the waqf and should therefore receive compensation for the work – that is, ensuring a steady income which would be generated by the endowment. The characterization of the shaykh as intercessor on behalf of the local public was a common trope in hagiographical writing in the medieval Muslim period. Christopher Taylor, ‘Saints, Ziyāra, Qissa, and the Social Construction of Moral Imagination in late Medieval Egypt,’ Studia Islamica 87, March (1998): 103–120. Since the fourteenth century a popular form of charitable institution in Anatolia and western Iran was the ‘imārat (prosperity, flourishing). At its simplest, this was a modest building where food and lodging was provided for poor students or indigents. More elaborate ‘imārats would include a mosque, dwelling place (for the qazi or administrator), resthouses and a large soup kitchen around which they were centered. Such ‘imārats may be seen as prototypical of charitable institutions, such as the shrine of Shaykh Safi in Ardabil. For a discussion of an Ottoman imārat, see Oded Peri, ‘Waqf and Ottoman Welfare Policy: The soup kitchen of Hasseki Sultan in 18th c. Jerusalem,’ JESHO 35 (1992): 167-186. Also, Krieser, Goodwin and Lifchez in Raymond Lifchez, ed. The Dervish Lodge: Architecture, Art and Sufism in Ottoman Turkey, (Berkeley: University of California Press), 1992. Contrary to this evidence, ‘Ala’ al-Daula Simnani wrote that the zāwīya of Shaykh Safi was merely a place where the Shaykh taught the locals what food to eat (that is, harām or not) and how to recite the name of God (that is, the Qur’an). ‘Risala-i Iqbaliyya: Fawayid-i Shaykh ‘Ala’uddawla Simnani,’ ‘Alla’uddawla Simnani: Opera Minora, ed. Wheeler Thackston, Jr. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press), 1988; 176. After describing the properties in Ardabil, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi turns to villages in the vicinity of that town, which included Kalkhoran, Alghar, Binan, and Masudabad among many others. This makes up about half of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. The remaining half is concerned with property owned by the shrine in Tabriz, Toman Mishgin, Chakursa‘d, Khalkhal, Sarab, Karamrud, Maragha, Mughan, and Hashtrud in Azerbaijan, as well as properties as far as Gilan, Shirvan, and Iraq-i ‘Ajam.The document is divided into five sections: i. stores (dukākīn); ii. houses (khānehā) and caravansaries (timche) and hospices (ribāt), iii. baths (hammāmāt), iv. water mills (tahūnehā), v. miscellaneous papers (kāghazāt). Ṣarīḥ al-milk, Zayn al-‘Abdin (‘Abdi Beg Shirazi), Shawwal ah 977 (1570). Mss. 3598, microfilm 10; Iran Bastan Museum (henceforth, SM). SM, e. 1. Interestingly, many were bought in the early 1300s and endowed but a year before the death of Shaykh Safi. The majority of fourteenth-century deeds were attested by Shaykh Sadr al-din Musa, who appears to have had an ambitious vision for augmenting the shrine’s influence through real estate holding and built expansion. The administrators of Shaykh Safi’s shrine did not depend solely on the charity of others, but proactively began expanding its economic influence in Ardabil. The income was re-invested in the administrative estate (sarkār) of the shrine or made into perpetual waqf. During the period after Shaykh Safi’s death, more than eighteen stores were bought in the Ardabil bazaar by Sadr al-din Musa as the agent of the shrine, in addition to over fifty surrounding villages (these were villages closest to Ardabil, and do not even include property in Tabriz, Gilan, Mazandaran, etc, for which there were separate deed listed in the register). See Vladimir Minorsky, ‘A Mongol Decree of 720/1320 to the family of Shaykh Zahid,’ BSOAS 16 (1954): 515-27. This is in contrast to other Sufi orders which shunned any relationship with temporal authority, for example, the Chistiyya in medieval India. Simon Digby, ‘The Sufi Shaykh and the Sultan: A Conflict of Claims to Authority in Medieval India,’ Iran 28, (1990): 71–81.

222

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

34 In fact, the earliest dated deed in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk is one such imperial waqf and concerns the village Kalkhoran, Shaykh Safi’s ancestral home where his father was buried. It is dated 1305 and relates that one-third of the income from properties in that village was given by Ghazan Hasan to a woman called Anil Khatun who then endowed it to the shrine. Entry 111a. A parallel reading is given by Lambton, who write that during the reign of Sultan Uljaytu, Kalkoran was made into waqf for Shaykh Safi’s descendants (the land given in 1305 as waqf by Ghazan Khan to Hal Khatun was converted in 1315 by Uljaytu; A. K. Lambton, Continuity and Change in Medieval Persia, (Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988). 35 Apparently Uljaytu also made another village waqf for the Safavid family, the deed of which was re-sealed in 1327 with the name of his son and heir Prince Abu Sa‘id Bahadur Khan (d. 1335). Similar imperial waqfs are recorded in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk during the Chupanid periods. During his administration, Amir Ashraf Chubani (d. 1356) endowed two villages to the shrine of Shaykh Safi; entries 75, 97. 36 Entry 81. 37 ‘The Socio-Economic Condition of Iran under the Ilkhans,’ I. P. Petrushevsky, in CHI: V; 521. Shams al-din Juvayni was a powerful and wealthy Ilkhanid courtier, whose sphere of influence was widespread and involved in the struggle for power not only in the political arena, but the spiritual one, for example involving shaykhs such as Simnani; see Jamal Elias, The Throne Carrier of God: The life and thought of ‘Alā’ ad-Dawla as-Simnānī, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995). 38 Entries 3, 31, 42, 48, 90 respectively. 39 SM, e. 31. The waqf for the ribāt reads: ‘Eternal waqf and religious bequest and charity [a] pure structure and with sincere intention for the welfare of the aforementioned ribāṭ and the domed tomb (‘imārat al-qubba) [built for]… the copying of Qur’ans and the reading of the Qur’an at the set times.’ In this deed are also mentioned a number of bath houses and all of the water-mills that were outside the Tavai Gate in Ardabil, and a number of inns in the Ardabil bazaar. 40 This order was a government exemption granted to the shrine by Sultan Ahmad Jalayir; Henri Massé, ‘Ordonnance rendue par le Prince Ilkhanien Ahmad Jalayir en faveur du Chiekh Sadr-od-din (1305–1392),’ Journal Asiatique, (1938): 465–468, 466. Similarly, Prince ‘Ali b. Sultan Uvais Jalayir endowed three villages for the provisions (sufra) of the holy Safavid shrine in the name of the Shaykh al-Islam, Shihab al-din Mahmud; Entries 70, 87b, 122c. 41 The farmān is reprinted in Gottfried Hermann, ‘Ein Erlass von Qara Yusof des Ordens von Ardabil,’ Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran II, Neue Folge 9 (1976): 225–242. 42 Gottfried Hermann, ‘Urkunden-funde in Azarbaygan,’ Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran II, Neue Folge 4 (1971): 249–262. 43 On the role of women, see Fariba Zarinebaf-Shahr, ‘Economic Activities of Safavid Women in the Shrine-City of Ardabil,’ Iranian Studies 31/2 (1998); 251. 44 HS, 187. 45 HS, 554. 46 HS, 603. For the religious and political motivations of Shah Rukh and the Timurid elite, see Beatrice Forbes Manz, Power, Politics and Religion in Timurid Iran, (Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007). 47 Shah Isma‘il’s house was in the neighborhood of Anatolian settlers (rūmīyān). Rumlu, AT, 14. 48 It is important to note, as Martin Dickson did, that much of the early Safavid bureaucracy was recruited from the preceding Aqqoyunlu and Timurid regimes and did not consist of Qizilbash tribesmen. M. B. Dickson, ‘Shah Tahmasb and the Uzbeks,’ (Ph.D. Diss. Princeton), 1958; 14. These latter were, instead, restricted mostly to the role of military leaders, statesmen and imperial guardians, as the examples show.

Notes

223

49 Like the āsh-i khayrī, āsh-i halāl literally refers to legally sanctioned victuals and is food distributed through a charitable foundation. 50 As the intention and administration of this endowment was distinct from the shrine’s holdings, the author of the 1570 Sarīh al-milk land registers recorded its holdings in a separate section that was amended to the whole. 51 SM, entry 99. In a deed dated ah 945 (e. 113), Shamlu’s daughter Beg Malik Khanum sold another village that belonged to their family to the Safavid shrine. 52 Lala Beg was the khalifat al-khulāfā until 1508, an honored and coveted post symbolizing his elevated position at the court. He was killed in 1514 at the battle of Chaldiran. R. M. Savory, ‘The Principal offices of the Safawid State during the reign of Isma‘il I (907–30/1501–24),’ BSOAS 23, (1960): 91–105, 100 and ‘The Office of the Khalīfat al-Khulafā under the Safawids,’ JAOS 85, (1965): 497–502. Subsequent Safavid notables endowed the income of villages and orchards to the shrine, such as Shahvardi Beg Ustajlu who endowed an orchard in 1544 in the name of Shah Tahmasb. Most of the donors stipulated that the income was for the tomb (mazār) of ‘His Lordship’ (Shaykh Safi), like the aforementioned Shahvardi Beg and a woman Begi Sultan Rumlu. Local notables like Mirza Beg Chupani Mughani ‘endowed [the income from the village Bajirvan] on the estates of His Lordship, for the purchase of candles and oil that lights every evening the twelve lanterns (shama‘) at the head of the cenotaph (marqad) of His Lordship’ in 1570 (add. 4a). Another woman, Sultan Agha bint Maulana Sharf al-din ‘Ali, the mother of Khalifa Burhan al-din endowed the income from an orchard on the rauza of His Lordship in 1541 (add. 2b). 53 Chapter Six focuses on a more detailed analysis of Tajlu Khanum’s patronage at the shrine of Fatima Ma‘suma. See also Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Gendered Patronage: Women and Benevolence in the early Safavid Empire’, Women and Self-representation in Islamic Art and Society, ed. D. F. Ruggles, (New York: SUNY press), 2000. 54 Qummi, Khulasat, 290. In the āsh- halāl addendum to the Ṣarīḥ al-milk there is an endowment naming a certain ‘Begi Sultan (known as Tajlu) who had endowed for the tomb (mazār) of the deceased ruler, Isma‘il (‘alihazrat khāqānī janatmakāni), the income from a village near Ardabil. It was stipulated that the income was to be spent ‘for the necessary charity/building (imārat-zarurī) and the rest should be spent on the food that is cooked each day for the mendicants and residents and pilgrims and travelers, dated Shaban 957 (1550).’ 55 See J. W. Allan, ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period,’ Iran 33, (1995): 123–37. 56 The hand, along with other epigraphic fragments, was on the wall of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, as viewed in the photographs of Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis, (Berlin, 1924) (see Chapter Three). 57 Epigraphy also encircles the wooden sarcophagus. Qur’anic verses praise the believers and admonish the evil-doers, themes not unexpected in such a funerary context. According to writers such as Jamal Torabi, the casket was probably a gift from the Mughal prince, Humayun, who had sought refuge at the Iranian court and also visited the Safavid shrine, in 1544. Judging from the fine and unusual workmanship, this hypothesis may be true, but we have no historical evidence of such a gift. Hillenbrand argues against this interpretation in his article, ‘The Sarcophagus of Shah Isma‘il,’ in Ṣafāvid Art and Architecture, S. Canby, ed. (London: British Museum Press, 2002). 58 Subsequent Qizilbash allies were buried in the shrine precincts, an honor bestowed on them by the shah. This trend, popular during the reign of Tahmasb, shifted during ‘Abbas’s tenure when Mashhad became the primary focus of patronage. 59 This is evinced by the scattered gravestones lying outside the tomb tower and environs.

224

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

60 Shah Isma‘il had suffered a terrible political defeat at the hands of the Ottomans at Chalidiran (1514), after which he seldom went to battle and spent much of his time in the pursuit of pleasure. It may also be that his decreased charisma and the youth of his heir-apparent were factored into the relative modesty of this tomb. 61 The transition between the tower and its base seems to be more for convenience than aesthetic reasons and now appears like an unfinished part of the structure. Perhaps earlier it had been reveted in glazed tilework or it was added on later, an observation that may be proved by the fact that the extant tiles are in later Safavid colors such as yellow and bright white. Based on such stylistic considerations, one may conjecture that it was renovated during the reign of Shah ‘Abbas II. 62 Martin E. Weaver, ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaikh Safi at Ardebil; Second Preliminary Study’, UNESCO serial no. 2560/RMO.RD/CLP, (Paris), 1971. 63 Although mention is often made in the chronicles of the burial of other Safavid figures, very little is known about the exact location of their tombs. For example, Shah Tahmasb’s burial in Mashhad was kept secret for a long time, especially after its supposed desecration by the Uzbeks; his body was then removed but where to is a mystery. Shah Isma‘il II’s and Shah Khudabanda’s tombs are no longer extant, and Shah ‘Abbas’s tomb was believed to be located in the Imamzada Habib ibn Musa in Kashan. This claim has been questioned in Javad Golmohammadi, ‘The Cenotaph in Imāmzāda Habīb b. Mūsā, Kashan: Does it mark the grave of Shāh ‘Abbās I?’ in ed. Patricia L. Baker and Barbara Brend, Sifting Sands, Reading Signs: Studies in honour of Professor Geza Fehervari, (London: Furnace Press), 2006. 64 Although according to Qummi, Shah Tahmasb’s mother, Tajlu Khanum, was buried in Shiraz; Shah ‘Abbas’ chronicler, Jalal Munnajim mentions the tomb of Shah Tahmasb’s mother within the shrine precincts; Jalal al-din Yazdi Munnajim, Tārīkh-i ‘Abbāsī, ya rūznāma-yi Mulla Jalāl, ed. S. Vahidniya, Tehran, 1344 (1963); 424. 65 The person is not identified but from the inscriptions it can be presumed that it was a woman from the royal Safavid clan. Chapter 3   1 Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Khulāsat al-tawārikh, 2 vols. ed. Ehsan Eshraqi, (Tehran, 1359–63/1980–84); 802. Henceforth, KT.   2 An inscription found on the Friday mosque of Ardabil is a tax grant issued by Sultan ‘Ali Safavi pointing to the independence of the Safavid order even before the imperial phase. In A. H. Morton, ‘Three Mediaeval Inscriptions from Ardabil,’ Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses für iranische Kunst und Archäologie, München, (1979): 560.   3 Subsequently, Safavid notables endowed the income of villages and orchards to this institution, such as Shahvardi Beg Ustajlu who endowed an orchard in 1544 in the name of Shah Tahmasb. Most of the donors stipulated that the income was for the tomb (mazār) of ‘His Lordship’ (Shaykh Safi). Local notables like Mirza Beg Chupani Mughani ‘endowed [the income from the village Bajirvan] on the estates of His Lordship, for the purchase of candles and oil that lights every evening the twelve lanterns (shama‘) at the head of the cenotaph (marqad) of His Lordship’ in 1570 (SM, add. 4a). Another woman, Sultan Agha bint Maulana Sharf al-din ‘Ali, the mother of Khalifa Burhan al-din endowed the income from an orchard on the rauza of His Lordship in 1541 (SM, add. 2b).   4 Shah Tahmasb, Tazkira-i Shāh Tahmāsb: sharh-i vāqayi va ahvālāt-i zindigānī-yi Shāh Tahmāsb biqalam-i khudāsh, ed. Abd al- Shukur, (Berlin-Charlottenburg, 1343/1964); 38. Henceforth, TazT

Notes

225

  5 For a discussion of Shi‛i polemics for and against Sufism, see Nasrollah Pourjavady, ‘Opposition to Sufism in Twelver Shi‛ism,’ Islamic Mysticism Contested, in ed. F. de Jong and B. Radtke, (Leiden: Brill, 1999). Pourjavady gives the example of the fourteenth-century thinker, Hayder ‘Amuli, who incorporated Sufi ideas and showed respect for a number of Sufis, such as al-Junayd, Sari al-Saqati, Ma‛ruf al-Karkhi – who we notice are also in Shaykh Safi’s spiritual genealogy.   6 For a discussion of this see Michel Mazzaoui, The Origins of the Safavids: Shi‘ism, Sufism and the Ghulat, (Wiesbaden, 1972).   7 Andrew Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 2006); 37.   8 V. Minorsky and Sheila S. Blair, ‘Tabrīz,’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, ed. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2009). Brill Online. Yale University. 11 October 2009.   9 Michel Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia (1539–42), trans. A. H. Morton, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993); 20–42. 10 TazT, 1. 11 Jalal al-din Yazdi Munnajim, Tārikh-i ‘Abbāsi, ya rūznāma-yi Mullā Jalāl, ed. S. Vahidniya, (Tehran), 1344 (1963); 127. Henceforth, TA. According to a European source, it was believed that Shah Tahmasb was rumored to be a son of Imam ‘Ali. Michel Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia, 42. 12 Ibn Arabshah Veramini, Ahsan al-akhbār fi ma‘rafat aima’ al-athār, (837/1433) mss. Dorn 312, Russian National Library, St Petersburg, Russia, recopied around 1526; folio 373v. 13 ‘[During the reign of] the great Sultan and the just Khāqān the most generous Shadow of God over the two terrains … the Sultan [above Hasan: s/o Sultan s/o Sultan (in yellow: Abi Muzzafar Tahmasb Bahadur Khan may God make everlasting) his kingdom and confer upon over the universe his justice; in the month of Dhilhaj of 932 hijra by the humble, Qasim ‘Ali. 14 KT, 597. 15 Muhammad Afushtah Natanzi, Naqāwāt al-āthār fī dhikr al-akhyār, ed. Ehsan Eshraqi, (Tehran, 1350/1971); 15. Henceforth, NA. 16 Morton’s notes in Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia, 80. In 1543 the vizier, Qazi Jahan Husayni constructed a beautifully tiled wall surrounding the tomb of Fatima al-Ma‘suma in the name of his patron, Shah Tahmasb who had visited Qum the previous year. The tiles are in lapis and beautifully decorated. Inscriptions consist of prayers to the ‘Fourteen Innocent Ones’ and are dedicated to Fatima Ma‘suma. In Hossein Modaressi Tabataba’i, Turbat-i pākān: Asār va binhā-yi qadīm-i mahdūdā-yi kunūnī-yi dār al-Mominīn Qum, (Qum: Chāpkhānah-yi Mihr, 1976); 50. 17 KT, 599. 18 Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili, Ṣafwat al-ṣafa (759/1358), ed. Ghulam Reza Tabataba’i Majd, (Tehran, 1994); 381. henceforth, SS. 19 SS, 418. The Safavid ritual may be compared to that of the later Bektashi Sufis of Anatolia, for whom the gathering would take place in a space called the maydan evi, a large room entered from one side. Opposite the threshold was a throne-like structure, or takht, made of wood, on whose three steps were placed twelve candles, representing the twelve Imams (also called a chirāghlik). Helman Ringgren, ‘The Initiation Ceremony of the Bektashis,’ Studies in the History of Religion: Initiation X, (1965): 202–208; 203. Raymond Lichez, ed. The Dervish Lodge: Architecture, Art and Sufism in Ottoman Turkey, (Berkeley: University of California, 1992). A takhtlike structure can be found in the Jannatsarā even today, which is also octagonal, like some of the Bektashi maydans. 20 SS, 850.

