SOLOMON'S THRONE/SOLOMON'S BATH: MODEL OR …

SOLOMON'S THRONE/SOLOMON'S BATH:MODEL OR METAPHOR?

BY PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

OF THE LEGENDARYFIGURES MENTIONED IN THE QURAN,

Solomon is one of the most complex and multi-faceted. He possessed both practical wisdom anda connection with supernatural forces. He couldcommand the wind,' communicate with birds2

and demons, some of whom constructed objectsand buildings for him,3 and one of whom seizedfor him the throne of a female ruler, Bilqis.4

Solomon could make armor, possessed the wis-dom to adjudicate disputes,5 and was fond ofhorses.6 In religious terms Solomon's role is some-what ambiguous. He is said to have received adivine message, 7 but also to have been arrogant,for which he sought a divine pardon.8 Deathovertook him, as it does all mortals. 9

Across the Islamic period these various aspectsof his personality varied in importance. TheQur'anic frame of reference for Solomon didensure, however, that certain of them wouldretain awide currency in the Islamic world, givingSolomonic imagery consistent features in differ-ent periods and regions. This consistency is anaid to the identification of Solomonic themes,even when an image or monument lacks anydirect epigraphic or historical evidence whichwould connect it with that tradition.

Such is the case with the Umayyad palace com-plex known as Khirbat al-Majfar and in particularits bath hall.'0 It lacks any direct historical docu-mentation which could explain the rationalebehind its decorative program, let alone any textswhich establish a connection between its featuresand the attributes or accomplishments of So-lomon. Nevertheless both the monument's archi-tectural features and its sculptural program docontain elements which may reflect Islamic leg-ends about Solomon, particularly his connectionwith baths and the special properties of his throne.Since there is no direct historical documentationin contemporary sources which could corrobo-rate this hypothesis, archaeological and textualevidence must be assembled before this questioncan be addressed.

The Khirbat al-Majfar excavation yielded noinscriptions aside from a few graffiti scattered onthe surface or in foundation trenches. Archaeo-logical evidence was, however, sufficient to

establish that the complex was begun during thecaliphate of Hisham b. 'Abd al-Malik (724-43),"but that some of the buildings were still unfin-ished when they collapsed in the devastatingearthquake of the mid eighth century.' 2 Baramkiand Hamilton dated this earthquake to 746, butother, more conclusive information suggestsJan-uary 18, 749: excavations at Bet Shean (Romanand Byzantine Scythiopolis) turned up a goldcoin dated 131 A.H. (August 31, 748-August 18,749), excavated from a jeweler's shop buriedunder earthquake debris.'3

The Khirbat al-Mafjar complex had four maincomponents: a palace, a mosque, a bath, and acourtyard with a domed fountain. Customarily abath is assumed to be a subsidiary structure, akind of service appendage to a residence, but inthis case not only was the bath larger and moreelaborately decorated than any of the palacerooms, it was also the first part of the complex tobe built and the only one which shows signs ofuse. Thus, even though the upper story of thepalace, which should have contained the privatechambers of its owner, was unfinished when thebuilding was destroyed, the pipes of the bathcontained deposits of lime and ash that must haveresulted from a significant period, perhaps years,of service.' 4

The bath complex was also notable both for thedivergent scale of its components and for itslavish decoration which included mosaic pave-ments, painted plaster, carved stucco, and stone-work. The core of the structure was a square hallwith projecting exedrae on each side. In hisexcavation report Hamilton identified this cham-ber as a frigidarium, but later designated it as a"music room," partly as a descriptive term andpartly to take issue with Ettinghausen's interpre-tation that it was a throne room.1 5 Here theneutral terms "bath hall" or "hall" will be used.Although the functional rooms of the bath locat-ed along the hall's northern side were small, theadjacent latrine was capacious.' 6 Three sectionsof the bath hall had particularly elaborate deco-ration: its entrance facade, its domed porch, andthe small chamber attached to its northwest cor-ner.' 7 The bath hall proper also contained some

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

figural sculpture, but it was too fragmentary tointerpret.1 8

All three decorated areas-the bath-hall facade,its domed vestibule, and the northwest cham-ber-combine large areas of low-relief geometricor vegetal ornament with human and animalfigures executed in high relief or even in theround. This contrast between two sculpturalmodes is particularly evident in the bath-hallfacade and porch where figural elements wereplaced over or in front of vegetal and geometricornament.' 9 Figural decoration was also concen-trated in the upper zones of both structures. 2°0 Onthe facade most of the sculpture was placed abovethe entrance portal. Three niches are assumed tohave contained human figures, although only thecentral one, a bearded man standing on a pair oflions, labeled the "caliph," was recovered. 2' A rowof bearded ibexes with pendants around theirnecks rested, somewhat precariously, on top of acornice which surmounted the arch.2 2 Other an-imal sculptures, among them the head of a horse,were similarly perched along a lower molding(figs. 1-4).2

The bath porch was, if anything, more startlingin its juxtapositions, for it had low-relief vegetaland geometric ornament both below and abovethe figural zone.2 4 Figures in high relief or in theround were also arranged in clear levels. Theupper level consisted of niches about 1.5 metershigh once occupied by nearly life-sized, brightlypainted male and female figures. Most of thewomen are nude to the waist with a cloth drapedaround their lower torso, but one poorly pre-served figure wears a different garment. 5 Someof the men wear loincloths, but one is dressed asa Roman footsoldier with a scale-armor tunic.26

The zone of figures in niches was surmounted bya row of birds and had kneeling sheep and ga-zelles at its base, balanced on the top ledge of anacanthus cornice (figs. 3-4).27

This whole upper structure which filled thedome's drum rested on pendentives covered withgrapevines, but visually appeared to be support-ed by four male figures also wearing loincloths.2 8

These figures are described with derision byHamilton who speaks of their conflicting roles of"Caryatid" and juggler."29 Certainly the execu-tion of these figures lacks polish, but this does notexclude the possibility that their pose was intend-ed to convey a message or that they had a mean-ingful connection with the upper zones of figureswhich they appear to support.

Hamilton is also critical of the placement of

figures in the palace entryway, including life-sized figures in niches, horsemen standing on acornice, and nude human figures on a vaultcovered by a dense tangle of grapevines inhabit-ed by birds, monkeys, and pigs, which he de-scribes as "awkward and incoherent."3 0 Yet per-haps even this seemingly accidental placement offigural sculpture against the building, with birdsand animals perched in rows along the corniceslike so many pigeons on a roost, and life-sizedhuman figures coming out of wall niches, wasprompted not by incompetence but by the desireto create a specific impression in the mind of theviewer.

In his study, Walid and His Friends, Hamiltondivides the figural sculptures into two groups onthe basis of technique-one includes figures fromthe northwest chamber and domed porch, theother those from the palace entryway and bathfacade. He also postulates two dates of executionand suggests that the bath facade sculptures wereadded only after Walid's accession to the caliph-ate in 743.31

Both Hamilton and Hillenbrand concur thatthe totality of the figural decoration on the bathfacade and porch had no symbolic significancebeyond an obvious reference to traditional themesconnected with princely pomp and pleasure. AsHillenbrand states, "It was not conceived andexecuted as an entity" and "implicitly disclaimspolitical themes."3 2 Although Hamilton's sugges-tion of two phases in the execution of the sculp-tures is plausible, it need not imply the absence ofan overall rationale in the choice and placementof the figures.

The question of whether the structure anddecoration of Umayyad palatial complexes werebased on a unifying concept or whether theyrepresent a kind of accidental assemblage ofrecycled forms and themes continues to be debat-ed.33 With respect to Khirbat al-Mafjar, most ofthe debate to date has focused on a portion of thecentral bath hall and on its highly decoratednorthwest chamber. A theory that both of theseareas displayed Iranian royal symbols proposedby Ettinghausen was strongly disputed by Hamil-ton. Subsequently, Shaked provided additionalevidence to support some of Ettinghausen's hy-potheses.3 4 Rather than joining in a debate overthese portions of the building, however, we willfocus on the sculptural ensemble on the bath-hallfacade and porch in which we see a reflection oflegends about Solomon's throne and bath.

First, however, it is useful to review what is

110

SOLOMON'S THRONE/SOLOMON'S BATH

known about the Umayyad vision of Solomonand how the stories about him contained in theQur'an were viewed in the first Islamic centuries.Studies on the evolution of Islamic religiousthought and practice have suggested that theUmayyad period was a critical moment in whichexplanations for Quranic texts were sought froma wide variety of sources.3 5 Where passages havestrong parallels with the biblical narrative, theinterpretations of persons familiar with Jewishand Christian sources were particularly impor-tant.