226

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

21 The older Chillākhāna was the site of Shaykh Safi’s spiritual ecstasy. 22 Today, the square enclosure is entered through a small foyer preceding the entrance into the courtyard and is unroofed, with arched windows opening onto the courtyard on its southeastern side. 23 That is to say, it was the site where Shaykh Safi achieved enlightenment, through deep meditation and prayer. 24 Usually each Sufi was given a wazīfa-i dhikr (religious duty, here involving a section from the Qur’an) to recite as part of his spiritual and mental training; SS, 795. The forty chambers on the ground floor may have been for private meditation or served as lodging for the Sufis, while those above were offices for the collectors of nazr. 25 Adam Olearius, The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein, trans. J. Davies, (London: J. Starkey, 1662); 178. The Chillākhāna is now in disrepair but its main features can still be recognized as they follow closely ‘Abdi Beg’s description. There are still signs of hazārbaf tiling on the western exterior wall facing the main courtyard; these are blue and green tiles, patterned similarly to the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi and could have been installed in the sixteenth-century renovations. 26 The tradition had carried on since the time of Sadr al-din Musa and is described in detail by Ibn Bazzaz, in SS, 989. 27 The Ṣarīḥ al-milk points to changing elite at the shrine, as now clerics (qāzī) officiated over the registers and waqf documents (as opposed to local officials). 28 On ghulāt (extremist) tendencies, see Kathryn Babayan’s ‘The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamate Shi‘ism,’ Iranian Studies, 27:1–4, (1994): 135–162. 29 Iskander Munshi, Tārikh-i ‘Alam Ara-i ‘Abbāsi, 2 vols. ed. Iraj Afshar, (Tehran, 1314/1975); 145. henceforth, TAAA 30 Hossein Modarressi Tabataba’i, An Introduction to Shi‘i Law: A bibliographical study, (London: Ithaca Press, 1984); 3. 31 Modarressi Tabataba’i, An Introduction to Shi‘i Law, 50. 32 The 1570 Ṣariḥ al-milk does mention another madrasa, in the context of its courtyard facing outside the shrine precincts. However, this could refer to the Dār al-ḥadīth, which was near the edge of the complex, and would fit the location according to Olearius’ map of Ardabil. A later chronicle mentions the madrasa of Shah Tahmasb in Ardabil that was renovated by his grandson, Shah ‘Abbas I. TA, 426. 33 Traditionally, a dār al-ḥadīth was part of a religious and charitable establishment. An earlier example, unfortunately extinct, is that of a dār al-ḥadīth built by the Timurid princess Malikat Agha in Balkh as part of a foundation which included a hospital, madrasa and caravansary. L. Golombek and D. Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, (Princeton: Princeton University, 1988); 62. In the sixteenth century a dār al-ḥadīth was built by Sultan Suleyman as part of his Suleymaniye complex in Istanbul. In this case, it was a supplement to the four larger and more elaborate madrassas that were also part of the complex. Gülru NeçipogluKafadar, ‘The Suleymaniye Complex in Istanbul: an Interpretation’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): 92–117. 34 It was earlier attached to a wall which continued along the side of the Dār al-ḥuffāz and enclosed the court, as seen in older photographs taken by F. Sarre. 35 Currently, these side entries are closed and the southern one has windows. 36 Within this upper half is an arch pattern which has now been renovated (a copy of the original seen in Sarre’s photographs), such that the arch frames a flowering vase. In the pendentives of the arches are epigraphic diamonds with mirrored ya Allah, ya Ṣafi.’ The iwān on the left, southern side shows the bare bricks where the courtyard enclosure wall was attached, and has not yet been repaired. 37 Appendix A.

Notes

227

38 The main iwan is extensively renovated especially its pendentives which are of very incongruous blue and white tilework. None of the earlier photographs available to me show the entire building. 39 SM, preface. See also Appendix A. First cited in Anthony H. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I,’ Iran, 12, (1974): 31–64; 43. 40 Within the enclosure a similarly latticed minbar (pulpit) can be seen. Tempting as it may be to believe that this was installed at the time of the building of the Jannatsarā, it is not feasible to do so at this time. 41 The section (Figure 5, Chapter Four), demonstrates what the original may have looked like. 42 The third stipulation was to install a new mutawallī at the shrine of Imam Reza. TazT, 23. Kathryn Babayan interprets this as referring to the hoped-for conquests of Balkh and Mazar-i Sharif, in her book Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs: The spiritual landscapes of early modern Iran, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003), 295. She also discusses here the implications of Shah Tahmasb’s biography in its social and political context. 43 Martin B. Dickson, ‘Shah Tahmasb and the Uzbeks,’ (Ph.D. diss., Princeton, 1958); 228. 44 Some scholars have conjectured that the Jannatsarā was meant to be Shah Tahmasb’s tomb; however, this point is not supported by any textual evidence, nor was there a precedent for such commemoration at the shrine. The authors do not question why a young ruler, at the height of his power, would build his mausoleum. Nor do they consider that the vast scale of the building and the openness of its architecture, which gave access to the courtyard, orchards and kitchens, suggest a more communal function. The small room to the side could have served as a burial chamber but at present there is no sign of what its original intention may have been. Sheila Blair, ‘Texts, Inscriptions and the Ardabil Carpets,’ in Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in honor of Iraj Afshar, ed. K. Eslami, (Princeton: Zagros Press, 1998). It is important to also note that Shah Tahmasb was ultimately buried in Mashhad (as per his wishes), but his body was removed to an anonymous site owing to threats of defilement by the Uzbeks. 45 No longer extant, these are quoted in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. 46 In the later Safavid chronicles the sentiment toward Sufis was more ambiguous; that is, whereas the Safavid traditions were often upheld, the Sufis themselves were sometimes referred to pejoratively. Munshi, Tarikh-i ‘Alam Ara-yi ‘Abbasi, 463 (Savory translation). TazT, 35. 47 ‘Remember Allah with much remembrance’ (Qur’an 33:40). 48 Kamal al-din Gazurgahi, Majālis al-‘ushāq, (c. 1520) British Library, OR 11837. Folio 152a. 49 There is not much textual evidence of the Sufi dances, other than a few mentions of a rite called rasm-i charkhchīgarī, a form of circular dance. TA, 287. This could refer to the swirling dance depicted in Safavid miniatures such as the aforementioned Majālis al-‘ushāq. 50 The stories chosen for illustration are divided into three unequal groups, reflecting the cultural trends and preoccupations of the time: the first group illustrates Qur’anic and prophetic themes; the second, comprising the majority, illustrates the lives and practices of famous Sufi masters; and the third is made up of enthronement scenes. In the major group, much of the action takes place in bazaars, as was the case with most of the stories. 51 Lisa Golombek, The Timurid Shrine at Gazur Gah, (Ontario: Royal Ontario Museum, 1969); 91. 52 Tazkira-yi Shaykh Safi, (1582), Sadruddin Aga Khan Collection, MS 06. The dedication at the end of the book does not name a patron, but reads: ‘This book is very

228

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

precious to me, and this is a unique copy. Therefore, I have made the following vow that I will not give away or sell this book for thirty years. If I do, I will make the pilgrimage to Karbala, and if I die before completing it, I leave one hundred tomans for the Sayyids.’ 53 Speculation on ritual practices of the Safavid tariqa during Tahmasb’s reign are discussed in A. Morton, ‘The Chub-i tārīq and Qizilbash Ritual,’ in Etudes Safavides, (1993): 225–246. The halqa-i dhikr is mentioned in the fourteenth-century Ṣafwat al-ṣafa, as well as the seventeenth-century Silsilāt al-nasab of Hussain Ibn Abdal Zahidi. 54 On the poetry of Shah Isma‘il under the pen-name of Khatā‛i see Wheeler Thackston, ‘The Diwan of Khata’i: Pictures for the Poetry of the Shah Isma‘il I,’ Asian Art 1/4, (1988): 37–63. 55 Michel Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia, 42. 56 Ibid., 18. 57 See Chapter Five. 58 The better-preserved of the pair is at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, and measures 10.5 × 5 meters. Its twin is at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, but is smaller as parts of it were used to repair the London carpet. 59 Sheila Blair, ‘Texts, Inscriptions and the Ardabil Carpets.’ 60 This translation is provided on the V&A website, along with details such as size and materials. http://www.vam.ac.uk/collections/asia/object_stories/ardabil/index.html. 61 The dome was built originally by the Seljuk vizier Nizam al-mulk in 1072. Shah Tahmasb’s repairs are recorded in an inscription around the mihrab in this room. 62 Another source may be the Shi‛i shrines in Iraq which were, however, by this time lost to the Ottomans (in 1530). 63 The Dār al-ḥuffāz and tomb of Shaykh Safi appear to have a synchronous epigraphic program, and while the formal and stylistic evidence points to their design being in the later fourteenth century, they may have been repaired and reveted at a later date. 64 Above the entrance is the name of Shaykh Safi, and in the margins are dedications naming his son, Sadr al-din Musa and Shihab al-din Mahmud as the founder and builders of the Dār al-ḥuffāz. In the Silsilāt al-nasab, Zahidi credits Sadr al-din Musa with building the tomb of Shaykh Safi, but he also mentions that the Dār al-ḥuffāz building was funded by the charitable donations of Shihab al-din Mahmud, the second son of Sadr al-din Musa and the Shaykh al-Islam of Ardabil Hussain Ibn Abdal Zahidi, Silsilāt al-nasab Ṣafavīyya, (Berlin, 1924); 40. 65 Al-Ra‘d, (Qur’an, 13:23-24). 66 See Appendix B. 67 All four are published in Abdul Hassan Navai, ed., Shāh Tahmāsb Safavī: Isnād va makālāt-i tārīkhī, (Tehran, 1989). The 1534 one is very similar to the one in Ardabil in its prohibitions against all manner of heresy. The one dated 979 (1571) is identified as a lā‘natnāma (in 1564 Shah Tahmasb was reported to have such lā‘natnāmas carved in stone and installed in mosques everywhere). It is curious that Tahmasb would order these, given the relatively recent peace treaty with the Ottomans, in which it was stipulated that the Safavids would no longer curse the Sunni caliphs. The 1573 one deals mostly with taxation (of the soap factories) and like that of 1571 does not directly identify Shah Tahmasb as the patron. 68 Reading the text inversely, that is as an affirmation of certain activities that took place at the shrine, gives an important clue as to the society at large. The prohibitions point to a heterogeneous mix of behavior and ethics, that is, ‘taverns, drug houses, electuary houses, beer houses, houses of pleasure, gaming houses,’ were apparently an integral part of the city and the bazaar, to the extent that they paid taxes to the state and were, to a certain degree, controlled by them. Extremist rites, such as collective mourning,

Notes

229

while condemned by the Shah and his clergy, continued in the public realm as the descriptions of numerous European travelers testify. 69 One source of anxiety during Tahmasb’s reign, and to a larger extent during that of his grandson, Abbas I, was the Nuqtaviyya movement founded by Muhammad Pishikani (d. 1427). See Babayan, ‘A Safavid Synthesis,’ 149–150. 70 S. A. Arjomand, trans., ‘Two Decrees of Shah Tahmasp Concerning Statecraft and the Authority of Shaykh ‘Ali al-Karaki,’ in Authority and Political Culture in Shi‘ism, ed. S. A. Arjomand, (New York, 1988); 256. 71 The prohibition on qawwālī should not be understood as anti-Sufi orders, but rather a curtailment and readjustment of mores that would render them acceptable to a wider Shi‘i society. 72 It may be assumed that the courtyard of the shrine was renovated at the time of Tahmasb, although twentieth-century renovations have dated it during the reign of ‘Abbas. 73 Also in the shrine of Fatima Ma‘suma, Qum, this ḥadīth is ubiquitous in early Safavid art and literature. 74 Amir Mahmud bin Khwandamir, Iran dar rūzgār-i Shāh Ismā‘īl va Shāh Tahmāsb Safavī (Zayl-i habib al-siyar) ed. Iraj Afshar, (Tehran), 1370 (1991); 392. 75 In addition to these distinguished monuments, Safavid historians were also aware of their non-Muslim neighbors. Hence, included in this architectural landscape are edifices such as the palace of the Shirvanshah in Baku as well as famed Christian churches in Georgia. Hasan beg Rumlu, Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, ed. ‘Abd al-Husayn Nava’i, (Tehran, 1349/1970); 455 (henceforth AT). Shah Tahmasb’s own built projects included the interior and exterior renovations of Imam Reza’s shrine, mosques located in Sahibabad and the Masjid Panja ‘Ali in Qazvin, Bagh-i Sa‘databad and its buildings, Imamzada Abdul Azim in Ray, Shahzada Husayn in Qazvin and other madrasas, ribāṭs, and baths. KT, 609. 76 Abul Fazl, Akbarnama, trans. H. Beveridge, (Lahore: Sang- e Meel Publishers, original 1897/ reprint 2004); 364. One example of a Safavid account of Timur’s visit to Ardabil is given in KT, 33. 77 Such as the tombs of the Sufi shaykhs, Rukn al-din Alam and Baha al-din Zakriya in Multan and the imperial mosques of Delhi. 78 The Sharbatkhāna is no longer extant. 79 SNS, 112. Chapter 4   1 Ṣarīḥ al-milk, Zayn al-‘Abdin (‘Abdi Beg Shirazi), Shawwal ah 977 (1570). Mss. 3598, microfilm 10; Iran Bastan Museum.   2 For the move from Tabriz to Qazvin, see Ehsan Echraqi, ‘Le Dar al-Sultana de Qazvin, deuxième capitale des Safavides’, in C. Melville ed., Safavid Persia: the History and Politics of an Islamic Society, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris), 1996, and Michel Mazzaoui, ‘From Tabriz to Qazvin and Isfahan: Three Phases of Safavid History’, ZDMG Supplement III, (1977): 514–22. There are differing opinions of when the capital was moved, but it may be agreed that it was sometime between 1555 and 1559.   3 For a thoughtful analysis of this work, see Paul Losensky, ‘The Palace of Praise and the Melons of Time: Descriptive patterns in ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi’s Garden of Eden’, Eurasian Studies, 2/1 (2003): 1–29. An interesting parallel is Vildan Serdaroğlu, ‘When Literature and Architecture Meet: Architectural images of the beloved and the lover in sixteenth-century Ottoman poetry’, Muqarnas 23, (2006).   4 ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi (Navidi), Takmilāt al-akhbār: Tārīkh-i ṣafāviyah az āghāz tā 978 Hijrī Qamarī, ed. ‘Abd al-Ḥusayn Nava’I, (Tehran: Nashr-i nay, 1990).

230

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

  5 ‘Abdi Beg records in his chronicle that in 974 (1566) ‘Abdi Beg went to Ardabil to ‘secure seclusion and retirement.’ Takmilat, 128.   6 The lists are abridged notations of the endowments, not the original deeds themselves; there may, therefore, be some inaccuracy introduced in them.   7 Numerous studies have dealt with this topic in terms of Arabic poetry, most relevantly by Akiko Motoyoshi Sumi, Description in Classical Arabic Poetry: Waṣf, ekphrasis, and interarts theory, (Leiden: Brill, 2004).   8 Examples in the Iberian case would include Cynthia Robinson, ‘Seeing Paradise: Metaphor and vision in Taifa palace architecture,’ Gesta, 36/2, ‘Visual Culture of Medieval Iberia’ (1997): 145–55 and D. Fairchild Ruggles, ‘The Eye of Sovereignty: Poetry and vision in the Alhambra’s Lindaraja Mirador’, Gesta, 36/2, ‘Visual Culture of Medieval Iberia’ (1997): 180–9.   9 A useful comparison may be made with Ottoman poetry regarding the Topkapı palace in Istanbul; see Gülru Necipoğlu, Architecture, Ceremonial and Power: The Topkapı Palace in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991). Another genre to consider is the genre of shahrangīz (lit. ‘disturber of the city’) poetry, in which the city is the subject of praise and commentary. However, it appears the goals in this type of poetry are different, for the subject deals with homoerotica and discourses on the diverse crafts in the city. It could be argued, however, that this is a type of encomium to the ruler under whose authority the city exists. See the definition of the term by Bruijn, J.T.P. de; Halman, Talat Sait; Rahman, Munibur, ‘Shahrangīz,’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, eds. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2007). Brill Online. See also Sunil Sharma, ‘The City of Beauties in Indo-Persian Poetic Landscape’, Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 24/2 (2004): 73–81. 10 Julie Scott Meisami, ‘The Palace-Complex as Emblem: Some Samarran Qaṣidas,’ in C. F. Robinson, ed., A Medieval Islamic City Reconsidered: An interdisciplinary approach to Samarra, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001); 70. 11 This point is brought up by numerous authors, notably, Eva Maria Subtelny, ‘SocioEconomic Bases of Cultural Patronage under the late Timurids’, International Journal of Middle East Studies 20/4, (1988): 479–505; idem, ‘Art and Politics in Early 16th century Central Asia,’ Central Asiatic Journal 27/1–2, (1983): 121–48. See also L. Golombek, ‘Discourses of an Imaginary Arts Council in Fifteenth-Century Iran’, L. Golombek and M. Subtelny, Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, Muqarnas supp., (Leiden: Brill, 1992). 12 For a brief biography, see J. Rypka, ‘Ibn-i Yamīn, Amīr Fakhr al-Dīn Maḥmūd b. Amīr Yamīn al-Dīn Tughrāī Mustawfī Faryūmadī,’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, ed. P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs (Brill, 2007). Brill Online, accessed on 25 May 2007. 13 Ibn-i Yamin Faryumadi, Divān-i ‘Ashār, ed. H. Bastani Rad, (Tehran: Kitābkhāna-yi Sana‛ī, (1344/1966); 173. 14 The manuscript may have been part of the gift made by Shah ‘Abbas in 1608, but could as likely have been housed there earlier as there was an imperial kitabkhāna (scriptorium) there already during the reign of Shah Tahmasb. The manuscript in Ardabil was a fifteenth-century copy that is now housed in the Russian National Library; Dorn 403, Catalogue des manuscrits et xylographes orientaux de la Bibliothèque impériale publique de St Pétersbourg, (St Pétersbourg:  Impr. de l’Académie impériale des sciences, 1852); 358. 15 J. S. Meisami, ‘Palaces and Paradises: Palace description in medieval Persian poetry,’ in O. Grabar and C. Robinson, eds. Islamic Art and Literature, (Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers), 2001; 21–54.

Notes

231

16 The term used here, ta‛rīf, may be understood as praise, as well as description. Ibn-i Yamin Faryumadi, Divān-i ‘Ashār; 30. 17 An analysis of their originality and virtuosity as literary texts is beyond the scope of this study. 18 Such as M. Szuppe, ‘Palais et Jardins: Le complexe royal des premiers safavides à Qazvin, milieu XVIe–debut XVIIe siecles,’ in Res Orientales 8, (1988); A. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I,’ Iran, 12 (1974): 31–64; and 13 (1975): 39–58. 19 Each of the volumes starts in this manner which may be dismissed as stereotypical, as it was a standard trope of mathnawi literature. 20 Losensky points out that the goal of the Jannāt-i ‘adn collection is not simply descriptive, but literary. Losensky, ‘The Palace of Praise’, 7. The poems comprising the Jannāt-i ‘adn are: ‘Rawzat al-sifāt’, ‘Dawḥat al-azhār’, ‘Jannat al-aṣmār’, ‘Zinat al-awrāq’, ‘Ṣaḥīfat al-ikhlās’. 21 Such as the gardens of Bahram Mirza and Shahquli Khalifa muhrdār; Rawzat al-ṣifāt, 49 and 40, respectively. 22 Translation from Losensky, ‘The Palace of Praise’, 9–10. 23 Ṣifat-i fun-taṣwīr va ashār bita‛rīf-i dast o qalm-i Shah- jahāngīr, ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Dawhat al-azhār, (Moscow: Danish, 1974); 24. 24 Such as the delicate copy of the Guy o Chughan that was illustrated by Shah Tahmasb and is dated 931 (1525), now at the Russian National library, Dorn 441; Catalogue des manuscrits et xylographes orientaux, 381. 25 For a more detailed treatment of the shrine administration, refer to K. Rizvi, Chapter III, ‘Piety and Power: Endowments and the Shrine Administration’, Transformations in Early Ṣafāvid Architecture: The Shrine of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili in Iran (1501–1629), (Ph.D. diss., MIT, 2000). 26 The Shaykhavand were not a tribe, but cognates of the Safavids, through figures such as Ma‛sum Beg Safavi. Andrew Newman, Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 2006); 54. 27 Sam Mirza Safavi, Tazkira-yi Tuhfā-yi Samī, ed. Rukn al-Din Humayun Farruk, (Tehran: Ilmi, n.d). 28 Qazi Ahmad Qummi, Khulāsat al-tawārikh, 2 vols. ed. Ehsan Eshraqi, (Tehran, 1359– 1363/1980–84); 550. Henceforth, KT. Subsequent entries in the land registers do not mention Sam Mirza and a later farmān calls for the ‘correction and checking’ of all his transactions. Reproduced in Bert Fragner, ‘Das Ardabiler Heiligtum in den Urkunden’, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 67 (1975): 169–215; 206. 29 KT, 288. Shreve Simpson writes, ‘While en route from Mashhad, the Prince condoned a joke about his new appointment, thereby angering the shah. The Ardabil appointment was withdrawn and, instead, Tahmasb gave Ibrahim Mirza the governorship of Qa‘in’; in Simpson, Sultan Ibrahim Mirza’s Haft Aurang, (Washington: Smithsonian, Freer Gallery of Art, 1997); 231. Perhaps it was in response to the treachery of Sam Mirza that the shrine administration was later taken out of the hands of the Shaykhavand (that is, Safavid cognates) and instead Mir Abul Vali Inju Shirazi was appointed the mutawallī. According to Iskander Beg Munshi, ‘Mir Abul Vali came to court, and he and his brother were jointly placed in charge of the Ghazani endowments. Toward the end of the reign of Shah Tahmasb, Mir Abul Vali was entrusted with administration of the Safavid shrine at Ardabil, and his brother was left in sole charge of the Ghazani endowments. During the reign of Sultan Muhammad Shah, Mir Abul Vali was appointed military chaplain (qāzī askār). Finally on the accession of Shah ‘Abbas I, he was appointed ṣadr’. The History of Shah ‘Abbas the Great: Tārīk-e ‘ālamārā-ye ‘Abbāsī by Eskandar Beg Monshi, R. M. Savory, trans., Persian Heritage Series, 28 (New York, 1986); 237. Henceforth, TAAA (Savory).

232

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

30 Bert Fragner, ‘Das Ardabiler Heiligtum in den Urkunden,’ Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 67 (1975): 169–215. 31 Thus the register confirms the existence of two types of administrative positions, one that was ceremonial and one functional. 32 I am indebted to Paul Losensky for his translations and corrections of the poetry in this chapter. The poetry from the preface of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk was reproduced by Anthony Morton, who was the first to analyze the descriptive passages of the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. Anthony H. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I’, Iran, 12, (1974): 31–64. However, he left out the poetry in his translations. See Appendix A for the full translations. 33 ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Dawhat al-azhār and Ṣarīḥ al-milk. 34 See also Losensky, ‘The Palace of Praise’, 9. 35 The ordering of the sequences is a curious and imaginative one, always moving from southwest to northeast: a) tomb of Shaykh Safi to Haram to Gunbad-i Shāhzādehā; b) Dār al-ḥadīth to courtyard to Jannatsarā; c) Chillākhāna to office of the nazīr. As we do not yet have information about architectural notation, it is difficult to extrapolate what this sequence can mean formally. 36 ḥādha jannāt ‘adn fadakhlūha khālidīn. 37 See Appendix B. 38 It is likely that ‘Abdi Beg is referring to Shah Isma‘il’s tomb, as its dome was on a high drum and was embellished with a sunburst pattern. The dome of the Haramkhāna is larger in scale but more modest in decoration, both on the interior and exterior. 39 Paul Losensky, “The Equal of Heaven’s Vault”: The design, ceremony, and poetry of the Haṣanābād bridge,’ in ed. B. Gruendler and L. Marlowe, Writers and Rulers: Perspectives on their relationship from Abbasid to Safavid times, (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2004); 203. 40 In 1509 Shah Isma‘il had ordered that the body of his father, Shaykh Haydar, to be buried in Ardabil, most likely in the Gunbad-i Shāhzādehā. Its name and location abutting the main graveyard of the shrine, the Shahīdgāh, both point to this function. Octagonal burial chambers are common, as for example those in Qum and the octagonal pavilion of the shrine of Abd al-Samad in Natanz, which was also once a freestanding edifice. However, the problem of orientation remains. While it is not always the case that a burial space be oriented toward Mecca (as in pre-eleventh-century Central Asian cases (S. Chmelnizkij, ‘The Mausoleum of Muhammad Boshoro,’ Muqarnas 7, (1990): 23–34, 29.) the precedent already set by the Haramkhāna and the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, which are oriented to the qibla, cause us to question the original use of the Chīnīkhāna as a burial space. 41 The title of the section is ‘Description of the Inlaid Dome,’ in ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Dawhat al-Azhār, 85. 42 He continues, ‘On two sides, east and west, of this portal are the covered graves of the lords, children of the Shaykhs (God have mercy on them) and behind the portal is a street that runs between this building (‘imārat) and the residences of (…) Sayyid Shaykhshah b. Khwaja Hasan Beg Safavi.’ 43 These are composites of verses from different poems and passages. 44 For an interesting collection of essays on the subject, see Crossley and Clark, Architecture and Language: Constructing identity in European architecture, c. 1000–c. 1650, (Cambridge, UK; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 45 At this time, Ottoman mosques built in the capital, Istanbul, were similarly inscribed in large, monumental epigraphy that was meant to be read. See Gulru Necipoglu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire, (London: Reaktion Books, 2005); 103.

Notes

233

46 Plans were no doubt known to Safavid builders, but I do not yet know of any extant copy. 47 It is not until the end of the sixteenth century that the trend of freestanding garden pavilions took off, as witnessed in the buildings in the palace of Shah ‘Abbas in Isfahan. Even there, the remaining buildings are from the seventeenth century. Timurid authors did make note of garden pavilions as well, but again, it is hard to imagine them in the absence of any extant prototype. The Ottoman case may provide an important parallel, especially in the case of Mehmet II’s garden pavilions, such as the Cinilikiosk. 48 Preceded by the locative description, ‘The Court between the buildings [such that] the aforementioned portal is in the qibla direction, and the revered Sanctum and the Dār al-ḥuffāz and dependencies are located on the eastern side. The Lofty Jannatsarā is in the northern direction and the Great Gateway (dargāh ma‘lī) and the old and new Chillākhānas are on the western side.’ He then continues with the poem. 49 As Paul Losensky noted in his comments on this paper, ‘Abdi Beg addresses the buildings in the second person, as though they were human. 50 Alina Payne, ‘Creativity and bricolage in architectural literature of the Renaissance,’ Res, 34, Autumn (1998): 20–38. She notes that the precedents for such thinking were already present in the discipline of literature. Chapter 5   1 Adam Olearius, Moskowitische und Persische Reise: Die holsteinische Gesandtschaft beim Schah (1633–39), reprint (Stuttgart: Thienemann, Edition Erdmann, 1986); 216.   2 There is not much evidence of architectural patronage during the reigns of Shah Tahmasb’s son Isma‘il II (d. 1578). He visited Ardabil before his coronation and his brother, Muhammad Khudabanda (d. 1587) visited en route to Qarabagh in about 1581 where he was met by the muttawali, Amir Abul Vali Inju. At that time, the ḥuffāz, khuddām and other workers were given one thousand toman from the imperial treasury for salaries. Later, Abul Vali Inju went to Tabriz to receive the Ghazani waqfs from the Shah for the shrine. Apparently these were the waqfs established by Ghazan Hasan; KT, 705.   3 Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Architecture and the Representations of Kingship during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I’ in Charles Melville and Lynnette Mitchell, Every Inch a King: From Alexander to the King of Kings, (forthcoming). Gülru Neçipoglu, ‘Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Palaces’, Ars Orientalis 23, (1993): 303–42.   4 TA, 19.   5 TA, 345.   6 Jean Calmard ‘Shi‘i Rituals and Power II. The consolidation of Safavid Shi‘ism: Folklore and Popular Religion,’ in Charles Melville, ed. Safavid Persia: the History and Politics of an Islamic Society, (London and New York, 1996).   7 Olearius, The Voyages, 175.   8 TAAA, 463 (Savory translation).   9 This point is also brought up by Sheila Canby in ‘The Ardabil Shrine’ catalogue entries for Sheila R. Canby, ed., Shah ‘Abbas: The Remaking of Iran, (London: British Museum Press, 2009; 134). 10 TazT, 3. 11 NA, 27. 12 Such as the time when Tahmuras Khan, a governor of Georgia, came to court having heard reports of the approach of Murad Pasha; TAAA (Savory), 1033. 13 TA, 114.

234

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

14 Farhad Khan Qaramanlu was later executed by orders of Shah ‘Abbas, NA, 397–8. On Farhad Khan’s collection of valuable manuscripts, see Filiz Cağman and Zeren Tanindi, ‘Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations’, Muqarnas, 13, (1996): 132–48. 15 TA, 424. 16 Ibid., 424. 17 KT, 923. 18 TA, 424. 19 Pietro Della Valle, De viaggi di Pietro della Valle il pelligrino: la Persia; 486. 20 KT, 767. 21 Rizvi, ‘Architecture and the Representations of Kingship during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I’. 22 A recent study of Safavid palaces is Sussan Babaie, Isfahan and its Palaces: Statecraft, Shi‛ism and the architecture of conviviality in early modern Iran, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008). 23 Vladimir Minorsky (trans.), Tadhkirat al-Mulūk, a Manual of Safavid Administration (ca. 1137/1725), (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1943), 33, 55. 24 Shah Tahmasb mentions being in a tauhīdkhāna; TazT, 63. 25 Shohleh Quinn, Historical Writing during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I, (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2000); 91. See also, Shohleh Quinn, ‘Notes on Timurid Legitimacy in Three Safavid Chronicles’, Iranian Studies 31/2, (1998): 149–58. 26 TA, 301. Also reported in Engelbert Kaempfer, Am Hofe des persischen Grosskonigs, 1684–1685, reprint (Tubingen, 1977), 212; Necipoglu, ‘Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid and Mughal Palaces’, 309. 27 TAA, 33. 28 Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Architecture and the Representations of Kingship during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I.’ 29 Described in Bernard O’Kane, Timurid Architecture, 313. 30 The floor in front of the entrance was previously raised a step and cordoned off by a low wooden enclosure, demarcating, thus, the sanctified precinct where shoes needed to be removed. Pietro Della Valle did not enter the Dār al-ḥuffāz because of the ‘inconvenience’ of removing his shoes. 31 Zulfiqar Khan Qaramanlu was the younger brother of Farhad Khan Qaramanlu and was a patron of the arts in his own right. Books such as Rashid al-din’s Jāmī al-tawārīkh, belonging to Farhad Khan, were gifted to the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Filiz Cağman and Zeren Tanindi, ‘Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapı Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations’, 140. 32 Dated 1611, the donor is unidentified but they are signed by a craftsman, Amir Khan Ardabili. 33 The alcoves are two meters deep and double-storied; the platforms are raised thirty centimeters off the ground. 34 Olearius, The Voyages, 179. 35 BL OR 11837. 36 There is little reason to believe that the epigraphy was different from what had been there originally, as fragments of the epigraphy can still be seen in de Morgan. 37 The lower band at the Shāhnishīn has a signature: ‘written by (kātiba) Mir Asadullah bin Agha Mir Qavam al-din Rawzakhwan.’ In this band, within the list of Sufi ancestors the date ‘137’ is inserted at the name of Shihab al-din Mahmud Tabrizi (in the first alcove after the Shāhnishīn). A. Morton has hypothesized that this date was 1037, which I am tempted to believe, but cannot assert with full conviction. What is certain, nonetheless, is that it was commissioned after Shah Isma’il’s succession, for the genealogy of Shaykh Safi is that amended in the Safwat al-ṣafa, that is leading to Imam

Notes

235

‘Ali b. Abi Talib. It is difficult with a building of this sort, which has been repaired and renovated many times since its inception, to give precise dates. However, given the historic evidence and the content of the epigraphy, I do not believe it diverges from the seventeenth-century renovations. Above the Shāhnishīn is the name of the writer, Muhammad Isfahani Afshar and the date ‘138’ which the custodians interpret as 1308, that is, during the period of Nasir al-din Shah Qajar. 38 The inscription reads: ‘Shaykh Safi al-din, Shaykh Ibrahim [Zahid Gilani], Sayyid Jamal al-din, Shihab al-din Mahmud Tabrizi [Ahari], Abu al-Ghanaim Rukn al-din al-Sajasi, Abu Al-Najib al-Suharwardi, Abubakr al-Abarhi, Qazi ‘Umar Bakri, ‘Uman al-Ma‘ni, Muhammad al-Bakri, Ahmad Aswad Dinwari, Shaykh Junayd b. Muhammad al-Baghdadi, Ma‘ruf al-Karkhi, Habib Allah al-Ajami, Shaykh Hayder bin Junayd’. 39 TAAA, 1152. There are later farmāns urging the inhabitants of villages near Ardabil to return and repopulate the countryside. According to the Ottoman traveler, Evliya Celebi, the Ottomans conquered the city during this siege and brought the treasures back to Istanbul. Cited in Filiz Cağman and Zeren Tanindi, ‘Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman-Safavid Relations,’ 147. 40 Della Valle, De viaggi, 486, 489. The rare observations of a woman visitor highlight the significant involvement of women at the shrine of Shaykh Safi. Queen mothers were remembered in the Shahs’ endowments as recipients of divine reward; women from a range of society were themselves donors who gifted their wealth to the shrine’s estate. The land registers show Ardabili women to be partners in sales transactions with the shrine and the description given by Señora Mani presents them as worshipers who came to the threshold of their leader with as much devotion as their male counterparts. After all many of the clients of the shrine of Shaykh Safi were women from the extended Safavi clan; they no doubt identified with the other great woman patron, Tajlu Khanum, who built the tomb of her consort, Shah Isma’il, at the ancestral shrine. The separate and discreetly placed stairs up to the balconies suggests that these were probably for women devotees, from where they could hear the sermon, or participate in the Qur’anic recitation. 41 The epigraphy above the exterior window of the Shāhnishīn is a foundation inscription however the name of the builder has been destroyed. Nonetheless, it conveys the message that this was a building built to honor the builder’s father, and may thus be attributed to the son of Shaykh Safi, Sadr al-din Musa. The two phrases are difficult to read, but what appears is: ‘The weak servant of Allah … servant of…’; ‘…he wrote his prayer for Allah’s forgiveness of his father.’ 42 The event took place on the last day of Jumada II, ah 1020, when the Shah visited the shrine of Shaykh Safi on his way from Sultaniyya. 43 TA, 424. 44 James Allan, ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period’, Iran 33 (1995): 123–137; 126. 45 Supposedly the Shah did not want another like him with as much authority, and that was the reason for his deposition. 46 Olearius, The Voyages, 171. 47 See also Sheila R. Canby, ‘Royal Gifts to Safavid Shrines’, in S. Rastegar and A. Vanzan, eds., Muraqqa’e Sharqi: Studies in honor of Peter Chelkowski, (Milan: AIEP Editore, 2007); 57–68. 48 TAAA, 754. 49 TAAA, 761. For the dating debate, see R. D. McChesney, ‘Waqf and Public Policy: The Waqfs of Shah ‘Abbas, 1011–1023/1602–1614’, Asian and African Studies, 15, (1991): 165–90; p. 170.

236

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

50 Shah ‘Abbas remained, after all, the overseer of all the waqfs. The collection was supplemented later by Shah ‘Abbas’ great grandson and namesake, Shah ‘Abbas II. 51 Its name and location abutting the main graveyard of the shrine, the Shahīdgāh, also point to this function. Octagonal burial chambers are common, as for example the octagonal pavilion of the shrine of Abd al-Samad in Natanz, which was also once a freestanding edifice. However, the problem of orientation remains. While it is not always the case that a burial space is oriented toward Mecca (as in pre-eleventhcentury Central Asian cases) the precedent already set by the Ḥaramkhāna and the tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, which are oriented to the qibla, cause us to question the original use of the Chīnīkhāna as a burial space. Its size suggests a possible public use: could it be the Khalvatsarā mentioned in the Safwat al-ṣafa before it was converted into a burial space in the sixteenth century? This speculation is lent further credence by a passage in the Silsilāt al-nasab where it is stated that Sadr al-din Musa built a khalvat at the time of building the Dār al-ḥuffāz, also in the shrine precinct. 52 ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Dauhat al-Azhār, ed. A. M. Tabrizi and A. Rahimof, (Moscow, 1974); 85. 53 The diameter of the dome is approximately 18 m and the area approximately 9.7 × 9.7 m. 54 Martin E. Weaver, ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaykh Safi at Ardebil’, Part I; 16. 55 The Chīnīkhāna functions currently as the shrine’s museum and contains samples of the china collection originally housed here, in addition to farmāns and other miscellany. A few years back a coat was brought back to the shrine from the National Museum in Teheran, and is said to be the original ‘khirqa (shirt) of Shaykh Safi. 56 The lower zone is the dado, which encircles the room and is covered in glazed tile. The tile revetment is of two types: the first is an accumulation of individual tiles, each with a distinct floral motif; the second type is of larger compositions, forming panels of blossoming plants sprouting from vases, the whole framed in an ogee arch. Based on their decorative technique (paint), the colors (bright yellows) and the very ad hoc manner of their application (many are upside-down or do not fit the composition) these tiled dados appear to be later repairs. Above one of the panels is a flowering vase and a medallion with a dragon-sphinx. Attached to this, within the branches of the plants, are smaller epigraphic cartouches, with the names of God, for example, yā quddūs (the Holy), yā murshid (the guide – not an attribute), yā manān (the Benefactor), yā mufīd (the Favorable). These tiles are similar to those on a large marble slab, now housed in the Chīnīkhāna, with six Godly attributes: ‘the Merciful, the Proof, the Judge, the Glorious, the Compassionate, the Benefactor’ (yā rahmān, yā burhān, yā dayān, yā subḥān, yā ḥanān, yā manān). As not all of the names are God’s attributes, such as ‘the Proof’ and ‘the Majestic,’ the question becomes ‘to whom do they refer?’ The marble slab was originally mounted on the shrine entrance, the ‘Ali Qāpu. 57 The technique of painting has been called ‘kundal’ by G. A. Pugachenkova, as observed by her at a mausoleum in Samarkand, the Timurid ‘Ishratkhāna. She describes this as a ‘special preparation of red clay (kizil kissak) with a mixture of plaster and vegetal glue. Here the surface is covered with a thin sheet of gold used as a background on which the design was drawn with compact brushes somewhat in the manner of tempera. For paintings of flowers, stem and inscription, white lead was introduced which, together with the previously mentioned colors, gave pink, light blue, pale green, lilac, and other such hues.’ G. A. Pugachenkova, ‘’Isratkhaneh and Ak-Saray, two Timurid Mausoleums in Samarkand’, Ars Orientalis 5, (1963): 177–89, 185. 58 Martin Weaver surveyed the building in 1970/71 and found accounts of the shrine, landholding deeds, waqfs, and farmāns, in the cupboards. Much of the more valuable material was taken by General Paskiewitch when the Russians conquered the region in 1828. M. Weaver, ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaykh Safi at Ardebil’.

Notes

237

59 The Zarnigārkhāna similar to the Chīnīkhāna in Ardabil in that it, too, is a freestanding building attached to a funerary complex, the interiors of which were richly ornamented in gilded arabesques and floral motifs. There are tiled inscriptions that commemorate Shah Tahmasb’s visit there in Lisa Golombek and Donald Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, (Princeton: Princeton University), 1988. 60 W. M. Thackston, The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor, (Washington, D.C.: Freer Gallery of Art, 1995); 86. 61 Vasifi, Badā’i‘ al-vaqā’ī‘, quoted in Bernard O’Kane, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan, (Costa Mesa: Mazda, 1987); 12. 62 Reproduced in T. Lentz and G. Lowry, Timur and the Princely Vision, (Washington: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery; Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989). 63 Built in 1612 by Akbar’s son, Padshah Jahangir. 64 Some of the smaller wares might have been displayed in these niches, but the rest of the objects are too large to fit in them. Olearius mentions seeing porcelains in the niches of the Chīnīkhāna; Adam Olearius, The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein, [henceforth, Voyages] trans. J. Davies, (London, 1669); 179. Carvalho cites a later fashion for placing precious vessels in niches, which was witnessed by a European traveler. Pedro Moura Carvalho, ‘Porcelains for the Shah, Ardabil and the Chinese Ceramics Trade in the Persian Gulf,’ The Oriental Ceramic Society, (2001–2): 47–56. 65 For a discussion of the funerary associations of the ‘ogee arch and vase’ motif in the Timurid period, see L. Golombek, ‘The Paysage as Funerary Imagery in the Timurid Period,’ Muqarnas 10, (1993): 241–52 66 ‘The circumference of the pavilion was 20 cubits and the height 12 cubits, all of carved wood but so gilded that one would think it was of red gold.’ Ghiyathuddin Naqqash, ‘Report to Mirza Baysunghur on the Timurid Legation to the Ming Court at Peking,’ in Wheeler Thackston, A Century of Princes,’ 286. 67 It is sometimes referred to in modern scholarship as the ‘Music Room’, but the supposed acoustic value of the niches is an additional merit, not a programmatic architectural feature. There are no contemporary eye witness accounts of this floor of the gatehouse. Don Garcia y Silva Figueroa seems to have observed it from outside (even then he is not sure how many floors there are!) The description of the interior never goes beyond the generic. The most striking motifs of the rooms, the carving and gilding of the vaults, are not mentioned – unless they were done after 1618, when Figueroa visited Isfahan. However, his asserting that the rooms were for the female members of the harem naturally excludes his presence in them; Don Garcia y Silva Figueroa, Le Ambassade de d. Garcia de Silva y Figueroa en Perse, trans. de Wicquefort, (Paris, 1667), 183. The earliest allusion to the fifth floor of the Ali Qapu is found in Eskander Munshi, when he refers to the building as the five-storeyed gatehouse of the palace (dargāh-i panj tabqah-i daulatkhāna); TAAA (completed in 1615), 1111. The decree may have been later, but the link to Ardabil was already established. 68 KT, 872. 69 Adam Olearius, The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein, trans. J. Davies, (London: J. Starkey); 179. I have corrected the English to cohere with modern syntax and spelling. 70 Ardabil and the shrine had workshops that produced luxury manuscripts, a tradition overshadowed (though not diminished) by the more restrictive policies of Shah Tahmasb. When Sam Mirza, Tahmasb’s brother, was the mutawalli these workshops had flourished and it was here that the prince completed his extensive biography of poets (and artists) called Tuhfā-yi Sāmī which included much of the local talent.