Scholars have identified the names of severalindividuals whose interpretations were appreci-ated by the first generations of Muslims.3 6 Someof them were qu.s.sas (sg. qa.s.s), popular preachersor storytellerswhose explanations of the Qur'anictext helped the expanding community of believ-ers understand the faith's doctrines. They prob-ably laid the foundation for the important as-pects of Qur'anic analysis later codified as tafsfr,and subsequently, some of their interpretationswere incorporated into historical texts such asTabari's annals.3 7

Major changes in the religious traditions whichaccompanied the formal codification of com-mentaries in the Abbasid period have made itdifficult, however, to reconstruct the religiousand cultural climate of earlier decades.3 8 Fortu-nately some texts preserved in an Abbasid recen-sion still provide important clues as to the atti-tudes of the preceding period. Two texts usefulfor understanding the early Islamic vision ofSolomon are the Kitab al-7TjnfiMulfikHimyarofWahb ibn Munabbih (654-729 or 732) 39 and thetafs rof Muqatil ibn Sulayman (d. 767) .40 Muqatilwas probably a qadi by profession and his tafsirissaid to contain colorful elements drawn from thetradition of popular preachers who often includ-ed comments about Qur'anic legends in theirsermons.41

Ibn Munabbih's biography, as reconstructedby R. G. Khoury, underscores his role as interpret-er of biblical traditions for the Umayyad dynastyand later generations of Muslims. Wahb was oneof six brothers born into a family of mixed Irani-an and Yemeni ancestry. His great-grandfather,al-Aswar, had come to the Yemen as a member ofthe cavalry force sent ca. 570 by Khusraw Anushir-wan to help Sayf Dhu Yazan dislodge the Abyssin-ians who had occupied South Arabia.42 ThesePersians and their descendants, known as theAbnai', remained a distinct group in the Yemenuntil the advent of Islam, maintaining an

attachment to Persian traditions and language.4 3

Wahb's father, Munabbih b. Kamil, probably con-verted to Islam within the Prophet's lifetime, andwas also remembered as an early compiler of theQur'an. His penchant for religious scholarshipwas evidently transmitted to his sons, two ofwhom,Hummam and Wahb, achieved eminence in reli-gious studies.4 4

Wahb gained renown for his knowledge ofbiblical traditions and is said to have known bothHebrew and Aramaic; he was also known for hisexemplary piety. Accounts that Ibn 'Abbas, thetraditionist, declaredWahb to be the mostlearnedof men are probably legendary, but even in itspresent state the Kitab al-Tijan attests to his inti-mate familiarity with Jewish, Arabian, and Irani-an lore. Some of this knowledge may have comefrom his mother, said to be descended from therulers of Himyar, but his text also reflects theunusual amalgam of cultures and religions char-acteristic of sixth- and seventh-century Yemen. 45

Professionally Wahb ibn Munabbih served as aqadi in San'a', a position to which he was appoint-ed by the Umayyad caliph, cUmar b. 'Abd al-'Azizaround 717. The Kitab al-Tijan confirms that hewas also skilled as a qs, or reciter of religioustales, a combination of skills particularly charac-teristic of religious leaders in the Umayyad andearly Abbasid periods.4

Wahb is said to have been consulted by thecaliphs Mucawiya and Walid b. 'Abd al-Malik onreligious matters. A tradition preserved inThaclabi's Qsa al-Anbiya? describes his conversa-tion with Mu'awiya about the special features ofSolomon's throne. Walid allegedly soughtWahb'said in interpreting a Hebrew inscription discov-ered during the construction of the Great Mosqueof Damascus which no one could read; Wahb wasable to link it with the reign of Sulayman b.Da'ud.4 7

Despite its abbreviated state, one can sense inthe Kitab al-Tijan the power of the qs to renderthe Qur'anic message intelligible to the commu-nity of believers through his dual skills as enter-taining storyteller and moralizing preacher. InIbn Munabbih's text these two goals-instruc-tion and entertainment-work in tandem. Hecreates a lively narrative of Solomon's relation-ship with Bilqis by skillfully blending quotationsand paraphrases of the Qur'anic text with extra-Qur'anic details to create a new whole which atonce endows the principals with credible person-alities and makes the Qur'anic text more mean-ingful. In addition, his stress on the story's moral

111

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

and religious message recurs at intervals like arefrain. Thus he frames a description of So-lomon's supernatural attributes with a stress ontheir role in a divine plan beginning with thestatement that God gave Solomon powers notgranted to anyone before or since so that hemight rescue Bilqis from her arrogant disregardfor God's omnipotence (qudrah) and concludingthat God's real goal was making Solomon guideher and the Himyarites to the true faith.4

Ibn Munabbih's text deserves a detailed analy-sis, but here three passages will be summarized-the discussion of Solomon's powers, the role ofhis throne, and his connection with baths. Indescribing Solomon's unique powers, Ibn Mun-abbih combines quotations and paraphrases ofthemes treated in suras 21, 27, 34, and 38. Theydescribe Solomon's command of the wind, hisability to communicate with both animate beingsand inanimate things, and his power to forcedemonic creatures to do his bidding, particularlyto erect buildings or collect pearls.

Here a section of this text will be translated.Qur'anic quotations will be both italicized andidentified, and paraphrases will be followed byparenthetical references to their apparent source.

To Solomon [he submitted] the wind. The morningone blewa month['sjourney] and the evening one blew a month['sjourney] [34:11/12]. The birds shaded him. He [God]taught him the language of the birds and the languageof all things [27:16]. No matterwhich thing uttered His[God's] praises he [Solomon] understood that praise[21:79 ]. The mountain traveled with him, indeed thewind carried itasitrepeated itspraises [ofGod ] [34:10].People, jinns, and shaytiins were made subservient tohim [21:82, 34:12/13]. As God-may his praise begreat-said: all builders and pearl-divers [38:36/37] .49

This nucleus of attributes established Solomon'srole as builder, and his mobility permitted hisconnection with buildings and regions quite dis-tant from one another. Ibn Munabbih notes thatSolomon could travel anywhere he pleased, butspecifically links him to Tadmur (Palmyra) inSyria, Istakhr (Persepolis) in Iran, and Kabul inAfghanistan.5 0

The Qur'anic text insists repeatedly on So-lomon's ability to command the wind and tomake it carry him wherever he wished, but givesfew hints about how he traveled. Comments inIbn Munabbih and Tabari, however, show that hewas believed to move from place to place with hisentire entourage in whatwas, in effect, a portablepalace complete with kitchens and stables. Ibn

Munabbih describes how Solomon arranged hisentourage during those journeys:

He commanded the wind to carry his throne (arsh)and he ordered it to carry the chairs (arsi) of hiscompanions. Then he sat on his throne. He seated themen on his right and left, and he placed the jinnbehind him in this way-some sitting, some standing.Then he said to the wind, "Carry us," and to the birds,"Shade us." Then the wind carried him and the birdsshaded him and his companions among men andjinnfrom the sun. The horses were standing and the cookssitting in their stalls at their work.5 '

This Kitab al-7Tijan description omits some detailsfound in other early accounts cited by Tabari inhis history. One given on the authority of IbnIshaq (d. 769) explains the preparations neededfor such ajourney. Whenever Solomon went towar, a wooden platform was constructed to trans-port his army, their mounts, weapons, and accou-trements. When everything was in order on theplatform, Solomon commanded a gale (asi tolift this structure and when it was airborne agentle breeze (rukh') propelled it.5 2 Anotherdescription cited by Tabari on the authority ofMuhammad b. Ka'b al-Quradi (d. 736) makes thesame differentiation between aviolentwindwhichlifts the platform and a breeze which carries itwhile also stressing that Solomon's traveling en-tourage stretched over a distance of one hundredparsangs and was divided evenly between hu-mans,jinn, birds, and animals, with each occupy-ing twenty-five parsangs. His immediate house-hold consisted of a thousand women-threehundred wives and seven hundred concubines-each of whom had a separate glass enclosure (baytmin qawafir) on that wooden support.5 3

Yet another description of how Solomon wastransported from place to place with his retinuegives the demons (shaya.t n) a role. It is in Tabari'stafsZr to explain sura 34:12 which describes So-lomon's control over the wind. When it was sta-tionary, the platform was supported by demons,but when he wished to move, it was lifted bydemons and a whirlwind until a gentle breezecarried it along.5 4 A belief that demons could takeon the form of winds links these two seeminglydisparate features; it is reflected in a statementattributed to the Prophet that mentions God'screation of three categories of jinn: one ofchthonic creatures-snakes, scorpions, and rep-tiles; another with human form and character;and a third which resembles the winds.5 5

Taken together, these passages clarify the

112


Islamic conception of Solomon's mode of loco-motion: he moved about on a platform largeenough to hold his entire army and retinue.When it was at rest it was supported by demons,and when he wished to travel it was propelled bythose same demons metamorphosed into winds.This notion that Solomon's throne was a mobileroyal household is mentioned much more fre-quently in Islamic sources than is his personalivory-and-gold throne so vividly described in theBible (I Kings 10:18-20, and Chronicles 9:17-19), which had lions flanking its arms and guard-ing each end of its six steps.

Two Qur'anic passages refer to Solomon'sthrone, but neither mentions specifically thislion-protected throne. Sura 27 describes howBilqis's throne ('arsh) is seized for Solomon bythejinn (27:23, 38, 41-42) and sura 38 how Godplaces an interloper on Solomon's throne (kursi)as a test of his devotion (38:34/35). Commentar-ies stress the opulence of Bilqis's golden andjewel-encrusted throne,5 6 but rarely discuss thatof Solomon.5 7

Despite the silence of Tabari and other Queaniccommentators on the subject of Solomon's lion-protected throne (probably precisely because itis from the Bible), its distinctive features wereknown in Islam. The lion-protected throne wasrepresented in paintings and even used as amodel for actual thrones.5 8 Although the piousshaykhs of Abbasid Iraq may have excised discus-sion of Solomon's throne from their chroniclesand commentaries, legends about it persisted inother literary contexts probably because it servedas an example of sculpture or tamthil(pl. tamathil),as an example of the "marvels" ('aja'ib) knownfrom various periods and regions, and because itcould be used in conjunction with Solomon'srole as ruler and judge. A link between the lion-protected throne and the administration ofjus-tice was of particular importance for early Islamicrulers because both the first caliphs and theUmmayads were involved in the resolution ofdisputes and the dispensation ofjustice.