238

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

See the mss. Chain d’or (Dorn 434) done for the Ardabil atelier by Shah Mahmud Nishapuri in 956 (1549). It was also repaired there as the cover has a later date of 983. See also Baqir Haravi, Mahr o vafā, (Dorn 465). Both manuscripts are at the Russian National Library in St Petersburg. 71 Olearius, The Voyages, 179. 72 Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn, 167. 73 SS, 982. 74 Olearius, The Voyages, 175. 75 TA, 301. 76 Appendix A. Current excavations have unearthed a large octagonal building near a water channel, with its ‘portal facing west’ as described in the Ṣarīḥ al-milk. It may be conjectured that this is the original sharbatkhāna of the shrine. 77 TA, 424. 78 Vladimir Minorsky, Tadhkirat al-Mulūk; 68. 79 Olearius, The Voyages; 175. 80 Robert Hillenbrand has also acknowledged this important aspect of the shrine in his survey, Islamic Art and Architecture, (London, 1999); 236. Chapter 6   1 Ḥadīth on the courtyards of the shrine of Shaykh Safi and the shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma.   2 Bibi Haybat in Baku was supposedly a sister of Imam Reza. As late as 1615 there were imperial orders from Shah ‘Abbas giving tax exemptions to the Shi‛i communities of Baku. Renate Schimkoreit, Regesten publizierter safawidscher Herrscherurkunden, (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1982); 85.   3 Savory, ‘Principal Offices of the Reign of Isma’il (907–30/1501–24)’, BSOAS 24, (1960): 91–105; 98.   4 The epigraphy can be found in Lutfallah Hunarfar, Ganjina-yi athar-i tarikh-yi Isfahan, (Tehran, 1977); 360–77.   5 Shaykh Shihab al-din Muhammad Ahari was a descendant of Shaykh Shihab al-din Suhrawardi (d. 1191).   6 These are no longer in Kalkhoran, having been reported by J. de Morgan who saw them on his visits of 1875, and 1889–94. According to Anthony Weaver they were gone by the time of Sarre’s visit in 1894. Martin E. Weaver, ‘Monuments of Ardabil’, EIr.   7 The Silsilāt was written after the reign of Shah ‘Abbas and was an important resource for the Zahid clan of cognates of the Safavids to wield authority at the powerful shrine of Shaykh Safi. SNS, no page.   8 TA, 301. Iskander Beg Munshi reported on the renovations ordered by Shah ‘Abbas at the tomb of Gibra‛il, in addition to those undertaken in Ardabil, Gilan, and Ahar. TAAA, 536 (Savory).   9 SS, 70. 10 Another tomb tower is in nearby Mishgin and is identified as the mausoleum of Shah Isma‘il’s grandfather, Haydar, but there is no epigraphic or textual evidence as yet to verify that. It is very similar to the free-standing tomb of Mulla Hasan Shirazi, which I believe is closer to the reign of Shah ‘Abbas based on dated examples such as the tomb of Gibra‛il in Kalkhoran and Khwaja Rabi near Mashhad. In Sussan Babaie, ‘Building on the Past: The Shaping of Safavid Architecture, 1501–76’ in S. Canby, ed. Hunt for Paradise: Court arts of Safavid Iran, 1501–1576, (Milan; London: Thames & Hudson, 2003). 11 The current dome is a replica of the original, but without the revetment. 12 Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn (1703), London, 1737; 239.

Notes

239

13 As in the case of the contemporaneous tomb of Khwaja Rabi‛ which was built a few years earlier. An epigraphic band circled the original dome, but it is difficult at present to make out the text. The ruined dome was reproduced in Athar-e Iran, Tome IV, Fascicule II (1949). 14 The text is reproduced in Torabi-Tabatabi, 204. 15 Torabi-Tabatabi, 204. 16 ‘There are six steps to the door of this edifice; and I was obliged to pull off my shoes; in the same ceremonial manner as I had done before at the monument of King Safi; and most of the devotees kiss the sepulcher, when they pay it a visit. When I got into the first apartment, which has a curious glass window above, I found the floor was covered with carpets. At a door, directly opposite to the first, I had a view of this sepulcher, which was raised six foot high, and stood in the center of a very elegant apartment. It was composed of wood, indeed; but then, as they were please to inform me, the encasings were all of solid gold. The pall that is spread over it is of a rich brocade; and there are several silver and gold lamps, not only before, but over the door… I was not permitted to stir an inch beyond the door, where the monument stands erected.’ Cornelis de Bruyn, The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn; 239. 17 Tabriz was occupied by Sultan Suleyman from 1548–55, when the Treaty of Amasya was signed between the Ottomans and Safavids. V. Minorsky, C.E. Bosworth and S. Blair, ‘Tabrīz,’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. (Brill, 2009). Brill Online. Yale University. 5 November 2009. 18 TazT, 54. 19 Khulasat, 597–8. 20 TA, 326, 399. 21 The mausoleum’s functional and formal parallel would be the monumental Timurid shrine of Ahmad Yasavi in present-day Kazakhstan. Commissioned in 1389 to commemorate the great Sufi shaykh, it comprises the tomb chamber and residential spaces for the Sufi order. The primary difference is that Shihab al-din Ahari’s shrine has an open courtyard in the center, within which the Shaykh is buried. 22 Older photographs do not show any tiles on these, but given the mason marks on the structure, it is safe to assume that it was clad in some form of glazed tile. 23 The identifications are tentative, as there is very little documentary information about the shrine. Much of my description parallels that of Sayyid Jamal Torabi-Tabataba’i, Asar Bastani-i Azerbaijan: Asar o abniya-i tarikhi-i shahristanha-i Ardabil, Arsbaran, Kalkhoran, Sarab, Mishginshahr, Mughan, Vol. 2., (Tabriz: Silisila-i Intisharat-i Anjuman-i Asar-i Milli), 2535 Shahanshahi. The domed roof above appears to have been rebuilt sometime during the twentieth century. 24 This type of open-air burial is similar to the Timurid mausoleum of the Sufi shaykh, Abdullah Ansari, in Gazurgah (near Herat) that was completed in 1425. 25 Torabi-Tabataba’i, Asar Bastani-i Azerbaijan, 392. 26 Ibid., 406. 27 Robert Gleave, ‘The Ritual Life of the Shrines’, in Sheila Canby, ed., Shah ‘Abbas and the Remaking of Iran, (London: British Museum Press, 2009); 86. 28 J. Calmard, ‘Kum,’ Encyclopaedia of Islam, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. (Brill, 2009). Brill Online. Yale University. 5 November 2009. 29 Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Gendered Patronage: Women and Benevolence in the Early Safavid Empire’, Women and Self-representation in Islamic Art and Society, ed. D. F. Ruggles, (SUNY: New York, 2000). 30 Morton’s notes in Membre, Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia, 80.

240

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

31 The reasons for this shift are many, but perhaps the most significant was the change in harem politics introduced by Shah ‘Abbas that removed the guardianship of Safavid princes from their Qizilbash male tutors and had them brought up in the palace under the guidance of queen-mothers. Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Sites of Pilgrimage and Objects of Devotion: Shah ‘Abbas and the great shrines in Ardabil, Qum, and Mashhad’, in Sheila Canby, ed., Shah ‘Abbas and the Remaking of Iran, (London: British Museum Press, 2009). 32 See also May Farhat, Islamic Piety and Dynastic Legitimacy: The case of the shrine of ‘Alī b. Mūsā al-Ridā in Mashhad (10th–17th century), (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2002); 103. 33 TazK, 33. 34 NA, 36–37. 35 Charles Melville, ‘Shah ‘Abbas and the Pilgrimage to Mashad’, in C. Melville ed., Safavid Persia: the History and Politics of an Islamic Society, (London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996). 36 KT, 987; NA, 199. 37 Details of epigraphy are given in Muhammad Hasan Khan, Matla‛ al-shams: tārīkh-i Arz-i Aqdas va Mashhad-i muqaddas, (Farhangsara, 1983–86), 127. Rizvi, ‘Sites of Pilgrimage and Objects of Devotion’, 108. 38 TAAA, (Savory translation), 205. 39 Munshi, History of Shah ‘Abbas the Great, 1034. 40 Allahverdi Khan had apparently commissioned an architect from Isfahan to oversee the construction. Munshi, History of Shah ‘Abbas the Great, 1084. More on Allahverdi Khan may be found in Babaie, et al, Slaves of the Shah, 93. 41 The identity is difficult to ascertain. There is little information about the Khwaja, but nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century European travelers did make note of the alleged history of the shrine and documented it photographically. For example, Lt. Col. C. E. Yates, Khurasan and Sistan (London: William Blockwood and Sons, 1900); A. U. Pope, Survey of Persian Art (London, New York: Oxford University Press, 1938–39). 42 The tomb of Padshah Humayun was built in 1562–72. Michael Brand, ‘Orthodoxy, Innovation and Revival: Considerations of the past in imperial Mughal tomb architecture,’ Muqarnas 10, (1993): 323–34. It may be recalled that Humayun had visited Iran during the reign of Shah Tahmasb (Chapter Three). 43 Kishwar Rizvi, ‘Architecture and the Representations of Kingship during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I’. in Charles Melville and Lynnette Mitchell, Every Inch a King: From Alexander to the King of Kings, (forthcoming). 44 Noted in Zeynep Yürekli Görkay, Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: The shrines of Seyyid Gazi and Haci Bektaş, (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2005); 256–257, and Gülru Necipoğlu ‘Dynastic Imprints on the Cityscape: The collective message of imperial funerary mosque complexes in Istanbul’, in Cimetières et traditions funéraires dans le monde Islamique, eds. Jean-Louis Bacque-Grammont and Aksel Tibet, 2 Vols. (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1996); 23–36. 45 Gülru Neçipoglu, The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire, (London: Reaktion Books, 2005). 46 The issue of Friday prayer was a contentious one in Safavid Iran in the sixteenth century, and was most likely the reason why congregational mosques were not built. For a discussion of the issues surrounding the debate, see Andrew Newman, ‘Fayd al-Kashani and the Rejection of the Clergy/State Alliance: Friday Prayer as Politics in the Safavid Period’, in Linda S. Walbridge, ed., The Most Learned of the Shi‛a: The Institution of Marja‛ Taqlid, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001); 34–52.

Notes

241

47 Gülru Neçipoglu, ‘Qur’anic Inscriptions on Sinan’s Imperial Mosques: A comparison with their Safavid and Mughal counterparts’, in Fahmida Suleman, ed., Word of God, Art of Man: The Qur’an and its creative expressions, (Oxford: Oxford University Press in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2007); 91. Appendix A   1 I would like to acknowledge the guidance of Wheeler Thackston and Paul Losensky, who looked at these translations at different stages of this book project. Any mistakes and mistranslations are solely my own. Prose is based on translations in A. H. Morton, ‘The Ardabil Shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I,’ Iran, 12, (1974): 31–64; and 13, (1975): 39–58. All other translations are by this author.   2 This segment is also inscribed on the Dār al-ḥuffāz of the shrine. Appendix B   1 Translation from Anthony H. Morton, ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I’, Iran, 12, (1974): 31–64; and 13, (1975): 39–58.   2 Also on the façade of the tomb of Hārūn-i Velayet in Isfahan (1513).   3 The complete ḥadīth is: ‘The family of the Prophet is like the Ark of Noah; to ride it is to gain deliverance, to oppose it is to drown in destruction.’ This ḥadīth was also used in the interior tomb chamber of Fatima al-Ma‘suma in Qum, which Modaressi dates to ah 925. Hossein Modaressi Tabataba’i, Turbat-i Pakan: asar va binaha-yi qadim-i mahdudah-i kununi-i Dar al-Muminin-i Qum, (Qum: Chāpkhānah-yi Mihr, 1976).   4 Translation from J. W. Allan, ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period’, Iran 33, (1995): 123–37.   5 According to Dibaj there was another signature, ‘amal Ustad Ibrahim … tarrash Tabrizi, 1307.’ Isma‘il Dibaj, Rāhnāma-yi āsār-i tārīkhī-yi Azerbāijān-i sharqī, (Tabriz, 1343 (1964)); 40.   6 Translation from J. W. Allan, ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period’, Iran 33, (1995): 123–137. According to Baba Safari, Mihrani’s grave is at the shrine. Baba Saffari, Ardabīl dar guzargāh-i tārīkh, 3 vols. (Tehran, 1350 (1971)); 233. The chronogram dates it at 1073, by my calculations, 1068 by James Allan and 1053 by Jamal Torabi Tabatabai.   7 According to Dibaj, there is the signature of Ustad Maqsud ‘Ali on the casket.   8 On site, it was impossible to read the date, so I go on earlier documentation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

I  UNPUBLISHED SOURCES ‘Abdi, Zayn al-‘Abdin (‘Abdi Beg Shirazi), Ṣarīḥ al-milk, (Shawwal ah 977). Mss. 3598, microfilm 10. Iran Bastan Museum, Tehran. Isfahani, Mohammed Tahir, Ṣarīḥ al-milk, (Rabi-ul awwal ah 1038). Mss. 3703 and 4324, microfilm 9-2. Iran Bastan Museum, Tehran. Khuzani Isfahani, Fazli. Afzal al-tawārīkh (1639). Mss. OR 4678. British Library, London. Veramini, Ibn Arabshah. Ahsan al-akhbār fī ma‘rafat aima’ al-athār, (837/1433) recopied around ah 932 (1526). Mss. Dorn 312. Russian National Library, St Petersburg. II  IMPERIAL ORDERS (FARMĀN) RELATING TO ARDABIL Fragner, Bert. ‘Ardabil zwischen Sultan und Schah. Zehn Urkunden Schah Tahmasp II.’ Turcica 6, (1975): 177–225. — ‘Das Ardabiler Heiligtum in den Urkunden.’ Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 67 (1975): 169–215. Herrmann, Gottfried. ‘Ein Erlaß von Qara Yusof zugunsten des Ordens von Ardebil.’ Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N. F., 9 (Festschrift für Walter Hinz) (1979): 225–42. — ‘Urkundenfunde in Azarbaygan.’ Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran N. F., 4 (1971): 249–62. Lambton, Ann K. ‘Two Safavid Soyurghals.’ Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies (BSOAS) 14 (1952): 44–54. Martin, B. G. ‘Seven Safawid Documents from Azarbayjan.’ In Documents from Islamic Chanceries, edited by R. M. Stern, 171–206. (Oriental Studies 3). New York: Columbia University Press, 1970. Masse, Henri. ‘Ordonnance rendue par la prince Ilkanien Ahmad Jalayir en faveur du Cheikh Sadr od-din, 1305–1392.’ Journal Asiatique, (1938): 465–68.

244

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Minorsky, Vladimir. ‘A Mongol Decree of 720/1320 to the family of Shaikh Zahid,’ BSOAS 16 (1954): 515–27. Navai, Abdul Hassan, ed., Shah Tahmasb Safavi: isnād vā makālāt-i tārīkhī. Tehran: Arghavān, 1989. — Shah ‘Abbas: majmūa-yi isnād va makālāt-i tārīkhī-yi humrāh bā yāddāshthā-yi tafsīlī. Tehran: Arghavān, 1987. Schimkoreit, Renate. Regesten publizierter safawidscher Herrscherurkunden. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1982. Torabi-Tabataba’i, Sayyid Jamal. Farāmīn-i buqa-yi Shaykh Safī al-din Ardabīlī. Tabriz: Sāzmān-i isnād-i millī, 1993. III  PRIMARY SOURCES – PERSIAN ‘Abdi Beg Shirazi, Zayn al-‘Abidin ‘Ali. Takmīlāt al-Akhbār. Edited by ‘Abdul Husayn Nava’i. Tehran: Nashr-i Nay, 1990. — Dauhat al-Azhār. Edited by A. M. Tabrizi and A. Rahimof. Moscow: Idārā-yi intishārāt dānish, 1974. al-Ahari, Abu Bakr al-Qutubi. Tarīkh-i Shaykh Uvays. Edited by J. van Loon. Gravenhage: Mouton, 1954. Anonymous, Tadhkirat al-Mulūk: A manual of Safavid administration (ca. 1137/1725). Translated by Vladimir Minorsky. London: Luzac & co., 1943. Anonymous, Ganjīna-yi Shaykh Ṣafī (18th century). Edited by Sayyid-Yunusi. Tabriz: Kitabkhana-i Milli, 1969. Ardabili, Ibn Bazzaz. Ṣafwat al-ṣafa (759/1358). Edited by Ghulam Reza Tabataba’I Majd. Tehran, 1994. Babur, Mirza. The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, prince and emperor. Translated by W. M. Thackston. Washington: Freer Gallery of Art/Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, 1996. Bashir, Shahzad. Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: The Nurbakhshiya between medieval and modern Islam, (Columbia: University of Carolina Press, 2003). Gazurgahi, Kamal al-din. Majālis al-‘ushāq. Edited by G. Tabatabai Majd. Tehran: Intishārāt-i zarīn, 1995. Isfahani, Muhammad Yusaf Valah Khuld-i barīn: Irān dar zamān-i Shāh Safī va Shāh ‘Abbās-i Duvvam (1628–1661). Edited by M. R. Nasiri. Tehran, 2001. Karbala‛i Tabrizi, Hafiz Husayn. Rawdat al-jinān wa jannāt al-janān. 2 vols. Edited by Jafar Sultan al- Qurra’i, Tehran: Sutudah, 2004. Kashifi, Husayn Va‛iz. Futūvat nāma-yi sultānī. Edited by Muhammad Jaffer Mahjub. Tehran: Intishārāt-i bunyād farhang-i Iran, 1971. — Rawzat al-shuhadā. Edited by Abul Hassan Shirani. Tehran: Kiṭabfarūshī-yi Islāmia, 1970. Khwajagi Isfahani, Muhammad Masum ibn. Khulasāt al-ṣiyār: Tārīkh-i rūzgār-i Shāh Safī Safavī. Tehran: Ilmi, 1989.

Bibliography

245

Khwandamir, Ghiyas al-din Muhammad Husayni. Habīb al-ṣiyār fī akhbār afrād al-bashār. Tehran: Kitābfurūshī-i Khayyām, 1983. — Volumes 3 and 4 translated by W. Thackston, Jr. as Habibu’s Siyar, Tome Three: The reign of the Mongol and the Turk. Cambridge, MA: NELC, Harvard University Press, 1994. Mahmud bin Khwandamir, Amir. Irān dar rūzgār-i Shāh Ismā‘īl va Shāh Tahmāsb Safavī (Zayl-i ḥabib al-siyār). Edited by Ghulamreza Tabataba’i. Tehran: Bunyād-i Mawqūfāt-i Duktur Maḥmūd Afshār Yazdī, 1991. Majlisi, Muhammad Baqir. Jalā‛ al-‘uyūn. Tehran: Rāshidī, 1983. Mir Khwand, Muhammad ibn Khwandshah. Rawdat al-ṣafa, 10 vols. Tehran, 1960. Munnajim, Jalal al-din Yazdi. Tārikh-i ‘Abbāsi, ya rūznāma-yi Mullā Jalāl. Edited by S. Vahidniya. Tehran: Vahid, 1987. Munshi, Iskander Beg. Tārīkh-i ‘ālam arā-yi ‘Abbāsī. 2 vols. Edited by Iraj Afshar. Tehran. 1985. —  The History of Shah ‘Abbas the Great: Tārīk-e ‘ālamārā-ye ‘Abbāsī by Eskandar Beg Monshi. Translated by R. M. Savory, Persian Heritage Series, 28 (1986). Natanzi, Muhammad Afushtah. Naqāwāt al-athār fī dhikr al-akhyār. Edited by Ehsan Eshraqi. Tehran: Ilmi, 1994. Nav’ai, ‘Abd al-Husayn. Asnād vā mukātabātī tārīkh-i Irān az Tīmūr tā Shāh Ismā‘īl, Tehran, 1963. Qazvini, Abu al-Hasan. Favā’id al-Safavīyyah. Edited by Maryam Mir Ahmadi. Tehran: Muʾassasah-ʾi muṭāla‘āt va taḥqīqāt-i farhangī, 1989. Qummi, Qazi Ahmad. Khulāsat al-tawārīkh. 2 vols. Edited by Ehsan Eshraqi. Tehran, 1981. —  Calligraphers and Painters (Gulistan-i Hunar): A treatise by Qadi Ahmad, son of Mir-Munshi (circa A.H. 1015/ A.D. 1606). Translated by Vladimir Minorsky. Washington: Freer Gallery of Art, 1959. Rumlu, Hasan Beg. Ahsan al-tawārīkh. Edited by ‘Abdul Husayn Nava’i. Tehran, 1970. —  A Chronicle of the Early Safavids being the Ahsan al-Tavarikh of Hasan-i Rumlu. Edited by G. N. Sedon. London: Gaekwod’s Oriental Series, 1931. Ruzbihan, Khunji Isfahani, Fadullah bin. Tārīkh-i ālamārā-yi Amini (Persia in AD 1478–1490). Translated by V. Minorsky. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1992. Sam Mirza Safavi, Tazkirā-yi tuhfā-yi Sāmī. Edited by Rukn al-Din Humayunfarruk. Tehran: Ilmi, n.d. Shah Tahmasb Safavi, Tazkirā-yi Shāh Tahmāsb: āhvālāt-i zindigānī-i Shāh Tahmāsb biqalam-i khudash. Edited by Abdul Shukur. Berlin-Charlottenburg: Kaviani, 1964. Simnani, Alla’uddawla. Risālā-yi iqbālīyya: Fawā’id-i Shaykh ‘Ala’uddawla Simnani. Edited by Wheeler Thackston, Jr. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988.

246

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Sipanta, Abdul Huasayn. Tārīkhchā-yi auqāf-i Isfahān. Isfahan, 1968. Zahidi, Husayn Ibn Abdal. Silsilāt al-nasab al-Ṣafavīyyah. Berlin: Chapkhāna-yi Irānshar, 1924. IV  PRIMARY SOURCES – EUROPEAN Barbaro, Josafa, and Ambrogio Contarini, Travels to Tana and Persia. Translated by W. Thomas. Edited by S. Aderley. London: Hakluyt Society, 1873. Bruyn, Cornelis de. The Travels of Cornelis de Bruyn (1702). London: A. Bettesworth and C. Hitch, 1737. Chardin, John. Voyages du chevalier Chardin en Perse et autres lieux de l’Orient (1673–77). London: Moses Pitt, 1686. Clavijo, Ruy Gonzalez de. Embassy to Tamerlane (1403–6). Translated by G. le Strange. Frankfurt am Main: Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, 1994. Della Valle, Pietro. De viaggi di Pietro della Valle il pelligrino: La persia, 1618. — The Pilgrim. Tanslated by G. Bull. London: Hutchinson, 1989. Figueroa, Don Garcia y Silva. Le Ambassade de d. Garcia de Silva y Figueroa en Perse. Translated by de Wicquefort. Paris, 1667. Herbert, Thomas. Relation of some yeares travaile, begunne anno 1626. Into Afrique and the greater Asia, especially the territories of the Persian monarchie, and some parts of the Oriental Indies. London: W. Stansby and J. Bloome, 1634. Kaempfer, Engelbert. Am Hofe des persischen Grosskonigs (1684–85). Edited by Walter Hinz. Tübingen: H. Erdmann, 1977. Kotov, Fedot. Travels of the Merchant Fedot Kotov into Persia (1623). [In Russian], Moscow, 1958. Martyr, Peter. History of Travel in the West and East Indies. London: Richard Willes, 1577. Membre, Michel. Mission to the Lord Sophy of Persia (1539–42). Translated by A. H. Morton. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993. Olearius, Adam. Moskowitische und Persische Reise: Die holsteinische Gesandtschaft beim Schah (1633–1639). Stuttgart: Thienemann-Edition Erdmann, 1986. —  The Voyages and Travels of the Ambassadors sent by Frederick, Duke of Holstein. Translated by J. Davies. London: J. Starkey, 1662. V  SECONDARY SOURCES – ART AND ARCHITECTURE Akimushkin, Oleg, and A. A. Ivanova. Persidskie Miniatury XIV–XVII vv., Moscow: Nauka, 1968. Allan, James W. ‘Silver Door Facings of the Safavid Period.’ Iran 33, (1995): 123–137.

Bibliography

247

Andrews, Peter Alford. The Felt Tent in Middle Asia: The nomadic tradition and its interaction with princely tentage. Ph.D. diss., School of Oriental and African Studies, London, 1980. Atil, Esin. Suleymanname: The illustrated history of Suleymane the Magnificent. Washington: National Gallery of Art; New York: H.N. Abrams, 1986. Babaie, Sussan. Isfahan and its Palaces: Statecraft, Shi‛ism and the architecture of conviviality in early modern Iran. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008. — ‘Building on the Past: The shaping of Safavid architecture, 1501–76.’ In Hunt for Paradise: Court arts of Safavid Iran, 1501–1576. Edited by Sheila Canby. Milan; London: Thames & Hudson, 2003. —  ‘Shah ‘Abbas II, the Conquest of Qandahar, the Chihil Sutun, and its Wall Paintings.’ Muqarnas 11, (1994): 125–42. Babaie, Sussan, Kathryn Babayan, Massumeh Farhad, and Ina Baghdiantz McCabe. Slaves of the Shah: New elites of Safavid Iran. London: I.B.Tauris, 2004. Bailey, Gauvin. ‘In the Manner of Frankish Masters: A Safavid drawing and its Flemish Inspiration.’ Oriental Art 40/4, (1993): 131–139. Begley,Wayne. Taj Mahal: The Illuminated Tomb, an Anthology of 17th Century Mughal and European Documentary Sources. Cambridge, MA: Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture; Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1989. Blair, Sheila. ‘Texts, Inscriptions and the Ardabil Carpets.’ In Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in honor of Iraj Afshar. Edited by K. Eslami. Princeton: Zagros, 1998. — ‘The Ilkhanid Palace.’ Ars Orientalis 23, (1993): 239–48. —  ‘Sufi Saints and Shrine Architecture in the Early Fourteenth Century.’ Muqarnas 7, (1990): 35–49. — ‘The Epigraphic Program of the Tomb of Uljaytu at Sultaniyya: Meaning in Mongol architecture.’ Islamic Art 2 (1987): 43–96. — The Ilkhanid Shrine Complex at Natanz, Iran. Cambridge, Mass: Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University, 1986. — ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan: Islamic architecture in eastern Iran on the eve of the Mongol invasions.’ Muqarnas 3, (1985): 75–91. — ‘Ilkhanid Architecture and Society: Endowment deed of the Rab‘-i Rashidi.’ Iran 22, (1984): 67–90. — ‘The Octagonal Pavilion at Natanz: A reexamination of early Islamic architecture in Iran.’ Muqarnas 1 (1983): 69–94. Brand, Michael. ‘Mughal Ritual in Pre-Mughal Cities: Case of Jahangir in Mandu.’ Environmental Design 9/11, (1991): 8–17. Buyuk-i Jama‘i. Nigāhī bā āsār o abnīyā-yi tārīkhī-yi Ardabīl. Tehran: Sāzmān-i mīrās-i farhangī, 1995.

248

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Çağman Fi̇li̇z, and Zeren Tanindi. ‘Remarks on Some Manuscripts from the Topkapi Palace Treasury in the Context of Ottoman–Safavid Relations.’ Muqarnas 13 (1996): 132–48. Canby,Sheila R. Shah ‘Abbas: The remaking of Iran. London: British Museum Press, 2009. — ‘Royal Gifts to Safavid Shrines.’ In Muraqqa’e Sharqi: Studies in honor of Peter Chelkowski. Edited by S. Rastegar and A. Vanzan. Milan: AIEP Editore, 2007. — Hunt for Paradise: Court arts of Safavid Iran, 1501–1576. Milan; London: Thames & Hudson, 2003. — Safavid Art and Architecture. London: British Museum Press, 2002. Carvalho, Pedro Moura. ‘Porcelains for the Shah, Ardabil and the Chinese Ceramics Trade in the Persian Gulf.’ The Oriental Ceramic Society (2001–2): 47–56. Chmelnizkij, Sergei. ‘The Mausoleum of Muhammad Bosharo.’ Muqarnas 7, (1990): 23–34. Crane, Howard. ‘The Patronage of Zahir al-Din Babur and the Origins of Mughal Architecture.’ Bulletin of the Asia Institute 1, (1987): 95–110. Dibaj, Isma‘il. Rahnāmā-yi āsār-i tārīkhī-yi Azerbayijān-i Sharqī. Tabriz: Sāzmān-i mīrās-i farhangī, 1964. Eaton, Richard M. ‘Political and Religious Authority of the Shrine of Baba Farid.’ In Moral Conduct and Authority: The place of adab in South Asian Islam. Edited by Barbara D. Metcalf. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Edwards, Holly. ‘The Ribat of Ali b. Karmakh.’ Iran 29 (1991): 85–94. Eslami, Kambiz. ‘Mansur Musavvir, “the Pride of the Painters,” and his son Shah Muzaffar, “the Rarity of the Age.” In Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in honor of Iraj Afshar. Edited by K. Eslami. Princeton: Zagros Press, 1998. Farhat, May. Islamic Piety and Dynastic Legitimacy: The case of the shrine of ‘Alī b. Mūsā al-Ridā in Mashhad (10th–17th century). Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2002. Fernandes, Leonor. The Evolution of a Sufi Institution in Mamluk Egypt: The khanqah. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 1988. Gaube, Heinz. Iranian Cities. New York: New York University Press, 1979. Golmohammadi, Javad. ‘The Cenotaph in Imāmzāda Habīb b. Mūsā, Kashan: Does it mark the grave of Shāh ‘Abbās I?’ In Sifting Sands, Reading Signs: Studies in honour of Professor Geza Fehervari. Edited by Patricia L. Baker and Barbara Brend. London: Furnace Press, 2006. Golombek, Lisa. ‘Discourses of an Imaginary Arts Council in Fifteenth-Century Iran.’ In Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century. Edited by L. Golombek and M. Subtelny. Leiden: Brill, 1992. — and Donald Wilber. The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.

Bibliography

249

— ‘The Cult of Saints and Shrine Architecture in the Fourteenth Century.’ In Near Eastern Numismatic, Iconography, Epigraphy and History. Edited by D. K. Kouymjian. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1974. — The Timurid Shrine at Gazur Gah. Ontario: Royal Ontario Museum, 1969. Grabar, Oleg. The Great Mosque of Isfahan. New York: New York University Press, 1990. —  ‘Isfahan as a Mirror of Persian Architecture.’ In Highlights of Persian Art. Edited by R. Ettinhausen and E. Yarshater, Persian Art Series 1, (1979). Gronke, Monika. Derwische im Vorhof der Macht: Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte Nordwestirans im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 1993. — ‘The Timurid Court between Palace and Tent: From Timur to ‘Abbas I.’ In Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century. Edited by L. Golombek and M. Subtelny. Brill: Leiden, 1992. Gruber, Christiane. ‘Between Logos (Kalima) and Light (Nur): Representations of the Prophet Muhammad in Islamic Painting,’ Muqarnas 26 (2009): 1–34. Haneda, Masahi. ‘The Character of the Urbanization of Isfahan in the Later Safavid Period.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. Hillenbrand, Robert. ‘The Sarcophagus of Shah Isma‘il.’ In Safavid Art and Architecture. Edited by Sheila Canby. London: British Museum Press, 2002. — Islamic Art and Architecture. London: Thames and Hudson, 1999. — ‘The Iconography of the Shah-nama-yi Shahi.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. Hillenbrand, Robert. ‘The Mosque of ‘Aisha Bibi and the Central Asian Tradition of Funerary Architecture.’ Turkish Studies, (Schimmel Festschrift) (1995): 111–120. — ‘Turco-Iranian elements in the medieval architecture of Pakistan: The case of the Rukn-i Alam at Multan.’ Muqarnas 9 (1992): 148–74. Holod, Renata, ed. ‘Studies on Isfahan.’ Iranian Studies 7, (1974). Hunarfar, Lutfallah. Ganjīnā-yi āsār-i tārīkhī-yi Isfahān. Isfahan: Kitābfurūshī-i saqafī, 1965. — Historical Monuments of Isfahan. Isfahan: Emami Press, 1964. Keyvani, Mehdi. Artisans and Guild Life in the Later Safavid Period. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 1982. Kleiss, Wolfram. ‘Safavid Palaces.’ Ars Orientalis 23, (1993): 69–80. —  ‘Der Pavillon-Typ der iranischen Karavanseraies aus safavidischer Zeit am Perischen Golf.’ Architectura 20/1, (1990): 73–76. — ‘Die Schlosser des Shah Abbas am Konigsweg von Isfahan an die Kuste des Kaspischen Meeres.’ Architectura 16/1, (1986): 42–49. Koch, Ebba. The Complete Taj Mahal and the Riverfront Gardens of Agra. London: Thams and Hudson, 2006.

250

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

— ‘Mughal Palace Gardens from Babur to Shah Jahan, 1526–1648.’ Muqarnas 14, (1997): 143–65. —  ‘Diwan-i ‘Amm and Chihil Sutun: The audience halls of Shah Jahan,’ Muqarnas 11, (1994): 143–65. —  ‘Shah Jahan’s Visits to Delhi prior to 1648: New evidence of ritual movement.’ Environmental Design 9/11, (1991): 18–29. — Shah Jahan and Orpheus, Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1988. Lentz, Thomas, and Glenn Lowry. Timur and the Princely Vision. Washington: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery; Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989. Lichez, Raymond, ed. The Dervish Lodge: Architecture, art and Sufism in Ottoman Turkey. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992. Luschey-Schmeisser, Ingeborg. ‘Ein Neuer Raum in Nayin.’ Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran II, N.F. (1972): 309–314. —  ‘Der Wand- und Deckenschmuck eines Safavidischen Palastes in Nayin.’ Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran II, N.F. (1969): 183–192. Mamedov, Azizaga. ‘Le plus ancien manuscrit du Divan de Shah Ismail Khatayi.’ Turcica 6, (1975): 11–23. Marefat, Roya. Beyond the Architecture of Death: Shrine of the Shah-i Zinda in Samarqand. Ph.D. diss. Harvard University, 1991. Marin, Louis. Portrait of the King. Translated by M. Houle. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis, 1988. McChesney, Robert. Waqf in Central Asia: Four hundred years in the history of a Muslim shrine. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991. ---’Postscript to ‘Four sources on Shah ‘Abbas’s Building of Isfahan.’’ Muqarnas 8, (1991): 137–8. —  ‘Waqf and Public Policy: The Waqfs of Shah ‘Abbas, 1011–23/1602–14.’ Asian and African Studies, 15 (1991): 165–90. ---’Four sources on Shah ‘Abbas’s Building of Isfahan.’ Muqarnas 5, (1988): 103–34. — ‘Economic and Social Aspects of the Public Architecture of Bukhara in the 1560s and 1570s.’ Islamic Art, 2, (1987): 217–242. Melikian-Chirvani, A. S. ‘The Lights of Sufi Shrines.’ Islamic Art 2 (1987): 117–48. — Islamic Metalwork from the Iranian World, 8th–18th centuries. London:Victoria and Albert Museum, 1982. Milstein, Rachel. Miniature Painting in Ottoman Baghdad. Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda, 1990. Modaressi Tabataba’i, Hossein. Turbat-i Pākān: āsār vā binhā-yi qadīm-i mahdudāh-yi kunūnī-yi Dār al-Muminīn Qum. Qum: Chāpkhānah-yi Mihr, 1976. Morgan Jacques de. Mission Scientifique en Perse. Paris, E. Leroux, 1894. Morton, Anthony H. ‘Three Mediaeval Inscriptions from Ardabil.’ Akten des VII. Internationalen Kongresses für iranische Kunst und Archäologie, München, (1979): 560.

Bibliography

251

— ‘The Ardabil shrine in the reign of Shah Tahmasp I.’ Iran 12 (1974): 31–64; and 13 (1975): 39–58. Mousavi, Mahmud. ‘Excavations in the western part of the monumental complex of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.’ In Safavid Art and Architecture. Edited by Sheila Canby. London: British Museum Press, 2002. Moynihan, Elizabeth B. ‘The Lotus Garden Palace of Zahir al-Din Mohammed Babur.’ Muqarnas 5 (1988): 135–152. Mukhlis, Muhammad Ali. Fahrist-i binhā-yi tārīkhī-yi Azerbayjān-i Sharqī. Tehran: Sazman-i Miras-i Farhangi, 1992. Naqshāh-yui tārīkhī-yi Irān dar zamān-i hukumat-i Safavīyah dar qarn-i 10 vā 12 hijri (Historical map of Iran under the Safavid dynasty in the 16th and 17th centuries, Tehran, 198?). Nasuh, Matrakci. Beyan-i menazil-i sefer-i Irakeyn-i Sultan Suleyman Han. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1976. Neçipoglu, Gülru. The Age of Sinan: Architectural culture in the Ottoman empire. London: Reaktion Books, 2005. — ‘Qur’anic Inscriptions on Sinan’s Imperial Mosques: A comparison with their Safavid and Mughal counterparts.’ In Word of God, Art of Man: The Qur’an and its creative expressions. Edited by Fahmida Suleman. Oxford: Oxford University Press in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies, 2007. — ‘Framing the Gaze in Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Palaces.’ Ars Orientalis 23, (1993): 303–42. — ‘A Kānūn for the State, a Canon for the Arts: Conceptualizing the classical synthesis of Ottoman arts and architecture.’ In Suleyman the Magnificent and his Time. Edited by G. Veinstein. Paris: La Documentation française, 1992. — Architecture, Ceremonial and Power: The Topkapi Palace in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1991. Neçipoglu-Kafadar, Gülru. ‘The Suleymaniye Complex in Istanbul: an Interpretation.’ Muqarnas 3 (1985): 92–117. O’Kane, Bernard. ‘From Tents to Pavilions: Royal mobility and Persian palace design.’ Ars Orientalis 23, (1993): 245–64. — Timurid Architecture in Khurasan. Costa Mesa: Mazda Press, 1987. Pope, Arthur Upham. Survey of Persian Art, from Prehistoric Times to the Present. Tehran; London; New York: Oxford University Press, 1967. Pope, John Alexander. Chinese Porcelains from the Ardebil Shrine. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, Freer Gallery of Art, 1956. Porter, Yves. ‘Splendeurs de l’architecture Safavide: Iran.’ Archeologia 304, (1994): 20–27. Pugachenkova, G. A. ‘’Isratkhaneh and Ak-Saray, two Timurid Mausoleums in Samarkand.’ Ars Orientalis 5, (1963): 177–189. Rawson, Jessica, ed. The British Museum Book of Chinese Art. London: British Museum Press, 1992. Rizvi, Kishwar. ‘Architecture and the Representations of Kingship during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I.’ In Every Inch a King: From Alexander to the King

252

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

of Kings. Edited by Charles Melville and Lynnette Mitchell. Leiden: Brill, forthcoming. —  ‘Sites of Pilgrimage and Objects of Devotion: Shah ‘Abbas and the great shrines in Ardabil, Qum, and Mashhad.’ In Shah ‘Abbas and the Remaking of Iran. Edited by Sheila Canby. London: British Museum Press, 2009. — ‘Ardabil.’ Encyclopaedia of Islam Three. Edited by Gudrun Krämer; Denis Matringe; John Nawas and Everett Rowson. Brill Online. — ‘The Imperial Setting: Shah ‘Abbas at the shrine of Shaikh Safi al-din Ishaq in Ardabil.’ In Safavid Art and Architecture. Edited by Sheila Canby. London: British Museum Press, 2002. — ‘Gendered Patronage: Women and benevolence in the early Safavid empire.’ In Women and Self-representation in Islamic Art and Society. Edited by D. Fairchild Ruggles. New York: SUNY Press, 2000. — “Its mortar mixed with the sweetness of life”: Architecture and ceremonial at the shrine of Shaykh Safi al-din ishaq during the reign of Shah Tahmasb I.’ The Muslim World (special issue on Saint and Shrine Formation in Medieval Islam), Fall (2000): 323–51. Saadat, Bijan. The Holy Shrine of Imam Zadeh Fatima Masuma, Qum. Shiraz: Asia Institute, Pahlavi University, 1977. —  The Holy Shrine of Imam Reza, Mashad. Shiraz: Asia Institute, Pahlavi University, 1977. Saffari, Baba. Ardabīl dar guzargāh-yi tārīkh. 3 vols. Tehran: Chāpkhāna-yi Bāhman 1971. Sarre, Friedrich. Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis. Berlin: E. Wasmuth, 1924. Seguy, Marie-Rose. The Miraculous Journey of Mahomet: Miraj Nameh. New York: G. Braziller, 1977. Simpson, Marianna Shreve. Sultan Ibrahim Mirza’s Haft Awrang: A princely manuscript from sixteenth-century Iran. Washington: Freer Gallery of Art; Smithsonian Institute, 1997. — ‘The Making of Manuscripts and the Working of the Kitab-khana in Safavid Iran.’ The Artist’s Workshop, Studies in the History of Art, 38, (1993): 105–121. Sims, Eleanor. Peerless Images: Persian Painting and its Sources. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2002 —  ‘The Illustrated Manuscripts of Firdausi’s Shahnama Commissioned by the Princes of the House of Timur.’ Ars Orientalis, 22 (1992): 43–66. Siroux, Maxime. ‘Les Caravanserais Routiers Safavids.’ Iranian Studies 7 (Winter-Spring, 1974): 348–375 Soucek, Priscilla. ‘Persian Artists in Mughal India: Influences and Transformations.’ Muqarnas 4 (1987): 166–181. Soudavar, Abolala. The Aura of Kings: Legitimacy and divine sanction in Iranian kingship. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2003.