Given his knowledge of biblical traditions, itwould be logical to assume that Wahb ibn Munab-bih mentioned Solomon's lion-protected thronein his writings. His HadithDa'iid preserved in theHeidelberg Papyrus (dated 844) describes threedisputes adjudicated by David and Solomon to-gether but breaks off at the beginning of So-lomon's reign.5 9 However, a later text, the Q.sasal-Anbiyai of Tha'labi (d. 1035), cites a conversa-tion between Wahb b. Munabbih and Caliph

Mucawiya, which connects Solomon's throne withthe practical administration ofjustice.

Tha'labi's narrative opens by citing sura 38:34/35, which describes how God tested Solomon'sdevotion by depriving him of his throne. ThenTha'labi abruptly shifts to a consideration of thethrone itself, which he connects with Solomon'srole as judge because its awe-inspiring appear-ance would prevent witnesses from giving falsetestimony.6 The link between these two seeming-ly disparate elements lies in the traditional expla-nation of the offense for which God was punish-ing Solomon-namely, allowing favoritism toinfluence his ruling in a dispute. In this incident,recounted by Ibn 'Abbas, he ruled in favor of therelatives of one of his favorite wives because of hisaffection for her rather than on the merits oftheir case. The incident of Solomon's throne isalso linked by commentators to sura 38:25/26 inwhich David, designated by God as caliph, is en-joined to rule justly or face divine retribution."

Tha'labi's description of Solomon's throne isunusually elaborate and contains many detailsnot given in the Bible, several of which recall themechanical throne seen in Constantinople byLiutprand of Cremona during his mid-tenth-cen-tury visit.6 2 The steps of the ivory-and-gold thronewere flanked by lions who stretched out theirpaws to aid Solomon's ascent. The whole appara-tus rotated. It was surrounded and protected bypalm trees, grapevines, eagles, and peacocks.The vegetation was made of gold and encrustedwith rubies and emeralds, and the birds shadedSolomon and also scattered musk over him. Whenhe was finally installed on the throne a dovewould present him with "the Torah" (al-tawrah)which he would use in issuing verdicts. Solomon'sthrone was flanked on the right by a thousandelders of the Israelites and on the left by a thou-sandjinn. Birds shaded the assembled company.When witnesses appeared before Solomon, thewhole throne structure made two quick rota-tions.63

The alleged conversation between Mu'awiyaand Wahb b. Munabbih contains a simpler de-scription of Solomon's rotating throne and cen-ters on its lion protectors, bird canopy, and itsvalue in forcing witnesses to give true testimony.This mechanical throne is said to have been madeby one of Solomon'sjinn named Sakhr (lit. "solidrock") .64 This meeting may well be legendary butits import, the linking of one of Solomon's mag-ical attributes with the pursuit of justice, is inconsonance with both Mu'awiya's documented

113

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

interest in legends and with the moralizing toneof the early Islamic qias tradition.5

Other Islamic authors connect Solomon's lion-protected throne with the likenesses or sculp-tures mentioned in sura 34:12/13. Among thethings made for Solomon by thejinn were "what-ever he wanted of mihrabs (mahcaib), likenesses(tamathi), basins (jifan) like pools, and fixedcauldrons." Tabari's tafsrdemonstrates that reli-gious scholars were perplexed by the Quraniclinking of Solomon with "likenesses."6 6 One ofthe few commentators to connect sura 34:12/13with Solomon's lion-protected throne is ShaykhTabarsi. His Majma' al-Bayan, composed ca. 1130,is noted both for following certain Shi'a practicesand for its voluminous and discursive commen-taries in which he often presents differing pointsof view to allow his readers to reach their ownconclusions.6 7 Tabarsi's remarks about Solomon'sthrone combine the biblical tradition with someof the features mentioned by Tha'labi. Thisthrone, intended to be awe-inspiring, had a pairof lions at its base and a pair of eagles perched onits flanking columns. Whenever Solomon "want-ed to mount the throne, the two lions stretchedout their paws and when he was sitting upon it,the two eagles spread out their wings and shield-ed him from the sun."68

Both Tha'labi and Tabarsi also describe howafter Solomon's death Bukhtnassar (Nebuchad-nezzar) tried to ascend this throne butwas struckby the paws of its lion supports, and Tha'labi addsthat Bukhtnassar's leg ached the rest of his life. 6

This juxtaposition of Solomon and Bukhtnassarparallels a statement attributed to Wahb ibnMunabbih by Ibn Qutayba: "Among world rulersthere were two believers and two idolators. Thetwo believers were Sulayman ibn Da'ud and Dhu'lQarnayn. The idolators were Nimrud and Bukht-nassar."70

Statements about Solomon in various Islamictexts confirm his extraordinary prestige as a mod-el ruler and judge in the early Islamic period.Particularly extravagant praises of him occur inremarks attributed by Tabari to Wahb ibn Mun-abbih, in a description of Asi b. Abijah, a mono-theistic ruler who is linked to the traditions ofAbraham, Moses, David, and Solomon. Here,Solomon emerges as the most powerful of thisdistinguished company. He has the greatestwealthand dominion over all creatures, but more partic-ularly, he is termed rals al-hukama' wa 1-mulik([he who is] preeminent among sages andkings).7 The prominence accorded to Solomon

in these statements raises the question ofwhether he played a particular role in the localSouth Arabian variety of monotheism, labeled byA. Beeston and others as "Rahmanism." 7 2 So-lomon, with his combination of practical andesoteric knowledge, would appear to be the per-fect candidate to mediate between the demon-inhabited landscape of pagan Arabia and themore intellectualized world of monotheism.

Further information about the early Islamicunderstanding of Solomon is evidently containedin an important, but as yet unpublished, source,the Nihayat al-'arab fi akhbar al-Furs wa-l-'Arabascribed to the Pseudo Asma'i.7 3 This text, whichhas a complex literary pedigree, appears to be amid-ninth-century work drawing on sources ofthe late Umayyad period. It traces the history ofthe world from the time of the creation, combin-ing traditions of various regions, but it givesspecial emphasis to the traditions of ancient Iranand of the Yemen. 74

Both versions of Solomon's throne, his air-borne retinue and the lion-protected seat ofjudg-ment, are connected primarily with Solomon'sofficial roles as warrior, ruler, and judge. Howev-er, the third aspect of his legacy to be consideredhere, Solomon's bath, is linked to more privateand intimate aspects of his life. Scattered refer-ences which link Solomon with baths are found inother Islamic sources, but only Wahb ibn Munab-bih's Kitab al-Tijan provides a plausible rationalefor this association; Tabari's history, however,also provides additional details. These two ac-counts contain a more expansive discussion ofSolomon's relationship with Bilqis than does theQureanic version in sura 27:20-44/45. Wahb'snarrative as a whole presents a skillful blend ofQueranic citations and additional dialogue be-tween the various characters which gives the storya kind of emotional immediacy.75 (In quotationsgiven below the Qureanic texts are again itali-cized.)

In the Qureanic version an unnamed queenenters Solomon's palace and, thinking its floor iswet, uncovers her legs. When he reassures herthat what she sees is only a glass pavement, shepronounces her submission to Solomon and heradherence to Islam, whereupon the Quranictext shifts to another theme.

Wahb's fuller version explains both why So-lomon had a reception chamber with a glass floorand how Solomon reacted to the queen's conver-sion to Islam. Wahb reiterates, at intervals, thereligious purpose of Solomon's relationship with

114


Bilqis, namely to rescue her and her subjectsfrom the errors of idolatry. At the same time, hisnarrative has the atmosphere of a romance inwhich the lovers test each other before decidingto unite, and their union follows her acceptanceof Islam.

In Wahb's version Bilqis is the only survivingchild of a marriage between Hadhad b. Shar-habil, the ruler of Himyar, and a female jinn.76

After Bilqis had succeeded her father and ruledseven years, Solomon, his retinue, and soldierswere transported to Arabia where the two corre-sponded and finally met.7 As he came to knowBilqis, Solomon, attracted to her beauty and im-pressed with her intelligence, decided to marryher. This decision alarmed his demonic servantsbecause they feared Bilqis would help Solomonto keep them enslaved.8

One of their number, Zawba'a, described as"an 'iffit among the jinn," a phrase which echoesthe Qureanic description of the demon who pro-cured the throne of Bilqis for Solomon (sura27:39), promised the others to turn Solomonagainst Bilqis. His leading role in this story maystem from the fact that as the embodiment of awhirlwind he was one of those forced to transportSolomon and his retinue.79 To cool Solomon'sardor for Bilqis he claimed that she, like all thoseborn to ajinn, had hoofs like a donkey and hairylegs. When Solomon demanded proof, Zawba'aconstructed the palace with a glass floor in whichfish seem to be swimming.8 0 When Bilqis wassummoned to enter this chamber she saw the fishand she uncovered her legs in order to wade into thewater. When Solomon saw her and looked at hertwo legs and the thick black hair on the white ofthose legs, he said to her, "don't bare your legs; itis [only] a palace paved with glass."8 ' Realizing hissuperiority, Bilqis offered herself to Solomonand acknowledged the primacy of his religion.

Wahb follows this passage with further detailsabout their courtship, portraying Solomon ashesitant because of Bilqis's hairy legs. In a passagetypical of his colloquial style, Wahb recounts theconversations of Solomon, Bilqis, and the jinn.First Bilqis tries to entice Solomon, saying, "OProphet of God, the pomegranate is not appreci-ated until it is tasted." Solomon then rebuts her,saying, "Only what is sweet to the eye is sweet tothe mouth."8 2

After a month's delay Solomon had decided tomarry Bilqis but remained concerned about herhairy legs.83 This time "a virtuous man among thejinn" says: "O Prophet of God, is her hair the only

thing you detest?" He said, "Certainly." [Thejinn] said "I'll leave her for you like unblemishedsilver." [Solomon] said, "Do it."8 4 Thisjinn's solu-tion was to construct a bath for Bilqis and to makedepilatory paste from the lime encrusted in thebath pipes. 5 This action is commented upon byWahb or one of his editors who expatiates on theimportance of this deed: "Some scholars say thatthe first depilatory was that made for her, and thefirst bath was the one made by thatjinn. That onejinn made for her two paved palaces and [prac-ticed] various crafts."86

The Kitab al-7Tjan is unusual for the clarity withwhich it explains how Solomon became associat-ed with baths, but several other authors repeataspects of this story. Tabari links the jinn onlywith the invention of depilatory paste, omittingany reference to bath structures.8 7 However, bothMutahhar ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi and Tha'alibimention Solomon's connection with baths.Tha'alibi's comments come in a chapter on awa'il,the first occurrences of various things. He de-scribes Solomon as "the first person ... to set upbaths," and credits him, not the jinn, with theinvention of depilatories. This discovery is linkedwith Solomon's desire to remove the hair fromBilqis's legs, but no mention is made of theirmarriage. Tha'alibi indirectly confirms the earlydate of a link among Bilqis, Solomon, and bathsby quoting a pre- or early-Islamic verse whichrefers to the use of "depilatories in the time ofBilqis."8

Mutahhar ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi (fl. 966) alsolists both "the extraction from the earth of depil-atory paste" and "the construction of baths"among Solomon's accomplishments. His text addsa further dimension by noting that Persians claimthe same powers forJamshid as those attributedby "the Muslims and Peoples of the Book" (theJews?) to Solomon (control overjinn, men, anddemons, comprehension of the speech of ani-mals and birds, and command of the wind).89

The remark that Persians attribute bath-build-ing toJamshid in the fashion that Muslims (andJews?) do to Solomon is also made byTabari in hisaccount ofJamshid's six-hundred-year-long reign.This passage ascribed to "Persian scholars" alsodescribesJamshid's ability to travel in a "chariot"('ajala) carried by demons:

From the year 150 to the year 250, he fought thedemons (shayatin) and jinn, causing great slaughteramong them and humiliating them. They were subject-ed [ to doing forced labor] for him and had to follow his

115

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

orders. From the year 250 to the year 316, he chargedthe demons with cutting stones and rocks from themountains and making marble, gypsum, and chalk.They also were directed to erect buildings and bathswith [these materials] and with clay. He also chargedthem with producing depilatories and with transport-ing, from the oceans, mountains, mines, and deserts,everything useful for mankind, such as gold, silver, andall other meltable precious metals, as well as differentkinds of perfumes and medicines. They carried out allthose orders ofhis.Jamshid then ordered the manufac-ture of a glass chariot. He harnessed the demons to it,mounted it, and went on it through the air from hishome, in Dunbawand, to Babil in one day. That was theday Hurmuzruz of Fawardin Mah. Because of the mir-acle people saw him perform on that occasion, theyestablished the day as New Year's Day (nawruiz). Heordered them to establish this day and the followingfive days as a festival.0

This passage and the one from al-Maqdisi's textcited above demonstrate the complex manner inwhich Solomonic legends and those connectedwith the Persian rulerJamshid had become inter-woven."' This occurred before the advent of Is-lam as the term used forJamshid's demon-trans-ported vehicle 'ajala (wagon or chariot) shows.In Ibn Munabbih's Had thDaiid the related word

'ajal is used to describe Solomon's wind-bornevehicle.9 2 Both terms suggest a link between theselegends and various apotheosis stories of lateantiquity. There may even be traces of this apo-theosis tradition in the sculptural program ofKhirbat al-Mafjar.

Ibn Munabbih also connects Solomon with

Istakhr, a town linked with the ruins of Persepolisin Islamic sources. 93 This site has strong ties to theJamshid legends, particularly those connectedwith the festival of Nawruz. 94 In later Persian and

Indian literary traditions and pictorial represen-tations the figures ofJamshid and Solomon be-come so interdependent that the two sometimesappear to be different aspects of the same perso-na, a process through which Solomon can evenbe linked with Nawruz and Jamshid's solar at-tributes.

Although by the tenth century, if not earlier,Persian sources ascribe the invention of baths to

Jamshid, this innovation is more securely linkedto Solomon, especially in the Arab tradition.Thus, the tenth-century Syrian author Muqadda-si identifies "Solomon's bath" (Hammam Sulay-man) as being among the ruins of Istakhr/Perse-polis.95 More commonly, however, Solomon isconnected with hot springs or baths in the Yemen

or Syria,96 most persistently with those in thevicinity of Tabariyya (Roman Tiberias), on thewestern shore of the Sea of Galilee. The proxim-ity of this site to Khirbat al-Mafar gives theseassociations a particular importance for the hy-pothesis proposed here that the structure anddecoration of the Umayyad bath and palace com-plex at Khirbat al-Mafjar were intended to con-jure up in the minds of its users legends sur-rounding Solomon's bath, as well as thoseconnected with Solomon's throne.

Two different areas near the city of Tiberiashad hot springs famous since antiquity for theircurative powers: one is just south of the Romanand Byzantine settlement, the other some dis-tance to the southeast, in the Yarmuk valley. Bothareas contain structures identified by Islamicauthors such as CAli al-Harawi and Nasir-i Khus-raw as baths erected by Solomon. The springs andbaths connected with them were considered oneof the world's "marvels" because from the groundemerged water so hot that no additional heatingwas needed.9 7

The marvel of the Tiberias bath is illustrated ina late-fourteenth-century manuscript now inOxford, the Kitab al-Bulhan (fig. 5). The scene,which has lost its original title, is identified in alater hand as "hammaim tabariyya." In the illustra-tion this bath has two stories, a lower one occu-pied by the bath's furnace and two demons andan upper one for bathers. Because of its demonicfire-tenders the illustration evokes the literarytradition of Solomon's bath, except that presum-ably at Tiberias the demons would have beenunderground whence the hot springs issued.Unfortunately there is no text associated with thispainting.9 8

In addition to Islamic sources, the city of Tibe-rias and its baths are also described in an anony-mous Syriac chronicle completed in 1234 andpublished by I.-B. Chabot in a Latin translation. Itcontains a description of damage inflicted on thecity and its surroundings in the devastating mid-eighth-century earthquake which also destroyedKhirbat al-Mafjar:

The earthquake overturned the entire city of Tiberias,except for the house of a barber named Isa. Thirtysynagogues of the Jews were destroyed and [also] thewonders that were in that city. The baths built by KingSolomon, of marvelous construction, were completelyoverthrown and collapsed. There was also in this city aspring of purgative waters bestowed by God for thepeople's cure and beautiful shrines were built over

116


it and there were latrines built in the area around itfor the use of those who came to be purged.... Allthese facilities were devastated and destroyed.9 9

Recent excavations at Tiberias have confirmedthe veracity of this description, which differenti-ates between a large bath and smaller structuresnear the spring. The "baths built by King So-lomon" should probably be connected with alarge bath erected in the Byzantine period, in thesouthern section of Tiberias, and said to have "amagnificent mosaic pavement," which was de-stroyed in the earthquake of 749.'0

More recent excavations near the springs in thesouthern suburb of Hammath-Tiberias have,however, uncovered a structure similar to thatdescribed in the Syriac text. Although also de-stroyed by the earthquake of 749, this buildingwas subsequently rebuilt and continued to beused into the tenth century.' 0 ' This section of thecity had buildings on either side of a main street.On the street's western side was a nine-roombuilding (about 250 meters square) equippedwith reservoirs, latrines, and systems for bothrunning water and drainage.'0 2 Information inthe Syriac text combined with archaeologicalevidence tells us that during the first half of theeighth century there was a large bath on thesouthern side of Tiberias proper known locally as"Solomon's bath."After the earthquake this struc-ture was not rebuilt as were smaller buildingsadjacent to the hot springs. Later Islamic authorsoften associate Solomon with buildings adjacentto those springs, or even with the more distantbaths in the Yarmuk valley.' 03

What gives the baths and springs near Tiberiasparticular importance for the question of wheth-er there is a link between the legends aboutSolomon's bath and the design and decoration ofKhirbat al-Mafjar is the fact that the Umayyaddynasty owned property in its immediate vicinityand that several members of the family are knownto have frequented the area. References to prop-erties owned by various Umayyad family mem-bers are scattered through Islamic sources andhave yet to be collected and analyzed in a system-atic fashion. However, even without such a syn-thetic study, certain features of the manner inwhich property was acquired and transmitted arediscernible. The various treaties of capitulationgranted to conquered cities provided the Islamicleaders with substantial holdings in diverse sec-tions of the conquered territories. From remarks

made by Baladhuri it would appear that land orproperty thus acquired was transmitted withinthe ranks of the caliphs and their families notonly from person to person but also from dynastyto dynasty. He was able to list the owners of landin the Arabian community of Fadak from thelifetime of the Prophet to the reign of the Ab-basid al-Mutawakkil (847-61). 1°

04 Other sourcesindicate that members of the Umayyad familywith holdings in different areas often traveledbetween them in the course ofayear, whether tomanage their properties better or to enjoy activ-ities appropriate to a given region or climate.