Bibliography

253

—  ‘A Chinese Dish from the Lost Endowment of Princess Sultanum (925– 69/1519–62).’ In Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in honor of Iraj Afshar. Edited by Kambiz Eslami. Princeton: Zagros Press, 1998. — Art of the Persian Courts. New York: Rizzoli, 1992. Strika, Vincenzo. The Islamic Architecture of Baghdad: The results of a joint Italian–Iraqi survey. Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1987. Subtelny, Eva Maria. ‘The Cult of ‘Abdullah Ansārī under the Timurids.’ In Gott ist Schön und Er liebt die Schönheit. Edited by A. Giese and J. C. Burgel. Bern; New York: Peter Langm 1994. —  ‘A Timurid Educational Foundation: The Ikhlasiyya Complex of Ali Shir Nava’i in 15th century Herat and its endowment.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 3/1, (1991): 38–56. —  ‘Socio-Economic Bases of Cultural Patronage under the late Timurids.’ International Journal of Middle East Studies 20/4 (1988): 479–505. — ‘Art and Politics in Early 16th Century Central Asia.’ Central Asiatic Journal 27/1–2 (1983): 121–48. Tabaroff, June. Bistam, Iran: The architecture, setting and patronage of an Islamic shrine. Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1981. Taylor, Christopher S. In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Ziyāra and the veneration of Muslim Saints in late medieval Egypt. Leiden: Brill, 1999. — ‘Saints, Ziyāra, Qissa, and the Social Construction of Moral Imagination in late Medieval Egypt.’ Studia Islamica 87 (March 1998): 103–120. —  ‘Re-evaluating the Shi‘i role in the Development of Monumental Islamic architecture: The case of Egypt.’ Muqarnas 9 (1992): 1–8. Terzioglu, Derin. ‘The Imperial Circumcision Festival of 1582: An Interpretation.’ Muqarnas 12 (1995): 84–100. Thackston Jr., Wheeler. A Century of Princes: Sources on Timurid history and art. Cambridge, Mass: The Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, 1989. ---, ‘The Diwan of Khata’i: Pictures for the Poetry of the Shah Isma‘il I.’ Asian Art 1/4 (1988): 37–63. Torabi-Tabataba’i, S. Jamal. Asār bāstānī-yi Azerbayjan: Asār va abnīyā-yi tārīkhī-yi shahristānhā-yi Ardabīl, Arsbaran, Kalkhorān, Sarāb, Mishgīnshahr, Mughān. 2 vols. Tabriz: Silisilā-yi intishārāt-i anjuman-i āsār-i millī, n.d. Uluc, Lale. Turkman Governors, Shiraz Artisans and Ottoman Collectors: Sixteenth Century Shiraz manuscripts. Istanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası, 2006. Weaver, Martin E. ‘The Conservation of the Shrine of Shaikh Safi at Ardebil; Second Preliminary Study.’ UNESCO serial no. 2560/RMO.RD/CLP. Paris, 1971. Welch, Anthony. Shah ‘Abbas and the Arts of Isfahan. New York: The Asia Society, 1973. Wilber, Donald. ‘Qavam al-Din ibn Zayn al-Din Shirazi: A fifteenth-century Timurid architect.’ Architectural History 30 (1987): 31–45. — The Architecture of Ilkhanid Iran. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955.

254

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Wolper, Sara Ethel. Cities and Saints: Sufism and the transformation of urban space in medieval Anatolia. University Park, Pa.:  The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2003. —  ‘The Politics of Patronage: Political Change and Construction of Dervish Lodges in Sivas,’ Muqarnas 12, (1995): 38–47. Yurekli, Zeynep. ‘Legend and Architecture in the Ottoman Empire: The shrines of Seyyid Gazi and Haci Bektas.’ Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2005. —  ‘A Building Between the Public and the Private Realms of the Ottoman Elite: The Sufi convent of Sokollu Mehmet Pasha in Istanbul,’ Muqarnas 20, (2003):159–185. VI  SECONDARY SOURCES – HISTORY Abisaab, Rula. Converting Persia: Religion and Power in the Safavid Empire. London: I.B.Tauris Publishers, 2003. — ‘Ulama of Jabal ‘Amil.’ Iranian Studies 27 (1994): 103–22. Alam, Muzaffar. ‘The Mughals, the Sufi Shaikhs and the Formation of the Akbari Dispensation.’ Modern Asian Studies, 43/1, Expanding Frontiers in South Asian and World History: Essays in Honour of John F. Richards (Jan., 2009): 135–74. Arjomand, S. Amir ed. Authority and Political Culture in Shi‘ism. New York: SUNY Press, 1988. — The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984. Aubin, Jean. ‘Shaykh Ibrahim Zahid Gilani (1218?–1301).’ Turcica 21–3 (1991): 39–54. Babayan, Kathryn. Mystics, Monarchs and Messiahs: The spiritual landscapes of early modern Iran. Cambridge, Mass,.: Harvard University Press, 2003. —  ‘Sufis, Dervishes and Mullas: The controversy over spiritual and temporal dominion in seventeenth-century Iran.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. — ‘The Safavid Synthesis: From Qizilbash Islam to Imamate Shi‘ism.’ Iranian Studies 27/1–4 (1994): 135–62. Bashir, Shahzad. ‘Shah Isma‘il and the Qizilbash: Cannibalism in the religious history of early Safavid Iran.’ History of Religions, 45/3 (Feb., 2006): 234–56 Betteridge, Anne H. ‘Gift Exchange in Iran.’ Anthropology Quarterly 58/4 (1985): 190–202. Birge, J. K. The Bektashi Order of Dervishes. London: Luzac and Co., 1937. Bosworth, C. E. ‘Árdabil I: History of Ardabil,’ Encyclopedia Iranica, online, http://www.iranica.com. Brown, Peter. Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982.

Bibliography

255

—  The Cult of Saints: Its rise and function in Latin Christianity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981. Bruinessen, Martin van. ‘Haji Bektash, Sultan Sahak, Shah Mina Sahib and various avatars of a running wall.’ Turcica 21–3 (1991): 55–70. Calder, Norman. ‘Zakāt in Imāmi Shī ‘ī Jurisprudence, from the Tenth to Sixteenth Century,’ BSOAS 45 (1981): 468–480. —  ‘Legitimacy and Accommodation in Safavid Iran: The juristic theory of Mohammed Baqir al-Sabzavari (d. 1679).’ Iran 25 (1987): 91–105. Calmard, Jean. ‘Shi‘i Rituals and Power II. The consolidation of Safavid Shi‘ism: Folklore and Popular Religion.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. Chehabi, Houshang. ‘Ardabil becomes a Province: Center–Periphery Relations in Iran.’ IJMES 29 (1997): 235–53. DeWeese, Devin. ‘Sacred History for a Central Asian Town: Saints, shrines, and legends of origin in histories of Sayram, 18th–19th centuries.’ REMMM 89–90, (2000): 245–95. — ‘Sacred Places and Public Narratives: The shrine of Ahmad Yasavi in hagiographical traditions of the Yasavi Sufi order.’ The Muslim World 90/3–4 (Fall 2000): 353–76. Dickson, Martin B. ‘Shah Tahmasb and the Uzbeks.’ Ph.D. diss. Princeton University, 1958. Digby, Simon. ‘The Sufi Shaykh and the Sultan: A conflict of claims to authority in medieval India.’ Iran 28 (1990): 71–81. Eberhard, Elke. Osmanische Polemik gegen die Safawiden im 16. Jahrhundert nach Arabischen Handschriften. Freiburg, 1970. Echraqi, Ehsan. ‘Le Dar al-Sultana de Qazvin, deuxième capitale des Safavides.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. Elias, Jamal. The Throne Carrier of God: The life and thought of ‘Alā’ ad-Dawla as-Simnānī. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. Ernst, Carl. W. ‘An Indo-Persian Guide to Sufi Shrine Pilgrimage.’ In Manifestations of Sainthood in Islam. Edited by C. W. Ernst. Istanbul:  Isis Press, 1993. Faroqhi, Suraiya. ‘Agricultural Crisis and the Art of Flute-playing: The worldly affairs of the Mevlevi dervishes.’ Turcica 20 (1988): 43–70. — ‘A Map of Anatolian Friday Mosques (1520–1535);’ ‘Seyyid Ghazi Revisited: The Foundation as seen through sixteenth- and seventeenth-century documents.’ In Peasants, Dervishes and Traders in the Ottoman Empire. London: Variorum Reprints, 1986. — ‘Vakif Administration in Sixteenth-century Konya, the zaviye of Sadreddin-i Konevi.’ JESHO 17 (1974): 145–72. Fischer, Michael J. Iran: From Religious Dispute to Revolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980.

256

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Fleischer, Cornell. ‘The Lawgiver as Messiah: The making of the imperial image in the reign of Süleymân.’ In Suleyman the Magnificent and his Time. Edited by G. Veinstein. Paris: La Documentation française, 1992. Gandjei, Tourkan. ‘Turkish in the Safavid Court of Isfahan.’ Turcica 21–3 (1991): 311–20. Ginzburg, Carlo. Clues, Myths, and the Historical Method. Translated by John and Anne C. Tedeschi. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1989. Gleave, Robert. ‘The Ritual Life of the Shrines.’ In Shah ‘Abbas and the Remaking of Iran. Edited by Sheila Canby. London: British Museum Press, 2009. Gross, Jo-Ann. ‘The Economic Status of a Timurid Sufi Shaykh: A matter of conflict or perception?’ Iranian Studies 21 (1988): 84–104. Hoffman, Valerie J. ‘Eating and Fasting for God in Sufi Tradition.’ JAAR 63/3 (1995): 465–484. Imber, C. H. ‘The persecution of the Ottoman Shi‘ites according to the muhimme defterleri, 1565–1585.’ Der Islam 56, (1979): 245–73. Jafariyan, Rasul. Dīn va siyāsat dar dawrah-yi Ṣafavīyyah. Qum: Anṣāriyān, 1991. Karakaya-Stump, Ayfer, ‘Subjects of the Sultan, Disciples of the Shah: Formation and Transformation of the Kizilbash/Alevi Communities in Ottoman Anatolia.’ Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2008. Karamustafa, Ahmet. God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish groups in the Islamic later middle period (1200–1550). Salt Lake City: University of Utah, 1994. Karang, ‘A. ‘A. ‘Ahar.’ Encyclopedia Iranica. (1984): 633–4. Lambton, Ann K. Landlord and Peasant in Persia: A Study of Land Tenure and Land Revenue Administration. Oxford: Oxford University, reprint, 1991. — Continuity and Change in Medieval Persia. Albany, N.Y.: Bibliotheca Persica, 1988. — ‘Awqāf in Persia, 6th–8th/12th–14th centuries.’ Studies in Islamic Law and Society 4 (1997): 298–318. —  The Office of Kalantar under the Safavids and Afshar.’ In Mélanges d’orientalisme offerts à Henri Massé, Tehran: Impr. de l’université, 1963. Markoff, Irene. ‘Samā‛ and the Alevis of Turkey.’ In Manifestations of Sainthood in Islam. Edited by C. W. Ernst. Istanbul: Isis Press, 1993. Matthee, Rudolph. ‘Was Safavid Iran an Empire?’ Journal of the Social and Economic History of the Orient 53 (2010): 233–65. — The Politics of Trade in Safavid Iran: Silk for silver, 1600–1730 (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge), 2000. Mauss, Marcel. The Gift. Translated by I. Cunnison. New York: W. W. Norton and Co. 1967. Mazzaoui, Michel. ‘From Tabriz to Qazvin and Isfahan: Three Phases of Safavid History.’ ZDMG Supplement III (1977): 514–22. —  The Origins of the Safavids: Shi‘ism, Sufism and the Gulat. Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1972. Melikoff, Irene. ‘Le Problème Kizilbas.’ Turcica 6, (1975): 49–67.

Bibliography

257

Melville, Charles. ‘A Lost Source for the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas: The Afzal al-tawārīkh of Fazli Khuzani Isfahani.’ Iranian Studies 31/2 (1998): 263–66. — ‘Shah ‘Abbas and the Pilgrimage to Mashhad.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. — ‘From Qars to Qandahar: The Itineraries of Shah ‘Abbas I (995–1038/1587– 1629).’ Etudes Safavides (1993): 195–224. Modarressi Tabataba’i, Hossein. An Introduction to Shi‘i Law: A bibliographical study. London: Ithaca Press, 1984. Morton, Anthony H. ‘The Early Years of Shah Isma‘il in the Afzal al-tavarikh and Elsewhere.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. — ‘The chub-i ṭarīq and Qizilbash Ritual.’ Etudes Safavides (1993): 225-46. —  ‘An introductory note on a Safavid Munshi’s Manual in the Library of the SOAS.’ BSOAS 33 (1970): 352–58. Nasiri, Muhammad Ibrahim ibn Zayn al-abidin. Dastūr-i shāhryārān: sālhā-yi 1105 tā 1110 H.Q. pādshāh-i Shah Sultan Husayn Safavi. Tehran, 1994. Newman, Andrew J. Safavid Iran: Rebirth of a Persian Empire. London and New York: I.B.Tauris, 2006. — ‘Fayd al-Kashani and the Rejection of the Clergy/State Alliance: Friday Prayer as Politics in the Safavid Period.’ In The Most Learned of the Shi‛a: The Institution of Marja Taqlid. Edited by Linda S. Walbridge. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. —  ‘The Myth of Clerical Migration to Safawid Iran.’ Die Welt des Islams 33 (1993): 66–112. Nizami, Khaliq Ahmad. ‘Some Aspects of Khanaqa Life in Medieval India.’ Studia Islamica 8 (1957): 51–68. Peri, Oded. ‘Waqf and Ottoman Welfare Policy: The poor kitchen of Hasseki Sultan in 18th c. Jerusalem,’ JESHO 35 (1992): 167–86. Petrushevski, I. P. ‘Vakfnye imushchestva Ardebil skogo mazara.’ An Azerb. SSr. Trudy Instituta Istorii I, Baku, 1947. Potter, Lawrence. ‘Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran.’ Iranian Studies 27/1–4 (1994): 77–102. Quinn, Sholeh. ‘Notes on Timurid Legitimacy in Three Safavid Chronicles,’ Iranian Studies 31/2, (1998): 149–158. — ‘The Historiography of Safavid Prefaces.’ In Safavid Persia: The History and Politics of an Islamic Society. Edited by C. Melville. London; New York: I.B.Tauris, 1996. —  Historical Writing during the Reign of Shah ‘Abbas I. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2000. Ringgren, Helman. ‘The Initiation Ceremony of the Bektashis.’ Studies in the History of Religion: Initiation X (1965): 202–8. Roded, Ruth. ‘The Waqf and the Social Elite of Aleppo in the 18th and 19th centuries.’ Turcica 20 (1988): 71–91.

258

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Roemer, H. R. ‘The Safavid Period.’ In The Cambridge History of Iran vol 6. Edited by P. Jackson and L. Lockhart. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Savory, Roger M. ‘The Qizilbash, Education and the Arts.’ Turcica 6 (1975): 168–76. — ‘The Office of the Khalīfat al-Khulafā under the Safawids.’ JAOS 85 (1965): 497–502. — ‘The Principal Offices of the Safawid State during the Reign of Tahmasp I (930–98/1524–76).’ BSOAS 24 (1961): 65–85. — ‘The Principal Offices of the Safawid State during the Reign of Isma‘il I (907– 30/1501–24)’ BSOAS 23 (1960): 91–105. Schimmel, Anne-Marie. Deciphering the Signs of God. New York: SUNY Press, 1994. — Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1975. Szuppe, Maria. ‘La Participation des Femmes de la Famille Royale à l’Exercise du Pouvoir en Iran Safavide au XVIe siècle.’ Studia Iranica 23 (1994):211– 58; and 24, (1995): 61–122. Tapper, Richard. ‘Shahsevan in Safavid Persia.’ BSOAS 37 (1974): 321–54. Taylor, Christopher. In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Ziyāra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Cairo. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Vilayati, Ali Akbar. Tārīkh-i ravābit-i siyāsī-yi Irān dar ahd-i Shāh ‘Abbās-i avval-i Safavī. Tehran, 1995. Walsh, J. ‘The Historiography of Ottoman–Safavid Relations.’ In Historians of the Middle East. Edited by B. Lewis and P. M. Holt. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. Woods, John E. The Aqquyunlu: Clan, confederation, empire. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1999. — ‘The Rise of Timurid Historiography.’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46/2 (1987): 81–108. Ugur, Ahmet. The Reign of Sultan Selim I in the Light of Selim-name Literature. Berlin: K. Schwarz, 1985. Zarinebaf-Shahr, Fariba. ‘Economic Activities of Safavid Women in the ShrineCity of Ardabil.’ Iranian Studies 31/2 (1998): 247–61. Zirke, Heidi. Hagiographisches Zeugnis zur persischen Geschichte aus der Mitte des 14 Jahrhunderts. Berlin: K. Schwarz, 1987.