With respect to Tiberias, both medieval textualreferences and modern archaeology confirm thiscity's importance in the Umayyad period. In ad-dition to Umayyad-period buildings discoveredboth in the city itself and in its suburb Hammath,an excavation north of Tiberias at Khirbat al-Minya revealed the presence of an Umayyad pa-latial residence.' 0 5 The texts suggest, however,that the most important holdings of the Umayyadfamily were in or near al-Sinnabra (former Sen-nabris), located south of the thermal springs.

Four generations of the Marwanid Umayyadscan be connected with the Tiberias region or al-Sinnabra: Marwan, 'Abd al-Malik b. Marwan,Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Malik, and Yazid b. Sulay-man b. 'Abd al-Malik. Both Marwan and Abd al-Malik appear to have used al-Sinnabra as a sea-sonal residence. Thus in Ansab al-Ashrif Baladhuridescribes both Marwan'svisit to al-Sinnabrawhileen route from Egypt to Damascus, and also theperegrinations of 'Abd al-Malik over the courseof a year, from one winter to another. The cyclebegins and ends with a sojourn in al-Sinnabrawhich he left at the end of winter, moving fromthere to Damascus via al-Jabiya, then to Ba'albak,and back to Damascus, before returning oncemore to al-Sinnabra. A bridge over the Jordannear al-Sinnabra linked it to the Damascus road."°6

Al-Sinnabra also figures prominently in theupheavals which followed the assassination of al-Walid II in 744. The citizens of Palestine, proba-bly in Ramlah, sought to make Yazid b. Sulaymanb. 'Abd al-Malik caliph because he had beenliving among them and they trusted him. Theinhabitants ofJordan, however, backed the can-didacy of Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Malik. To quellthese disturbances, forces loyal to Yazid b. al-Walid sent armed men to Tiberias where theybegan to plunder houses.'0 7 In the ensuing con-fusion the citizens of Tiberias "went to the

117

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

residence of Yazid b. Sulayman and Muhammadb. 'Abd al-Malik, plundered their belongings,seized their riding animals and weapons, andreturned to their own villages and houses."'0 8

After order had been restored, the commanderof the caliphal army convened the people ofJordan in al-Sinnabra and forced them to swearallegiance to Yazid b. al-Walid.' 09

Textual evidence connecting the Umayyad fam-ilywith the region aroundJericho and hence withKhirbat al-Mafjar is less detailed than for al-Sin-nabra, so a broader approach must be used. Inclimate the Jericho region resembled Tiberiasand was also a traditional winter residence, espe-cially for persons residing in the colder parts ofFilistin, such asJerusalem or Ramlah. °0 Propertyadjacent to important springs in the Jericho re-gion had a particularly high value and remainedthe property of Palestine's rulers from the Helle-nistic through the Byzantine period. Both Herodand his son owned palm groves in the vicinity ofJericho. Herod also established a balsam planta-tion near the village of Naurath (Duyuk) fivemiles north ofJericho, and water from that samespring was used by his successor to irrigate a palmgrove. Later both the palm trees and the balsamplantation were exploited for the profit of theRoman and Byzantine treasury. It is a measure ofthe high commercial value of balsam resin thatHadrian and his successors insisted that its culti-vation continue despite opposition from the lo-cal population. For this reason aJewish commu-nity is said to have remained at Naurath (Duyuk)until the sixth century."'

Given the long history of governmental controlover the oases ofJericho, it is probable that thecapitulation treaty forJerusalem transferred somesuch property to the new Islamic rulers. Thus, itis not surprising to learn that Sulayman b. 'Abd al-Malik, the governor of Filistin during the caliph-ate of his brother al-Walid (705-15) and thefounder of Ramlah, also had property nearJeri-cho. His foundation of Ramlah is described byBaladhuri, and other Islamic authors mention itsconnection with him or other members of thedynasty. "1 2 A description of hisJericho property,however, appears to be found exclusively in theanonymous thirteenth-century Syriac chronicle,mentioned above in connection with the historyof Tiberias." 3

Despite the thirteenth-century date of its com-pilation, this text, which appears to be based onmuch earlier records kept in the Christian com-munity, often gives details of their tribulations at

the hands of Islamic rulers and provides a vividaccount of various miracles and disasters. It is inthis vein that the chronicle of 1234 mentionsdamage inflicted on Sulayman's property by theearthquake of 749. Hamilton refers to this pas-sage in a postscript to his monograph on al-Walidand provides a partial translation, without biblio-graphical references, based on the unpublishedwork of a certain Robert Schick." 4 This textstates:

The spring, however, which is situated nearJericho atwhich Sulayman b. Abd al-Malik had built citadels(arces), gardens (hort), and mills (molae), this springitself stayed in its position, but the river which rose fromit changed its course and receded six miles from theplace in which it used to flow; thus it was that all theconstructions made on this river by Sulayman per-ished." 5

The Syriac author gives no specific source for thisevidence, but his extraordinarily specific descrip-tion of earthquake damage inflicted on Tiberiasmentioned above, the accuracy of which has beenconfirmed by modern archaeology, gives his ac-count high credibility. Both descriptions appearto have been based on eyewitness testimony,perhaps from monks who resided in the vicinity.A monastic community was established nearJer-icho in 475, and archaeological remains docu-ment a continuous Christian presence into theIslamic period."6 Monks living in the Jordanvalley are said to have supported themselves bymaking baskets and mats from palm fronds andto have scandalized their neighbors by raisingpigs. 1 7 Some of the graffiti discovered at Khirbatal-Mafjar itself are said to have been written byChristian clerics."8

The spring near which Sulayman is said to haveerected structures may be the twin sources of'Aynal-Nuway'ima and cAyn al-Duyuk located fourkilometers northwest of the ruins of Khirbat al-Mafjar and connected to it by an aqueduct. Ac-cording to Hamilton, "About 700 m. north-westof the palace the waters were gathered in a reser-voir or birkah, between which and the palace thefall of some 80 feet in the land was used to turnthree or more water mills."" 9 This water channelthen continued northward along the westernside of Khirbat al-Mafjar until it reached an unex-plored mound located to the north of the bathhall and tentatively identified as a guesthouse orkhan. 2 0 It is tempting to identify this unexplorednorthern mound, the mills and irrigation systemwith the structures erected for Sulayman b. cAbd

118


al-Malik. If so, then this property may even havehad a pre-Islamic imperial pedigree, and thehydraulic installations upon which it dependedmay have descended from those installed by Herodor his son to bring water to their palm groves andbalsam plantation. 121

If the installations near Khirbat al-Mafjar andeven its northern, unexcavated mound can belinked to the patronage of Sulayman b. 'Abd al-Malik, this does not necessarily mean that he wasalso responsible for the construction of the bathhall, mosque, and palace complex excavated byHamilton. Nor need it invalidate the hypothesisadvanced by Hamilton which links those build-ings with the patronage of Walid b. Yazid b. 'Abdal-Malik. Taking as his point of departure theexcavation of graffiti linking the buildings withthe reign of Hisham b. 'Abd al-Malik, Hamiltongradually evolved a theory that the complex hadbeen erected toward the end of Hisham's reignfor his nephew and successor Walid ibn Yazid (r.743-44).22 Hamilton provides several reasonsfor this identification; he finds a pun or rebus forWalid's name in a mosaic decoration showing aknife beside a fruit with a green sprig attached.'"23

Literary accounts of Walid's revels also containterms which Hamilton equates with specific fea-tures of the hall at Khirbat al-MafJar-majlis al-lawh for the main bath hall,124 a birka, or stonebasin, contained in an antechamber to the hotrooms,'2 5 and a bahw, or intimate audience cham-ber, which he connects with the highly ornament-ed room attached to the northwest corner of thelarge hall.12 6

The anthology of poetic texts and images whichHamilton has assembled gives a convincing pic-ture of Walid's life as it could have been enactedat Khirbat al-Mafjar, and Hillenbrand has collect-ed further literary references about Walid's hab-its which might have affected the organizationand decoration of his palaces.'2 7 Despite the plau-sibility of Hamilton's arguments and the manydetailed parallels between Walid's habits and thedecoration of extant Umayyad structures provid-ed by Hillenbrand, neither scholar was able toestablish a definite historical link between Walidand Khirbat al-Mafar.' 2 8

The evidence linking Sulayman b. 'Abd al-Malik with the area of Khirbat al-MafJar can pro-vide a foundation for establishing such a connec-tion and may also help to explain certain curiousfeatures of this complex. If this property hadbelonged to Sulayman b. 'Abd al-Malik, thenafter his death in 717 it should have passed to

another member of the dynasty, perhaps to cUmarb. Abd al-'Aziz or Yazid b. cAbd al-Malik, hisdesignated successors. If Yazid had been the ben-eficiary, then the property might have been trans-ferred by him to his sucessor, Hisham b. cAbd al-Malik or his own son, al-Walid.

Although this chain of inheritance must re-main hypothetical, the possibility that the unex-cavated northern mound houses the remains ofan Umayyad residence earlier than the bath hall,mosque, and palace complex excavated by Hamil-ton would explain certain anomalies of thosestructures, such as why they were erected fromnorth to south. In both the bath hall and thepalace the northern wall was apparently the firstto be erected.'2 9 According to the excavators thebathing roomswere the first to be built; theywerefollowed by the bath hall, the palace, the mosque,and the courtyard pavilion. This sequence ex-plains how the bath complex could have had"some years" of use even before the palace wascompleted.'3 0

The connection of Khirbat al-Mafjar with thepatronage ofal-Walid b. Yazid could also strength-en the hypothesis that this complex represents anattempt to translate legends concerning So-lomon's throne and bath into architectural terms.Before considering this question, however, it isfirst necessary to examine two examples of Islam-ic palatial architecture which are linked to So-lomonic legends by both visual and literary evi-dence-the divinkhana, or reception hall, of theGulistan Palace in Tehran,' and a portion of theMughal palace in Lahore known as the Kala Burj(Black Tower).'32

The d vankhiina may originally have been builtduring the time of Karim Khan Zand (r. 1750-79), butwas substantially altered by the Qajars.' 33In the reign of Fath 'Ali Shah (r. 1797-1833) itacquired a throne known as the Takht-i Marmarinscribed with verses linking that ruler with So-lomon.'3 4 Fath 'Ali Shah was also portrayed withSolomonic paraphernalia by his court painter,Mihr 'Ali. 15

Solomonic imagery also seems to have held aspecial fascination for the Mughal rulerJahangir(r. 1605-27) who was compared to Solomon byhis court poets and in architectural inscriptions.36The most complete pictorial manifestationof his identification with Solomon comes inthe decoration of the Kala Burj in the Mughalresidence at Lahore now known as the LahoreFort. This tower, located toward the middle of thefort's northern facade, had a balcony (jharoka-i

119

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

darshan) which Jahangir used for his public ap-pearances and from where he viewed animalcombats staged for his entertainment on theplain below. 37 During the darshan ceremony peo-ple were allowed to present petitions to the rulerthrough his representatives, giving it also thefunction of a court of appeals.'"

The Qajar throne described and analyzed byZuka, Tushingham, and most recently by Lerneris the most direct in its Solomonic themes (figs.6-7) .139 The throne consists of a horizontal plat-form on two levels supported by caryatid figuresand by spiral-fluted columns. Three of the sup-ports, two flanking the steps and a third beneaththe royal seat at the rear, take the form of divswho carry the tools. The throne's lateral sides reston the shoulders of six figures: two men and fourwomen. The women on the right side support thethrone on their right shoulder with the help oftheir left hands and hold a piece of fruit in theirright hand. The man on the right carries whatappears to be a sprig of flowers. The figures onthe left side use their right hands to steady thethrone on their left shoulders. Their left handsappear to be empty.14 0 Lions carved in the roundguard the throne's rear and lions in relief flank itssteps.

The dress and adornments of both the menand women can be paralleled in Zand and Qajarcourt painting. The women wear belted short-sleeved tunics, which bare their breasts, over longskirts, and the men wear belted tunics over kneebreeches and leggings.' 4 ' The men's costume issimilar to that worn by princes or courtiers forriding or hunting.' 4 2 The women's dress resem-bles that of courtesans and entertainers with ajeweled claspjust below the breasts and ajeweledbelt. 1 4

The connection of this throne ensemble withSolomon and Fath 'Ali Shah is made explicit bytwo qaszdas inscribed in cartouches on the throne'svertical surface.' 4 4 The first connects the thronewith Fath CAli Shah, and the second explores themeaning of its form and decoration and containslines which identify it as a "Solomonic throne" ( ntakht-i sulaymani) and Fath 'Ali Shah as "the So-lomon of the Age" (Sulayman-i zaman). 4 5 Theqas.das describe the throne as an arsh, used inthe Qurean for both the throne of God and theone which the jinn seized for Solomon from thepalace of Bilqis, and they also use the moregeneral words safir and takht.'46 Other versesmention its supporting statues ofparis as wellas the guardian lions.' 47 These themes are

combined with others drawn from the traditionalIranian repertory of royal glorification-com-parisons of Fath 'Ali Shah with Alexander, Jam-shid, Faridun, and Dara and mention of thehomage paid to him by foreign rulers.'4 8

The burden of this throne's Solomonic mes-sage is contained not in its inscribed text, butrather in its structure and embellishment whichecho long-standing textual traditions about So-lomon and his throne. The placing of lions be-side its steps and around its base connects it withthe tradition of Solomon's lion-protected throne.

The differentiation between divs and humanfigures among the throne's supporters probablycorresponds to beliefs about the various catego-ries of supernatural beings.' 49 In Persian textsdemonic creatures with animal attributes aredescribed as divs, whereas those with a humanappearance are called paris. For the theme of thisessay the divs are of particular interest. The factthat they carry tools links them with Qur'anicreferences to demons who were obliged to workfor Solomon constructing buildings and divingfor pearls.

Upon closer examination, the divs' tools ap-pear to be those of stoneworkers, a detail whichstrengthens their link with the monument's cre-ation. The single div at the rear holds a double-pointed tool, perhaps a tisha, or mason's kernelhammer used to smooth the surface of stone inpreparation for carving or final polishing.'5 0 Thepair of divs flanking the stairs hold the kinds oftools used in the finishing process, that on the lefthas a chakush, or mallet, used in conjunction withnaqqari, or sculpting chisels, to carve decorationor flutes;' 5 ' the curved implement carried by thedivon the right appears to be a large suhan, or fileused to smooth the background of a relief-carvedpanel. 152 The tools of the divs flanking the stairsalso carry the signature of this monument's hu-man creator, the sculptor Muhammad IbrahimIsfahani, a detail which emphasizes the symbolicrole of the d v-sculptors as Solomon's or Fath 'AliShah's servants.'5 3

Considerable uncertainty surrounds the histo-ry of the chamber in which the Takht-i Marmarstands. Its monolithic limestone columns appearto have been pillaged from the Shiraz palace ofKarim Khan Zand.'5 4 The avidity with which theQajars collected objects owned by previous rulersis well documented in the sources, but here thereuse of architectural materials may also havea symbolic function. Monolithic columns areassociated in Islamic sources with Solomonic

120


structures, such as the masjid at Bayt al-Maqdis orJerusalem, which may mean that they had a sim-ilar connotation for Karim Khan Zand. 55 If so,they may have a link to the various traditionswhich interpreted Persepolis as a religious struc-ture erected by Solomon. There was also thecommonly repeated notion that the ruler of Shirazwas the heir to Solomon's legacy.' 5 6

If so, then the Takht-i Marmar may be a So-lomonic throne constructed to fit into a chamberwhich itself recalled aspects of Solomon's legacy.At the same time, this throne-room ensembleprobably also was linked to the legacy ofJamshid,who too was closely associated with Shiraz. As-pects of this throne such as the addition of pafisand divs as supporters could link it toJamshid aswell as Solomon because both had thrones pro-pelled through the air by demons. Some verses ofthe qaf.das written about it use images of lumi-nosity to describe Fath 'Ali Shah, thereby con-necting him with the solar aspects ofJamshid.' 5 7

Finally, this throne was used by Persian rulers forimportant ceremonial occasions, particularly theaudiences held on Nawruz, traditionally associat-ed with Jamshid.'5 8

Fath 'Ali Shah's throne thus integrates aspectsof Solomonic legends with those connected toJamshid. Texts cited above show that this processwas already underway in the first Islamic centu-ries so that by the Qajar period such a combina-tion was to be expected. The Takht-i Marmarclearly represents an attempt to draw upon aSolomonic legacywhich had assimilated elementsfrom the Persian royal tradition to enhance thestatus and prestige of its owner, Fath 'Ali Shah,and by extension to bestow legitimacy on Tehranas a dynastic capital.

A similar amalgam is said to have been createdby the court ceremonial of a tenth-century mili-tary leader from the Caspian area, Mardawij ibnZiyar theJilite, who controlled Isfahan, Rayy, andoccasionally other sections of western Iran be-tween 926 and 937.159 Mardawij had grandiosevisions of removing the Abbasid caliphs and in-stalling himself in their stead, and he developeda court ceremonial which combined featuresfrom the Sasanian tradition with those drawnfrom Solomonic legends. Ibn Miskawayh givestwo descriptions of that ceremonial which appearto be based on eyewitness accounts:

He had had fabricated a great crown studded withgems, and Abu Makhlad recorded how ... he had seenhim sitting on a golden throne on which he had placeda vast cushion, where he sat by himself; below him there

was a throne of silver with a carpet spread over it andbelow that some large gilt chairs with other arrange-ments whose purpose was to assign the officials theirproper order in the seating.