INDEX

Note: figure numbers are indicated at the end of an entry using bold Abaqa 32 Abbas I (Abbas the Great), Shah 12-14, 18, 22, 23, 6, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 133, 139, 140, 142, 143, 144, 149, 150, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 163, 165, 167, 170, 171, 173, 175, 179, 180, 182, 184, 185, 204, 206, 208, 209 Abbas II, Shah 15, 175 Abbassid 104 Abdi Beg Shirazi 16, 21, 22, 51, 59, 62, 68, 81, 85, 91, 94, 102, 103, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 126, 143, 156, 185, 187-197 a.k.a. ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Abdīn 124, 187, 196 Dawhat al-azhār 108, 115 Jannat-i ‘adn (Garden of Eden) 103, 106, 109, 110, 113, 115, 116 Rawzat al- ṣifāt 107 Ṣarīḥ al-milk 16, 21, 41, 55, 59, 62, 66, 67, 68, 70, 72, 73, 74, 85, 91, 102, 103, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 116, 117, 121, 156, 187-197, 206, 207 Takmilāt al-Akhbār 104, 106 ‘Abdullah Ansari, Khwaja 36, 38, 69, 89, 144, ch 5 fig 14 Abu al-Fath al Husayni 58

Abu Ghanayim Sajasi 167, 205 Abu Sa‘id 67 Abu Yazid al-Bistami, shrine of 35 Abul Fazl 100, ch 6 fig 13 Akbarnama 100, 180, ch 6 fig 13 aesthetics 99, 102-123, 182 Afghanistan 5 Afshar, Nader, 15 Agra 3 Ahar 23, 161, 163, 167, 170, ch 6 figs 6-8 ahl al-bayt (“People of the House”) 25, 68, 77, 124, 163 ahl-i ikhtisās (“the Select”) 27, 70 Ahmad Jalayir (Sultan) 68 Ahmad Yasavi 34 Ahsan al-akhbār fī ma‛rafāt aima’ al-athār, see Muhammad al-Husayni al-Varamini Ajmer 7, 179 Akbar, Emperor (Padshah) 100, 150, 179, 180, ch 6 fig 13 Alevi-Bektashi, ceremonial 41 ‘Ala’ al-Daula Simnani 51 allegory 103, 104, 116, 118 Alghar 66, 67, 197 ‘Ali al-Karaki 59, 76, 77 ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (Imam ‘Ali) 20, 25, 59, 61, 71, 72, 77, 86, 98, 137, 143, 155, 165, 167, 175, 205, 207 ‘Ali Qapu (Lofty Gate), see Isfahan and Shrine of Shaykh Safi

260

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

‘Ali Reza, Imam 1, 12, 23, 37, 57, 69, 79, 86, 93, 99, 124, 129, 133, 143, 157, 159, 160, 161, 174, 175, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184, ch 6 fig 9-10, plate 14, plate 21 Shrine of, 1, 12, 23, 37, 57, 69, 79, 81, 86, 93, 99, 124, 129, 157, 159, 160, 161, 174, 175, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184, ch 6 fig 9-10, plate 21 Dār al-ḥuffāz 133, plate 14 Dār al-Ṣiyyāda 178, 181 ‘Ali Reza-yi Abbāsī 178, 179 ‘Ali Shir Nava‘i 149 ‘Ali, Sultan 27, 70 Allahverdi Khan 178 Alqas Mirza 170 ‘Amili, see Sayyid Husayn Mujtahid Jabal ‘Amili Amin al-Din Gibra‛il 25, 144, 157, 161, 163, 167, 170, 173, 178, 182, 205 Tomb of, 144, 157, 161, 163, 167, 170, 173, 178, 182, ch 6 fig 1, ch 6 fig 3-5, plate 19 Amir Damishq Khwaja 36 Amir Khwandamir 60, 61, 69, 133 Habīb al-siyār 60 Amir Siyavosh 128 Amir Timur, see Timur Amira Pahliwan 42 Anatolia 5, 8, 12, 37, 55, 58, 70, 77, 130, 171 Andalusia 26 angels 53, 110, 114, 115, 121, 128, 189, 190, 194, 198, 200, 201, 204, 206, 208 Aq Qoyunlu 3, 4, 10, 27, 71 Ardabil 3, 5, 8, 10, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 38, 46, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 83, 89, 90, 95, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103, 105, 108, 109, 110, 124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 133, 135, 139, 140, 142, 143, 150, 153, 155, 161, 171, 174, 178, 182, 184, 185, 187, 188, 195, 197, 203, 204, 209 ‘Ali Qapu Gateway 15, 209, intro fig 6 Gūristān-i gharībān (graveyard) 30, 46 Ardabil carpets 91, 93, ch 3 fig 8 ascension 15, 58, 81, 83, 117, 191

‘āshūra 124, 125, 156, 157, ch 5 fig 1 Attar, Farid al-din 150, ch 5 fig 15 Mantiq al-ṭayr 150, ch 5 fig 15 authority 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 21, 23, 25, 26, 28, 55, 60, 61, 67, 70, 72, 75, 77, 79, 94, 95, 101, 103, 104, 105, 107, 108, 109, 113, 114, 116, 124, 128, 143, 157, 165, 182, 184, 185, 204 ‘Awz bin Muhammad al-Maraghi’ 48, 198 Ayyub Ansari 180 Azerbaijan 5, 10, 15, 16, 22, 27, 36, 58, 60, 66, 68, 74, 109, 128, 133, 143, 161, 170, 173, 174, 187, 197 Babur, Emperor 4, 149 Baburnama 149 Baha al-din ‘Amili (Shaykh Baha‛ī) 173 Jāmī-yi ‘Abbāsī 173 Baku 160 backgammon 98, 204 baraka (divine blessing or benevolence) 9, 137, 156 barber (shaving) 98, 142, 204, 206 bathhouses (baths) 28, 32, 34, 58, 64, 66, 73, 105, 191, 192, 197, 204 bazaar 89 Ardabil 26, 28, 31, 32, 34, 63, 68, 73, 81, 98, 101, 203 Isfahan 130 beer houses 98, 204 Bektashi 37, 41 Bibi Fatima (wife of Shaykh Safi) 25, 46 Bibi Haybat, shrine of, 160 bridges 159, 194 Būstān, see Sa‘di calligraphy 93 candles 38, 41, 46, 52, 67, 111, 150, 155, 157, 170 candlesticks 20, 52, 59, 64, 69, 79, 82, 157, 178 capital 1, 3, 4, 15, 88, 102, 106, 128, 129, 135, 157, 159, 175, 185 caravansaries 12, 28, 31, 32, 69, 159, 197 carpets 12, 67, 79, 91, 93, 163, 170, 175, ch 3 fig 8 Caspian Sea 10, 62 cemetery 12, 30, 62, 71, 163

Index ceremonial 1, 5, 6, 7, 19, 41, 60, 79, 88, 89, 91, 93, 102, 103, 116, 117, 123, 125, 126, 130, 140, 155, 156, 157, 158, 161, 171, 184, 185 Chihil Sutun (Forty Columns) Audience Hall, see Isfahan Chihil Sutun Palace, see Qazvin Chillākhāna, see shrine of Shaykh Safi China (Chinese) 32, 107, 133, 143, 149, 150, 153, 155, 156 Ming 150, 153 Yuan 150 Chīnīkhāna (Porcelain House), Ardabil, see Shrine of Shaykh Safi Chīnīkhāna, see Isfahan chūb-i tarīq (ritual beating) 91 cleric 7, 40, 46, 61, 76, 77, 83, 130, 173, 180, 182, 184 congregational mosque, see also mosque or city name Constantinople, see Istanbul dancing 37, 40, 89, 90, 182, ch 1 fig 3, ch 3 fig 7 Dār al-ḥarb (Abode of War) 10 Dār al-ḥadīth, see Shrine of Shaykh Safi Dār al-ḥuffāz, see Shrine of Shaykh Safi Dār al-irshād (Abode of Guidance), Ardabil 20, 66, 73, 98, 110, 128, 203, 204 Dār al-mominīn (Abode of Believers), Qum 73 Dawhat al-azhār, see Abdi Beg Shirazi De Bruyn, Cornelis 57, 156, 163, 164, 165, ch 6 fig 2 De Morgan, Jacques 16, ch 5 fig 7, ch 6 fig 6 Delhi 4, 37, 100, ch 6 fig 12 Della Valle, Señora Mani 139 Della Valle, Pietro 129 n. 19, 133 n. 30, 139 dervish 7, 35, 37, 69, 89, 91, 124, 126, ch 3 fig 1, ch 5 fig 2 dhikr (remembrance) 7, 21, 26, 39, 41, 54, 55, 75, 82, 89, 98, 100, 130, 208 divān 30, 103 Dorn Collection 15, ch 3 fig 1 dreams 31, 60, 61, 76, 86, 170, 175

261

drug houses 98, 204 drums 81, 99, 129 Durmish Khan Shamlu 58, 160 economy 19, 28 Edict of Sincere Repentance, see Shah Tāhmāsb Egypt 26 ‘eid 41 electuary houses 98, 204 empyrean 114, 189 epigraphy 16, 22, 48, 52, 53, 55, 71, 72, 85, 86, 89, 94, 95, 104, 133, 135, 142, 144, 165, 167, 171, 173, 178, 179, 182, 184, 198-209, ch 1 fig 6, ch 6 fig 8, plate 6, plate 9 Eskander Beg Munshi 126, 139, 153, 178 Farhad Khan Qaramanlu 128, 204 farmān 21, 68, 77, 95, 98, 100, 101, 108, 123, 126, 174, 203 fasting 41, 82 Fatima (daughter of the Prophet Muhammad) 68, 71, 79, 126, 182 Fatima Ma’suma (sister of Imam Reza) 12, 38, 71, 79, 93, 160, 174, 175, 178, plate 20 Firdawsi, Abu’l Qasim 3 Shāhnāma (Book of Kings) 3, 143 Shāhnāma-yi Shāh Tāhmāsb plate 1 fire 38, 157, 208 Fourteen Innocent Ones 79, 143, 207 Friday prayer, see prayer Gabriel 24, 110, 113, 188, 192 gambling (gaming) 77, 98, 101, 204 gardens 13, 24, 32, 39, 70, 86, 101, 103, 105, 106, 107, 110, 111, 113, 121, 140, 149, 164, 188, 190, 194, 195, 196, 200, 201, 202, 208 gates 10, 30, 31, 32, 37, 38, 39, 61, 110, 130, 150, 157, 164, 165, 188, 189, 191, 192, 193, 194, 200, 201, 206 of Ardabil, Asfaris (or Tavai gate) 30, 31, 32, 39, 61; Binan 30; Naushahr 30, 39 Gawhar Shad (Queen) 99, 175 Gazurgah 3, 36, 69, 89, 90, 149

262

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Georgia 229 n. 75, 233 n 12 Ghaznavids 107 Ghazan Hasan 67 Ghazan Khan 35, 69 ghāzī (warrior) 41, 160 Ghiyas al-Din Muhammad Husayni Khwandamir 57 ghulāt (extremism) 4, 83, 98 ghulām (slave) 12, 178, 184 Gunbad-i shāhzādehā, see shrine of Shaykh Safi gifts 7, 12, 15, 18, 20, 59, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 70, 76, 77, 91, 93, 109, 111, 124, 128, 129, 133, 143, 150, 155, 156, 170, 178, 180, 194, 200, 204 Gilan 25, 30, 73, 197 Golden Iwan, shrine of Fatima Ma’suma, Qum, see Fatima Ma’suma governors 8, 30, 58, 63, 66, 67, 68, 99, 109, 128, 133, 140, 157, 160, 178, 204 guardians to royal princes 72, 175, 204 Gūristān-i’ gharībān (graveyard), see Ardabil Habib al-Siyar, see Amir Mahmud bin Khwandamir Habib Allah Savaji 60 Habib b. Musa 224 n. 63 ḥadīth 8, 61, 83, 85, 95, 98, 137, 143, 165, 167, 173, 174, 182, 198, 205, 206, 207 Hafiz (poet) 93 hagiography 20, 25, 26, 38, 39, 66, 89 hajj, see pilgrimage Halveti 7, 8 ḥamd (praise) 109 Hamd Allah Mustawfi 66 ḥaram (sanctum) 110, 113, 137, 140, 142, 175, 178, 188, 190, 205, 206 Hārūn-i Velayet, Isfahan, 160 Hasan bin ‘Ali, Imam 71, 77, 198, ch 3 fig 1 Hasan Beg Rumlu 18, 58, 62 Hasht Behesht (Eight Paradises) 179 Hatim Beg Ordubadi 178 Haydar, Shaykh (bin Junayd Safavi) 3, 27, 61, 62, 205 hazārbaf 46

hāzirā 26, 32, 35, 36, 39, 41, 110, 188 heart 23, 24, 42, 60, 69, 85, 110, 113, 188, 192, 200, 201, 207 Herat 15, 38, 71, 86, 99, 102, 150, 175 heresy 58, 203, 204 hospital (hospice) 32, 36, 64, 129, 197 Hossein Modaressi Tabata’i 83 Humayun, Emperor 1, 12, 99, 100, 102, 179, plate 11 Husayn bin ‘Ali, Imam 57, 71, 79, 124, 126, 198 Husayn Bayqara, Sultan 69, 149 Husayn Beg Shamlu 70, 71 Husayn Ibn Abdal Zahidi 46 Husayn Mirza, Sultan 150, 160 Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili 16, 24, 25, 26, 31, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 58, 60, 62, 81, 89, 161 Safwat al-ṣafā 16, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40, 42, 46, 52, 55, 58, 60, 61, 62, 66, 70, 72, 76, 77, 81, 89, 90, 117, 161 Ibn-i Yamin Faryumadi 105, 106 Ibrahim Gulseni 7 Ibrahim Mirza 109 Ibrahim Pasha 76 ideology 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 28, 59, 61, 73, 77, 83, 102-123, 124, 130, 149, 159, 160, 161, 173, 174, 182, 184 Ilkhanids 10, 18, 27, 32, 35, 36, 66, 67, 69, 102 imams 7, 69, 160 Imami Shi‛ism, see Twelver Shi‛ism imāmzādeh 32, 79, 124, 160, 163, 165 Imamzada Shahzada Husayn 160 ‘Imārat Shihābīyya, Ardabil 28, 86, 195 imperial 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 37, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 82, 88, 89, 90, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 120, 124, 126, 128, 130, 133, 140, 143, 144, 150, 153, 156, 157, 158, 161, 167, 173, 174, 175, 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 185, 189

Index India (Indian), 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 26, 32, 36, 37, 55, 57, 99, 100, 150 inscriptions 35, 36, 42, 48, 79, 85, 89, 94, 95, 113, 118, 140, 155, 160, 161, 165, 167, 171, 174, 200, 203, 204, 207, 208, ch 5 fig 9, ch 5 fig 16 Irān dar ruzgār-i Shāh Isma‘il vā Shāh Tāhmāsb, Amir Mahmud, 61 Iranian Ministry for Heritage 16 Iraq 57, 77 Isfahan 21, 22, 58, 93, 129, 130, 143, 156, 157, 159, 160, 175, 182, 184 ‘Ali Qapu (Lofty Gateway) 130, 153, 184, ch 5 fig 3, ch 5 fig 18, plate 18 Chihil Sutun (Forty Columns) Audience Hall plate 11 Chīnīkhāna (Porcelain House) 143, 153 Tawhīdkhāna (Hall of Unity) 130, 184, ch 5 fig 4 Isma‛il I (Ismail bin Haydar), Shah 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 27, 28, 41, 46, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 76, 77, 83, 89, 91, 94, 95, 118, 140, 143, 160, 174, 189, 206 Tomb of 8, 12, 15, 20, 71, 72, 76, 111, 113, 114, 139, 150, 174, 206, 207, ch 2 fig 1, plate 3, plate 8 Isma‘il (Sultan Aq Qoyunlu) 27 Isma‘il ‘Bahadur Khan (Sultan Shah) 115, 160, 189 Ismihan Sultan 8 Istanbul (Constantinople) 3, 8, 10, 86, 180, intro fig 2 Jabal ‘Amil 59, 83 Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Imam 72, 207 Ja‘far Pasha 128 Ja‘farabad 103, 106 Jalal al-Din Yazdi 18, 128, 129, 139, 163 Tārīkh-i ‘Abbāsī 128, 163 Jamā‘tkhāna 36, 38 Jāmī-yi ‘Abbāsī, see Baha‛ī, Shaykh Jannat-i ‘adn (Garden of Eden), see Abdi Beg Shirazi Jannatsarā (Paradisal Palace), Ardabil, see shrine of Shaykh Safi Jerusalem 4, 160 jihad 26, 70

263

jinn 31, 38 Juvayni family 32, 67, 68 Junayd Safavi, Shaykh, 3, 27, 62, 205, 207 Jupiter 102, 116, 118, 190 Ka‘ba 51, 165, 182, 200, 201 Kadirga 8, intro fig 2 Kalkhoran 23, 25, 30, 38, 68, 144, 157, 161, 163, 171, 173, 197, ch 6 fig 1 Kamal al-din Gazurgahi 89, 135 Majālis al-ushhāq 91, 138, ch 3 fig 7, ch 5 fig 6 Karbala 57, 175 Kashan 95 Kashkar 128 kasr al-nafs (mortification) 41 khalvatsarā 39, 40, 81, 82 khānqah (lodge) 25, 26, 35, 36, 37, 38, 60, 61, 68, 69, 171 Khata’i (the Sinner, pen name of Shah Isma‘il) 28, 91, 143 khirqa (mantle) 25 Khorasan 1, 86, 175, 179 khutbā (sermon) 61 Khudabanda, see Uljaytu Khulāsāt al-tavārīkh, see Qazi Ahmad Qummi Khwaja Rabī, tomb of 11, 15, 157, 178, 179, 182, ch 6 fig 11 Khwandamir, Ghiyas al-Din 57, 60, 61, 69, 133 Khwarazm 135, ch 5 fig 6 kingship 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 15, 28, 32, 62, 68, 69, 75, 77, 93, 98, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 113, 116, 124, 130, 133, 137, 142, 150, 153, 157, 159, 167, 178, 184, 185, 190, 195, 200, 203, 208, 209, ch 5 fig 15 kinship 5, 10 kitchens 13, 37, 38, 39, 41, 58, 66, 67, 70, 73, 86, 91, 111, 128, 130, 140, 155, 156, 170, 191, 192, 193, 195, 196 Konya 41 kulliye 64 lacquer 34 Lahijan 27, 57, 70 Lahore 3, 99

264

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

lamps 12, 31, 52, 67, 69, 93, 105, 111, 135, 140, 155, 157, 163, 178, ch 4 fig 1, ch 5 fig 9 lapis lazuli 52, 133 lion 108, 167 literature 5, 8, 20, 21, 22, 23, 103, 104, 106, 108, 113, 117, 120, 122 Medina 77, 79, 126, 160, ch 3 fig 1 Mahin Banu (Shahzada Sultanum) 79, 175 madrasa 6, 8, 13, 64, 66, 69, 83, 85, 99, 101, 129, 170, 184, 194 Majālis al-ushhāq, see Kamal al-din Gazurgahi Mamluk 26 manādīgāh (place for proclamations) 31 Mantiq al-ṭayr, see Attar Maqsud Kashani 93 Maragha 10, 36, 197 Ma‘rashi Sayyids 124 Mashhad 1, 12, 15, 21, 23, 37, 57, 60, 69, 73, 76, 79, 86, 93, 99, 124, 129, 143, 157, 159, 160, 161, 174, 175, 178, 179, 184, ch 6 figs 9-11, plate 14, plate 21, plate 22 Majd al-din Baghdadi 135, ch 5 fig 6 manuscripts 3, 14, 16, 58, 77, 89, 90, 109, 111, 143, 153, 155, 163 martyrs 46, 62, 77, 124, 143 masjid al-ḥaram (the sacred mosque) 137, 142, 205, 206 Masjid-i Shah, Isfahan 182, ch 6 fig 14, plate 23 Masjid Imad al-din, Kashan, 95 Ma‘sum Beg Safavi 99, 108 Mausillu 174 mausoleum 5, 10, 20, 37, 62, 67, 72, 133, 139, 144, 150, 163, 171, 178, 179, 184, 187 Maydan-i Naqsh-i Jahan (Image of the World Square), Isfahan 129, 182, plate 23 maydans 32, 37, 57, 81 Mazandaran 124, 139, 163 Mecca 4, 46, 51, 60, 79, 85, 160, 182, 208 meditation 12, 21, 37, 39, 55, 81, 83, 93, 100

Mediterranean Sea 4 Membre, Michele 77, 91 memory 3, 5, 54, 57, 67, 81, 143, 163, 208 mendicant 34, 67 messianism 4 Mevlevi order 41, 182 millennialism 4, 83 Ming, see China miniatures, see manuscripts miracles 27, 71, 129, 207 Mirza Shah Husayn 160 Mishgin 163, 197 Munnajim, Jalal al-Din, see Jalal al-Din Yazdi Mongol Empire 25, 27, 55, 59, 60, 66 Monshi, see Eskandar Beg mosques 3, 6, 8, 21, 35, 37, 64, 69, 77, 81, 86, 95, 100, 108, 118, 137, 160, 171, 175, 176, 182, 184 Ardabil 10, 30, 31, 32, 35, 61, 68, 105, 123, intro fig 3 Delhi 100 Herat 99, 102 Isfahan 21, 93, 130, 159, 182, ch 3 fig 9 Natanz 35 Tabriz 69 Mughals 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 99, 100, 149, 150, 157, 158, 179, 180 Muhammad, Prophet 4, 20, 21, 25, 28, 35, 59, 60, 61, 68, 71, 76, 79, 106, 107, 109, 124, 126, 135, 139, 165, 179, 182, 199, 205, 207 Muhammad al-Husayni al-Varamini 78 Ahsan al-akhbār fī ma‛rafāt aima’ alathār 77, ch 3 fig 1 Muhammad Isfahani Afshar 205 Muhammad Tabakhani 89, ch 3 fig 7 Muhiy al-din 12, 35, 40, 42, 46, 62, 98 Muin al-din Chishti 7, 37, ch 6 fig 13 Munshi Sadr al-Din (and Musa al-Safavi), see Sadr al-Din Musa Musa Kazim, Imam 3, 21, 28, 58, 72, 76, 124, 125, 160, 163, 207 music 81, 98 mutawallī 15, 28, 30, 31, 36, 62, 70, 76, 86, 91, 108, 109, 140, 195, 196, 197 myth (or legend) 3, 16, 18, 19, 20, 25, 38, 57, 60, 72, 73, 106, 165