Abu Makhlad remarks that the audience stood ata distance "gazing and speaking only in whispers,such was their awe and admiration for his great-ness."'60 In another passage ibn Miskawayh re-lates this very theatrical court ceremonial to So-lomonic precedents: "He seated himself on athrone of gold, below which was one of silverwhereon the person whom he chose to favourtook his seat. On the days in which he receivedofficial visits he arranged his army in lines at adistance from him.... He used to say that he wasSolomon son of David and his men the demons. "161

The fusion of Iranian court ceremonial andSolomonic traditions evidenced in both the ac-tions ofMardawij ibn Ziyar and the throne of Fath'Ali Shah invites comparison with the use ofSolomonic themes in the decoration of a Mughalpalace complex at Lahore built under the patron-age ofJahangir. Here the Solomonic imagery hadan internal and external component. It had botha painted vault over the darshan chamber andpanels of figural tiles on the building's exterior.In Mughal palaces the darshan chamber was nor-mally adjacent to the ruler's private quarters, sothat Jahangir would have been accompanied tothis chamber by members of his immediate house-hold. Only the emperorwas normallyvisible fromthe exterior because of screens which covered allthe windows except the one he used to appearbefore his subjects.' 6 2

The room whereJahangir sat has a faceted vaultembellished with figural paintings (fig. 8). Itsapex contains a pair of simurghs in combat and issurrounded by concentric circles of small panelscreated by intersections of the vault's ribs. Largerpanels containing angels in flight alternate withsmall star-shaped units painted with birds. 16 3 Low-er zones of the decoration, no longer visible,appear to have contained demonic creatureswhose appearance is vividly described by WilliamFinch:

In the Gallery where the King useth to sit, are drawneoverhead many Pictures of Angels, with Pictures ofBanian Dews, or rather Divels, intermixt in most uglyshape, with long hornes, staring eyes, shagge haire,great fangs, ugly paws, long tails and with such horribledifformity and deformity that I wonder the poor wom-en are not frightened therewith.164

The vault paintings, which appear to have been

121

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

executed between Jahangir's accession in 1605and Finch's visit in 1620, show Solomon's entou-rage in mid-flight and at the same time forming aprotective canopy over the ruler's head. The useof flying creatures who hover over the ruler'shead is one of the most characteristic themes inSolomonic imagery. Wahb b. Munabbih, as citedby Tabari, mentions this feature in his discussionof how Solomon first lost and then regained hisring and his throne. When Solomon had finallyrecovered his power, the birds reappeared hover-ing overhead, and "people knew that he wasSolomon." 6 5

In this Mughal ensemble the emphasis is onSolomon's retinue which is permanently in atten-dance on the building both outside and inside.The exterior decoration consists of panels ofmosaic tile inserted into niches along the fort'snorthern and western walls of which only frag-ments survive. Some of them show demons danc-ing or being led by angels. Other panels containanimal combats.'6 The theme of enslaved de-mons depicted on this palace, both inside andoutside, is a second theme with clear Solomonicconnections.

The Mughal decorative ensemble, however,has some features not met in other examples ofSolomonic imagery. The integration of Solomon'sentourage into the structure of a vault has trans-formed it into a kind of celestial guard of honor.Mughal texts suggest that the vaults provided avisual symbol for the heavens and thus an appro-priate setting for the luminous divine person.The interconnection of Solomonic legends andthose of Jamshid in the Iranian tradition mayhave been one inspiration for this combination.' 6 7

It would be interesting to investigate how fre-quently Mughal court poets used Solomonic im-agery. Jahangir's particular affinity for suchthemes may have been sparked by one of thePersians at the Mughal court. Paintings, whichprobably show a Mughal prince, perhaps theyouthful Jahangir himself, in circumstances thatstress his possession of luminosity, were paintedby two Persians at the Mughal court, 'Abd al-Samad and his son Muhammad Sharif. The paint-ing by 'Abd al-Samad is of particular interestbecause it makes a metaphorical equation be-tween a Mughal prince (Jahangir?) andJamshidand may have been intended as a Nawruz gift.'6

The basic design of the Kala Burj vault alsoreflects Iranian practice, for it echoes decora-tive schemes used in Safavid architecture. The

division of the vault by ribs and the placement offigures within them are parallel to the schemeused in the vault of a palace pavilion discoveredat Nayin, probably executed in the last quarter ofthe sixteenth century. In both cases flying crea-tures such as angels and simurghs are placed atthe vault's apex in star-shaped panels. The Nayinchamber differs from the one in Lahore, howev-er, in its overall theme, which is devoted to thecelebration of various famous lovers-Khusrawand Shirin, Layla and Majnun, Shirin and Far-had.'6 9 Thus, the Lahore palace vault combines ascheme of Iranian inspiration with the hybridliterary tradition of Solomon and Jamshid tocreate a scheme which glorifies a Mughal ruler.The addition of exterior tile decoration withSolomonic components also effectively equates alarger section of the palace with Solomon's plat-form throne.

With these two instances where Solomonicthemes were expressed in Islamic palace archi-tecture or decoration in mind, we can now con-sider whether the complex at Khirbat al-Mafjarwas intended to portray a member of the Umay-yad dynasty, possibly Walid b. Yazid, in the guiseof Solomon and his retinue. When the sculpturaldecoration of the bath porch facade and of thedomed chamberimmediately behind itareviewedagainst the background of Solomonic legends,several features of the sculptural ensemble gainin significance. Neither Hamilton nor Hillen-brand sees a connection between the figures ofthese two areas, but the cross-section of the porchand facade gives several indications that thesetwo parts of the building were designed as a unit(figs. 1-3). The "caliph's" lion pedestal rests onthe same level as the standing figures in theniches of the porch drum and the porch itself.The recumbent animals-gazelles, sheep, andibexes-are also at almost the same elevationfrom the floor on interior and exterior.

Not only were these two areas designed as anensemble, but they can also be understood ascomplementary sections of Solomon's throne.The exterior figure of the "caliph" can be read asSolomon on his lion-protected throne which restson the larger platform occupied by his concu-bines, male attendants, and various animals. Thisplatform, in turn, is shown to be supported byjinn in human form who brace their legs againstthe dome's pendentives in order to steady theirheavy load. The throne ensemble is completed bya row of birds placed in a circle around the apex

122


of the interior niches. These appear to be thethrone's avian sun shade, here shown at rest forthe night.

If it is possible to connect both the standingfigure and the recumbent gazelles of the facadewith the sculptures of the bath porch, then per-haps other aspects of the facade design are alsomeaningful. Originally the central figure wasprobably flanked by two more figures who stoodin niches to his left and right. Two lions flankedthe arch of the entrance below, and they were inturn framed by the heads of horses. A row ofcrenellations completed the top of this facade.

Taken as a whole, the upper level of this facadebears a striking resemblance to the scene depict-ed on a silver plate discovered in Iran near the cityof Qazvin (fig. 9). It shows a frontal enthronedruler holding a sword and standing under an archdecorated with rows of birds and surmounted bycrenellations. He is flanked by standing figures inPersian dress, and beneath his feet are two lionswith outstretched paws. Both the rows of birdsflanking the throne and the lion guardians belowit link the plate with Solomonic legends. Al-though clearly reflecting Iranian royal iconogra-phy, and similar in its arch and crenellations to aSasanian pavilion known as Taq-i Girra, the plateappears to postdate the fall of the Sasanian dynas-ty, and is perhaps from the eighth or early ninthcentury.' 70

The importance of this plate for Khirbat al-Mafjar lies in the similarities of its general schemeand that of Solomon's throne depicted on theupper level of the facade (figs. 2-3, 9). Theseparallels strengthen the possibility that the facadewas intended to portray a throne pavilion andmay also suggest that it was designed by Persiancraftsmen.' 71 The two final sculptural elements ofthe facade, the lions flanking its arch and thehorse protomes located beside them, may alsobelong to a Solomonic scheme. The lower pair oflions from Khirbat al-Mafjar may be supplemen-tal guardians of the throne above and the horse (s)may have been intended to recall the idea ofSolomon's chariot throne (ajala) mentioned byIbn Munabbih. A plate now in the HermitageMuseum shows a curious blending of a wheeledvehicle and throne pavilion in which a ruler isseated. Schematic renderings of chariots are alsoknown from Sasanian seals and Central Asianmurals.' 72

Khirbat al-Mafar's sculptural decoration wasimposed upon its superstructure in a curious

fashion-with birds, animals, and even horse-men standing along cornices and life-sized maleand female figures in niches (figs. 1-4). Theplacement of these figures would suggest thatSolomon's throne with its host of human, de-monic, and animal occupants had landed on thisbath-palace complex, perhaps in order to enjoyits amenities.

Khirbat al-Mafjar was situated on land whichhad belonged to the Umayyad family and dynastyfrom at least the time of Sulaymen b. 'Abd al-Malik. Archaeological data linking the excavatedstructures with the reign of Hisham were alsopresented along with Hamilton's hypothesis thatWalid b. Yazid was its patron. These connectionsgive greater force to the pun in a poem whichappears to link Walid with al-Ghawr or the areaaround Khirbat al-Mafjar. The passage occurs inan account of his quarrels with Hisham and adescription of his life wandering from one of hisestates to another. Indeed this poem, which alsolaments the need to wait for Hisham's death, issaid to have been one of the catalysts for Hisham'srevocation ofWalid's allowance.' 7 Composed andrecited by his companion 'Abd al-Samad b. 'Abdal-'Ala, it draws upon astronomical imagery incomparing Walid's peregrinations to a star wan-dering in the heavens until it reaches its bayt ormansion in a declivity, or al-ghawr

Have you not seen the star, when it came to restHurrying in its mansion to a point of return?It strayed from its proper path.It came to the declivity (al-ghawr) and sought its place

of rising.I said while its actions amazed meAnd its gleam shone making me hopeful,"Perhaps the reign of Walid has come near,And this is the eve of his ascendance."' 74

It is tempting to extract from this poem acomparison between the image of a heavenlybodywhich has reached its astrological home andthe representation of al-Walid portrayed as So-lomon on a lion-protected throne on the facadeof the Solomonic bath at Khirbat al-Mafjar, readyto rise again when his time arrives. The additionof a Solomonic entourage which has also justlanded on these buildings could provide anothermetaphorical reference to Walid's life, movingfrom residence to residence as he awaits hischance to rule. Walid refers to himself as the "sonof David" in a poem composed on the eve of hismarriage to Salma. 175

123

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

Whether or not the patron of Khirbat al-Mafjarwas Walid b. Yazid, the question remains of howthe idea of constructing a Solomonic bath couldhave arisen. Here the evidence is incomplete, butthe proximity ofJericho to Tiberias with its strongSolomonic tradition may have been an importantfactor. Perhaps the familiarity of the Umayyadsthemselves with the Solomonic baths of Tiberiasled to the idea of re-creating such a bath. It is evenpossible that the fame of the springs of Tiberiaswas a stimulus to the development of the entirelegend of Solomon's bath. Arabian traditionslinking Solomon and his jinn with hot springscould have provided another stimulus for such acombination.