Index mystic (or mystical) 25, 26, 27, 41, 55, 60, 81, 85, 171, 173 Najaf 77 Namakdan 89 naqqarakhāna (bandstand) 129, 193 Natanz 35 nationalism 5 naurūz (Persian New Year) 124 Nazar ‘Ali Khan 15, 140, 209 nazir 30, 140 nazr (offering) 111, 137, 170, 192 Nizam al-din Awliya 37 Nizami Ganjavi, Khamsa, 106 Noah, ark of, 98, 159, 174, 203 Nur al-din ‘Abd al-Samad, see Shaykh Nur al-din ‘Abd al-Samad Olearius, Adam 32, 34, 52, 82, 125, 135, 149, 153, 157, ch 1 fig 2, ch 5 fig 1 orchard 86, 101, 170 orthopraxy 8 Osman Agha 139 Ottomans 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 37, 64, 76, 77, 86, 128, 130, 139, 143, 158, 160, 170, 173, 175, 179, 180, 182, intro fig 2 palaces 9, 13, 22, 75, 83, 88, 99, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 110, 113, 114, 116, 117, 120, 122, 123, 128, 129, 130, 144, 150, 156, 159, 184, 185, ch 5 fig 3-4, plate 12 panjā (hand print) 71, 98, 190 Paradise 53, 105, 107, 111, 113, 115, 121, 179, 188, 189, 190, 192, 194, 200, 202, 204, 209 patronage 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26, 31, 34, 36, 37, 58, 63, 67, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 90, 95, 99, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109, 111, 116, 117, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 129, 130, 133, 140, 143, 155, 156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 163, 165, 170, 173, 174, 175, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184, 185 phenomenology 117, 122 piety 3, 7, 9, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 38, 41, 51, 61, 64, 66, 67, 79, 83, 103, 106, 124,

265

125, 128, 142, 155, 158, 161, 173, 174, 178, 198, 200, 207 pilgrimage 1, 5, 6, 10, 15, 16, 19, 23, 24, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41, 46, 48, 51, 52, 58, 60, 62, 66, 74, 76, 81, 89, 91, 99, 102, 110, 113, 117, 121, 122, 128, 129, 130, 135, 139, 140, 159, 160, 161, 167, 170, 173, 174, 175, 179, 180, 183, 188, 201, 203, 208, ch 6 fig 13 Ardabil 1, 10, 23, 24, 31, 37, 38, 41, 46, 48, 51, 58, 60, 62, 66, 74, 76, 81, 91, 95, 99, 102, 110, 113, 121, 122, 128, 129, 130, 135, 139, 140, 160, 170, 174, 180, 188, 201, 203, 208 Mashhad 1 Pir Husayn Zahidi 163 porcelain 14, 22, 34, 101, 143, 144, 149, 150, 153, 155, 157, ch 5 fig 16-17 poverty 15, 26, 58, 64, 66, 67, 69, 125, 140, 156 power 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 20, 22, 23, 24, 27, 38, 57, 99, 107, 109, 122, 126, 129, 130, 139, 142, 158, 159, 160, 173, 178, 184, 185, 199 procession 55, 81, 133, 180, 191 proclamations 93, 95, 98, 116 prostitution 77, 98, 101, 204 prayer 1, 41, 46, 53, 58, 61, 66, 68, 76, 85, 130, 133, 139, 143, 170, 173, 182, 199, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207, 208 Friday prayer 83 poetry 4, 16, 21, 22, 28, 37, 40, 41, 51, 58, 62, 63, 81, 91, 93, 99, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 167, 187-197, 204, 206 Qahqaha, Fort, 109 Qasim Beg 139 qawwālī 37, 40, 41, 98 Qajar 235 Qaramanlu, see Farhad Khan or Zulfiqar Qara Qoyunlu 27, 68 Qarabagh 36 Qasida 105 Qaysariyya, Ardabil, 28, 31, 32 Qazi Ahmad Qummi 18, 61, 71, 129, 130, 170

266

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Khulāsāt al-tavārīkh 61 Qazvin 10, 22, 58, 99, 102, 103, 106, 108, 110, 117, 122, 124, 144, 159, 160, 185, plate 12 Chihil Sutun (Forty Columns) Palace plate 12 qibla 46, 48, 60, 77, 85, 93, 111, 115, 144, 189, 192, 199 Qizilbash 4, 12, 18, 27, 28, 58, 60, 70, 71, 76, 77, 83, 89, 91, 98, 126, 130, 160, 174, 177, 184, 187 Qum 12, 15, 21, 37, 71, 73, 79, 93, 160, 174, 175, 184, plate 20 Qur’an 1, 12, 38, 39, 40, 41, 46, 48, 53, 60, 69, 81, 83, 89, 94, 95, 109, 110, 113, 120, 130, 133, 135, 137, 143, 156, 165, 167, 173, 175, 182, 199, 200, 202, 205, 206 Surah al-Fathaḥ 135, 199, 205, 206 Qussam b. ‘Abbas 37 Qara Yusuf 68 Qavam al-din Shirazi 175 Rabī b. Khuthaym, see Khwaja Rabī Rashid al-din 36, 67 Rawzat al-ṣifāt, see Abdi Beg Shirazi Rayy 79, 160 religious taxes, see taxes remembrance, see dhikr resurrection 51, 53, 202 ribāṭ (hospice) 26, 68, 197 Rizwan 113, 188 roses 38, 101, 108, 156 Rumi, Jalal al-Din 182 Rumlu, Hasan Beg 18, 58, 62 Russian National Library, St. Petersburg 15, ch 3 fig 1 Sa‛adatabad Palace (Abode of Felicity), Qazvin 103, 106, 107, 114, 117, 120 Sabalan 10, 70 Sabzvar 105 Sa‘di, poet 150, 196 Būstān 150 Sadr al-Din Musa 12, 28, 41, 46, 48, 52, 67, 68, 81, 89, 117, 126, 130, 191, 194, Safaviyya (or Safavid) Sufi Order 1, 3, 5, 10, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 39, 40, 41,

46, 55, 57, 59, 60, 66, 68, 69, 74, 75, 76, 81, 89, 90, 117, 126, 130, 133, 161, 163, 167 Initiation 5, 89, 91, 126 Safi I, Shah 15, 128, 155, 175, 200 Safi, Shaykh (Safi al-Din Ishaq Ardabili), also see shrine of, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 46, 51, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 76, 77, 81, 82, 90, 104, 117, 126, 130, 133, 135, 137, 153, 156, 161, 163, 164, 167, 175, 191, 194, 195, 199, 200, 201, 205, 209 Safwat al-ṣafā, see Ibn Bazzaz Ardabili Sahibabad 129 Salsabil 24, 110, 188, 192 Sam Mirza 108, 109 Tazkira-yi Tuhfā-yi Sāmī 108 sama‘ 26, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 55, 81, 89, 98, 182 Samasbi 70 Samarqand 3, 37, 86, 99, 144, 149 sanctity 1, 24, 42, 46, 55, 70, 77, 91, 94, 110, 111, 113, 114, 115, 118, 120, 129, 137, 142, 150, 155, 156, 167, 173, 188, 189, 190, 198, 200, 203 Sarakjan 70 Sarav 36, 37 Ṣarīḥ al-milk, see Abdi Beg Shirazi Sarre, Friedrich 16, 210, intro fig 3, intro fig 6, ch 1 fig 5, ch 1 fig 9, ch 5 fig 8, ch 5 fig 13, ch 5 fig 17, plate 2 Saturn 104, 102, 115, 116, 189, 190, 206, 208 Sayyids 16, 28, 30, 61, 69, 77, 81, 124, 157, 163, 165, 175, 178 Sayyid Abi al-Qasim Hamza 163 Sayyid Husayn Mujtahid Jabal ‘Amili 83 Sayyid Shaykhshah b. Khwaja Hasan Beg Safavi 81, 189, 191 Selim I, Sultan 4, 7 Seljuk 31, 160 semantic 6, 83, 95, 117 Serlio, Sebastiano 122 Sevunduk Beg Afshar 99 “Shadow of ‘Allah on Earth” 28, 79, 200, 203

Index Shah Begi Begum (Tajlu Khanum) 71, 75, 77, 174 Shah-i Zinda cemetery, Samarqand, 37 Shāhnāma, see Firdawsi Shāhnishīn, see Shrine of Shaykh Safi Shahrukh Mirza 68, 69, 133, 175 Shams al-Din Tuti 40 Shams al-Din (Daula Beg) Juvayni 32, 67 Sharbatkhāna, see Shrine of Shaykh Safi shari‘a 30, 59, 83, 98, 100, 204 Shaykh Lutfullah Mosque, Isfahan 182, plate 23 Shaykh Nur al-din ‘Abd al-Samad 35 Shaykh Safi’s mother 61, 129 Shaykhavand 108 Shaykh Shihab al-din Mahmud Suhrawardi (Tabrizi, Ahari) 28, 86, 161, 167, 170, 171, 173, 205, ch 6 fig 6-8 Shi‛ism 21, 23, 57, 61, 69, 72, 76, 77, 79, 83, 85, 89, 90, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 109, 124, 133, 160, 161, 165, 167, 171, 173, 174, 175, 178, 182, 184 Shiraz 25, 90, ch 1 fig 3, plate 7 Shirvan 27, 197 Shirvanshah 4, 10, 58 shrines 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 48, 51, 57, 64, 69, 75, 79, 98, 108, 125, 156, 160, 161, 173, 174, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184, 203 Shrine of Shaykh Safi 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 46, 48, 51, 52, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 89, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113, 114, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 132, 133, 135, 137, 142, 143, 144, 149, 150, 153, 155, 156, 157, 159, 160, 161, 163, 167, 170, 171, 173, 174, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184, 185, 187, 209, intro fig 5, ch 1 fig 1, ch 1 fig 7, ch 1 fig 9-10, ch 3 fig 2, ch 5 fig 13 ‘Ali Qapu 15, 209, intro fig 6 Chillākhāna (meditation hall) 12, 13, 41, 81, 82, 83, 85, 89, 93, 95, 99, 100, 111, 117, 118, 190, 191, ch 3 fig 3

267

Chīnīkhāna 14, 22, 89, 95, 129, 143, 144, 149, 150, 153, 155, 157, 158, 159, 167, 173, 184, ch 5 fig 11-13, ch 5 fig 17, plate 17 courtyard 9, 21, 38, 41, 48, 71, 72, 79, 81, 85, 86, 93, 94, 95, 100, 111, 116, 118, 120, 121, 123, 125, 144, 174, 177, 191, 207, 208, intro fig 1, ch 4 fig 3, ch 5 fig 1 Dār al-ḥadīth 8, 13, 21, 83, 85, 86, 93, 94, 95, 100, 105, 111, 114, 115, 118, 123, 189, 190, 206, ch 3 fig 4, ch 4 fig 3, plate 9 Dār al-ḥuffāz 12, 13, 14, 18, 22, 46, 52, 53, 55, 62, 72, 81, 83, 89, 94, 95, 98, 111, 113, 114, 116, 126, 128, 129, 133, 135, 137, 139, 143, 144, 150, 155, 157, 167, 173, 175, 184, 188, 189, 200, 203, 204, 205, 207, 209, intro fig 1, ch 1 fig 11-13, ch 3 figs 10-11, ch 5 fig 5, ch 5 fig 7-8, plate 2, plate 6, plate 13, plate 15 Gunbad-i shāhzādehā 62, 71, 89, 111, 114, 115, 126, 135, 143, 189 ḥaram 110, 113, 140, 188, 190 Ḥaramkhāna 18, 19, 20, 42, 46, 48, 71, 72, 113, 139, 198, ch1 fig 4-6, plate 3 hospital 129 Jannatsarā (Paradisal palace) 13, 18, 21, 71, 83, 85, 86, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 100, 111, 114, 115, 117, 118, 120, 123, 130, 153, 171, 189, 190, 191, 195, 196, 207, 208, ch 3 fig 5, ch 3 fig 6, ch 4 fig 3, plate 10 Khazina (treasury) 150 library 5, 15, 105, 14, 153 madrasa 8, 13, 66, 85, 101, 129, 194 place of ascension 15, 81, 117, 191 Shahīdgah 12, 46, 62, 86, 191 Shāhnishīn 46, 133, 139, 140, 142, 203, 205, 206, plate 16 Sharbatkhāna 101, 111, 129, 156, 157, 193 Tomb of Shah Isma‘il 8, 12, 15, 20, 71, 72, 76, 95, 111, 113, 114, 139, 150, 174, 177, 206, 207, ch 2 fig 1, plate 3 Tomb of Shah Tahmasb’s mother 8, 72, 95, 98, 129, 190, 209, ch 2 fig 3

268

The Safavid Dynastic Shrine

Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi 12, 20, 46, 48, 51, 52, 55, 72, 81, 94, 95, 114, 118, 135, 139, 144, 150, 163, 198, 207, intro fig 1, ch 1 fig 8, ch 1 fig 12, ch 1 fig 13, ch 4 fig 2, plate 3, plate 4, plate 5 Sidrat al-muntahā 165 Sikandra 150 Sitti Maryam 125 slave, see ghulām Sokollu Mehmed Pasha 8, intro fig 2 Solomonic star 173 sublime 104, 111, 115, 118, 121, 122, 188, 190, 201 sūfīgarī 89, 126 Sufism (Sufis) 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 55, 57, 58, 59, 62, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 72, 75, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 83, 85, 89, 90, 91, 93, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 114, 124, 125, 126, 129, 130, 133, 135, 139, 142, 143, 157, 159, 160, 161, 165, 167, 171, 173, 182, 184 Sufis of Lahijan 27, 57 Suhrawardi Order 167, 173 Sulayman, Sultan, 182 Suleyman, Shah Safi II 175 Sultanabad 70 Sultaniyya 36, 102, 120 Sultanum 175 Sunni 4, 15, 25, 59, 83, 85, 173 symbolism 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 19, 23, 27, 64, 73, 76, 78, 85, 103, 111, 116, 123, 126, 129, 150, 155, 159, 161, 167, 173, 184 Syria 58 Tabaristan 62 tabarruk 77 Tabriz 1, 3, 4, 10, 27, 36, 57, 58, 60, 67, 68, 76, 77, 99, 102, 128, 129, 139, 170, 197, plate 1 Tadhkirat al mulūk 156 Tāhmāsb I, Shah 1, 8, 12, 13, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 58, 59, 61, 62, 70, 71, 72, 75, 76, 77, 79, 81, 83, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118,

121, 122, 123, 124, 126, 129, 133, 144, 160, 161, 163, 170, 174, 175, 185, 187, 190, 191, 193, 195, 203, 207, ch 3 fig 9, plate 11 Edict of Sincere Repentance 98, 175 Tazkira-i Shāh Tahmāsb (Memoirs of Shah Tāhmāsb) 88, 178 Shāhnāma-yi Shāh Tāhmāsb, see Firdawsi Tāhmāsb I’s mother 8, 72, 95, 98, 129, 190, 209, ch 2 fig 3 Tāhmāsb II, Shah 15 tāj (crown) 91 tāj-i haydarī 27 Tajlu Khanum, see Shah Begi Begum tekke 37, 41 Takmilāt al-Akhbār, see Abdi Beg Shirazi tambour 91, 98, 204 tapestry 82, 142, 161 Tārīkh-i ‘Abbāsī , see Jalal al-din Yazdi Tartar 32 Tawḥīdkhāna, see Isfahan tawlīyat 28, 198 taverns 98, 204 taxes 30, 66, 67, 68, 83, 95, 98, 203, 204 Tazkira-yi Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili 40, 90, ch 1 fig 3, plate 7 Tazkira-yi Tuhfā-yi Sāmī, see Sam Mirza theology (theologians) 4, 6, 7, 8, 83, 160, 174 Timur 60, 99, 100, 130 Timurids 3, 4, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 25, 38, 48, 59, 68, 90, 94, 99, 102, 105, 127, 130, 133, 144, 149, 150, 159, 163, 175, 182 Tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il, see Amin al-din Gibra‛il Tomb of Khwaja Rabī’, see Khwaja Rabī’ tourism 15 treaty 139 Tuman Aga Mausoleum, Samarqand, 144 Turkey 1, 5, 7, 140 Turkish 4, 28, 32, 58, 139, 153 Turkman 70 turquoise 46, 48, 52, 73, 88, 110, 171, 188, 191 Twelver (Imami) Shi‛ism 3, 4, 27, 32, 59, 61, 72, 77, 79, 83, 104, 105, 109, 125,

Index 139, 143, 160, 165, 171, 173, 174, 182, 205, 208 ‘ulema 30, 67, 69, 83 Uljaytu Khudabanda 67, 120 Ulugh Beg 149 urban 19, 20, 28, 31, 34, 35, 130, 184 Urumiya 36 Uzbeks 76, 86, 157, 175, 178 Uzun Hasan, Sultan 3, 27 Vasifi 149 Venetian 77 visitation 1, 35, 37, 38, 51, 179 vizier 8, 32, 36, 60, 67, 76, 105, 149, 178 wajd (spiritual ecstasy) 39, 81 waqf 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 73, 79, 86, 100, 140, 170, 174, 178, 187 waqfīyya 59, 67 wasf (descriptive poetry) 21, 103, 104, 110

269

wells 38, 156, 208 whipmaker 31 wilāyat (spiritual territories) 36 women patrons 20, 23, 68, 69, 174 women 10, 20, 23, 39, 68, 69, 100, 129, 135, 139, 174, 184, 205 Yaqub, Sultan 27 Yazdi, see Jalal al-Din Yazdi Yuan, see China Zahid Gilani, Shaykh 25, 38, 60, 70, 137, 161, 205 Zahir al-Din Ibrahim Safavi 109, 194 zanānkhāna (women’s quarters) 39 Zarnigārkhāna 144, ch 5 fig 14 zāwīya (lodge) 5, 19, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 46, 64, 66, 67, 68, 81, 110, 135, 188 Zulfiqar Khan Qaramanlu 133, 140, 204, ch 5 fig 5

Introduction Plate 1 ‘The ship of Shi‛ism,’ Shāhnāma-yi Shāh Tāhmāsb, Firdawsi, 1524–25 (Tabriz), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (folio 18v). Gift of Arthur A. Houghton Jr., 1970 (1970.301.1). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, NY, U.S.A. Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art / Art Resource, NY.

Introduction Plate 2 Façade of the Dār al-ḥuffāz, shrine of Shaykh Safi. From Friedrich Sarre, Ardabil, Grabmoschee des Schech Safis (Berlin, 1924). Courtesy of Documentation Center, Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library.

Introduction Plate 3 From left to right: Haramkhāna, tomb tower of Shaykh Safi, and mausoleum of Shah Isma‘il.

Chapter 1 Plate 4 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, exterior view. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1335.

Chapter 1 Plate 5 Tomb Tower of Shaykh Safi, interior view of the ceiling.

Chapter 1 Plate 6 Dār al-ḥuffāz, cornice epigraphy.

Chapter 2 Plate 7 ‘Shaykh Safi dining with disciples,’ Tazkireh of Shaykh Safi al-din Ishaq Ardabili, 1582 (Shiraz), Collection of the Aga Khan Museum (AKM 00264). © AKTC.

Chapter 2 Plate 8 Tomb of Shah Isma‘il, exterior view.

Chapter 3 Plate 9 Dār al-ḥadīth, detail of epigraphy panel.

Chapter 3 Plate 10 Jannatsarā, entrance portal. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, c. 1537.

Chapter 3 Plate 11 ‘Shah Tahmasb greets the exiled Humayun,’ 1647. Wall painting on the Chihil Sutun Audience Hall, Isfahan. Courtesy of the Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT.

Chapter 4 Plate 12 Chihil Sutun Palace, Qazvin, c. 1545–55.

Chapter 4 Plate 13 Dār al-ḥuffāz, Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil, detail of entrance portal.

Chapter 5 Plate 14 Dār al-ḥuffaz, interior. Shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad, 15th–17th, 20th centuries. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat.

Chapter 5 Plate 15 Dār al-ḥuffāz, interior view of two-storey alcoves. Shrine of Shaykh Safi, Ardabil.

Chapter 5 Plate 16 Shāhnishīn, interior view, c. 1610. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat.

Chapter 5 Plate 17 Chīnīkhāna, interior view.

Chapter 5 Plate 18 ‘Ali Qapu Gatehouse, fifth floor atrium, Isfahan, early 17th century.

Chapter 6 Plate 19 Tomb chamber, interior detail, tomb of Amin al-din Gibra‛il.

Chapter 6 Plate 20 Golden Iwan, shrine of Fatima Ma‛suma, Qum, c. 1519.

Chapter 6 Plate 21 Detail of dome, shrine of Imam Reza, Mashhad. Courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum. Photo: Khadim Bayat.

Chapter 6 Plate 22 Tomb of Khwaja Rabī’, near Mashhad, 1617–22.

Chapter 6 Plate 23 View of the Masjid-i Shah and Shaykh Lutfullah Mosque from the Maydan-i Naqsh-i Jahan, early 17th century, Isfahan. Courtesy of Aga Khan Visual Archive, MIT. Photo: Khosrow Bozorgi.