The three examples presented here provide aninsight into the role of Solomonic themes inIslamic palatial structures. They demonstrate thatthose themes, although recognizable, were notstatic butwere capable of change and adaptation.In the end, the Umayyad owner of Khirbat al-Mafjar, the Persian ruler Fath 'Ali Shah, and theMughal emperorJahangir each shaped the So-lomonic tradition according to his own self-im-age, using the legacy of Solomon to enhance hispersonal prestige.

There are, however, important qualitative dif-ferences among these three instances. In theIranian example Solomon is essentially assimilat-ed to the Iranian historical heritage; in the Mu-ghal one, Solomon's attributes become an exten-sion of the Mughal language of royal pomp. In

both cases the symbolism requires the ruler him-self to participate. It is only when Fath 'Ali Shahsits upon his throne orJahangir appears at thewindow of his chamber that the ensemble iscomprehensible. In the Umayyad building, how-ever, Solomon is himself included in the sculp-tural ensemble. The placement of figures in thecomplex at Khirbat al-Mafjar conveys the impres-sion that the structure had two levels. At groundlevel there was the functional building used by itsUmayyad owner and his guests; just above theirheads was a second structure populated by sculp-tures representing Solomon and his retinue ofconcubines, soldiers, demons, birds, and ani-mals. Thus, Khirbat al-Mafjar may have had adouble role as both a sumptuous private resi-dence and a symbolic edifice created to evoke thememory of both Solomon's throne and bath.

Ultimately, the particular fascination of Khir-bat al-Mafjar as an example of the Solomonicpalatine tradition is the manner in which it offersa glimpse of the beliefs and practices of UmayyadIslam. The building may be understood in part asan exercise of visual exegesis on the Queanicstory of Solomon, but admittedly an exegesisbased not on the deliberations of learned shaykhsin Abbasid Iraq but rather on the vibrant andmysterious evocations of the South Arabian qAss,or storyteller, who sought to harness the power ofa rich mythology to the task of Quranic explica-tion.

124


19. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafar, 172-92, 228-41.

1. QurPan, 21:81, 34:11/12, 38:35/36.

2. Qur'an, 21:79, 27:16, 20-29.

3. Qurlan, shay.ti n 21:82, 38:36/37-37/38;jinn 27:17,39, 34:11/12. Some of the shai.tans were builders(bannS') 38:36/37, as were some of the jinn whomade mihrabs, likenesses (tamithil), and basins(qudir) 34:12/13-13/14.

4. Quran, 27:38-42.

5. Qufran, 21:78-82, 27:15.

6. Qufran, 38:30/31-32/33.

7. Qur-an, 4:161/163.

8. Quran, 38:31/32-34/35.

9. Qufran, 34:14.

10. Robert Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafiar: An ArabianMansion in the Jordan Valley (Oxford, 1959).

11. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 7, 42-44, pls. LVII: 1,XCIV-XCV.

12. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 8; Robert Hamilton,Walid and His Friends: An Umayyad Tragedy (Ox-ford, 1988), 13-16.

13. Yoram Tsafrir, Gid'on Foerster,"Bet Shean Exca-vation Project-1988/1989," Excavations and Sur-veys in Israel 1989/1990, 9 (1991): 127. Other evi-dence had led M. Margalioth to suggest anearthquake date of 748-49 in a 1941 article (D. H.Kallner-Amiran, "A Revised Earthquake-Catalogueof Palestine," ExplorationJournal 1 [ 1950-51 ]: 226,244).

14. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 172.

15. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafar, 47-52,103-5; Hamil-ton, Walid and His Friends, 22-32; Richard Etting-hausen, "The Throne and Banquet Hall of Khirbatal-Mafjar," in From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran andthe Islamic World (Leiden, 1972), 17-65.

16. Hamilton, Khirbat al-MaJfar, 52-67.

17. For the entrance facade, see Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 98-108,172-83,228-32,237; for the porch,see 48, 92-98, 183-92, 233-37, 240-41; for thenorthwest room, see 63-67, 192-212, 239-40.

20. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafijar, figs. 50, 52, pls. CVII,CVIII.

21. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafar, 227-29, fig. 52, pls.LV: 1, 5.

22. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafijar, 240, pls. XLII, CVII.

23. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 237-39, pl. XLI: 2,XLII: 5.

24. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, fig. 50, pls. XLIV,CVII, CVIII.

25. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 233-34, pls. LV: 3, 4,LVI: 1-4, 9, CVIII.

26. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 232-33, pl. LVI: 1.

27. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 240, pl. XLII: 2-4.

28. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafiar, 236-37, fig. 50, pl.XLIV: 4-5.

29. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafiar, 237.

30. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 238.

31. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 172-75.

32. Robert Hillenbrand, "La Dolce Vita in Early Islam-ic Syria: The Evidence of Later Umayyad Palaces,"Art History 5, 1 (March 1982): 8.

33. Oleg Grabar, "L'art omeyyade en Syrie, source del'art islamique," in La Syrie deByzance d l'Islam: VII 6-VIIIF siecles, ed. Pierre Canivet, Jean-Paul Rey-Co-quais (Damascus, 1992), 187-93, esp. 190-93.

34. Hamilton, "Khirbat all-Mafjar: The Bath Hall Re-considered," Levant 10 (1978): 128-30; Etting-hausen, Byzantium to Sasanian Iran, 21-43; ShaulShaked, "From Iran to Islam: On Some Symbols ofRoyalty," Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 7(1986): 75, 82-85.

35. Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of theQur'an, ed. Andrew Rippin (Oxford, 1988), esp.Introduction and "Lexicographical Texts and theQur-an"; Fred Leemhuis, "Origins and Early De-velopment of the tafsir Tradition"; and ClaudeGilliot, "Les Debuts de l'exegese coranique," in LesPremieres Ecritures Islamiques, ed. A.-L. de Premare,(= Revue du MondeMusulman et de la Miditerrane 58[1990]), 83-100.

36. Nabbia Abbott, Studies in ArabicLiteraty Papyri, vol.

Notes

125

18. Hamilton, KhirbatalGMafjar, 237,pl..XXXVI: 8-10.

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

2 (Chicago, 1967), 5-12, 257-58; M. J. Kister,"Legends in tafsir and hadith Literature: The Cre-ation of Adam and Related Stories," in Approachesto the History of the Interpretation of the Qur'an, 82-84.

37. H. T. Norris, "Qisas Elements in the Quean," and"Fables and Legends in Pre-Islamic and Early Is-lamic Times," in Arabic Literature to the End of theUmayyad Period, in Cambridge History of Arabic Liter-ature, vol. 1, pt. 1, ed. A. F. L. Beeston et al.(Cambridge, 1983), 246-59, 374-86.

38. M.J. Kister, "The Sirah Literature," in Arabic Liter-ature to the End of the Umayyad Period, 356-57; R.Firestone, Journeys in Holy Lands: The Evolution oftheAbraham-IshmaelLegends inIslamicExegesis (Bing-hamton, N.Y., 1990), 3-21.

39. Fortunately the Kitab al-7ijan survives in a versioncompiled by Abfi Muhammad cAbd al-Malik ibnHisham (d. 828 or 833), better known as the editorof Ibn Ishaq's Sira, and based on informationtransmitted by Ibn Munabbih's grandson, cAbd al-Muncim Abi Idris b. Sinan. This version of IbnHisham/'Abd al-Muncim although apparently ex-cerpted from a longer work by Ibn Munabbih,contains details of direct relevance to the ques-tions under consideration that are not found inlater sources; Raif Georges Khoury, Wahb b. Mun-abbih (Wiesbaden, 1972), 287-302; Wahb b. Mun-abbih, Kitab al-Tijinfi Mulftk Himyar (Hyderabad,1347/1928-29), esp. 152-69.

40. Unfortunately the tafsirofIbn Sulayman, althoughpublished recently in Cairo, is in practice unob-tainable, except for the first and last (index) vol-umes, because of pressure from religious authori-ties at al-Azhar; Claude Gilliot, "Muqatil, grandexegete, traditioniste et theologien maudit,"Jour-nalAsiatique 279 (1991): 40 n. 1.

41. Muqatil b. Sulayman, Kitfb Tafsir al-Khams Mi'atAya min al-Qur'n, ed. Isaiah Goldfeld (Shfaram,1980), 3-8; Gilliot, "Les Debuts de l'exegese cora-nique," 90-91; Gilliot, "Muqatil," 40-50. Two schol-ars with access to complete copies of this work,Claude Gilliot and Jacob Lassner, are preparingpublications which will reveal this text's value forthe topic under consideration. Lassner is prepar-ing a monograph on the story of Solomon andBilqis (personal communication), and Gilliot haspromised an article dealing with Muqatil's treat-ment of biblical legends ("Muqatil," 40).

42. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, 188-90.

43. Clifford Edmund Bosworth, "Iran and the Arabsbefore Islam," Cambridge History of ran, vol. 3 (1),ed. Ehsan Yarshater (Cambridge, 1983), 606-7.

44. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, 190-93; Tabari, An-nales, ed. M. De Goeje, vol. 1, pt. 5, p. 1763, 11. 13if. confuses father and son.

45. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, 194-96;A. F. L. Beeston,"Religions of Pre-Islamic Yemen" and 'Judaismand Christianity in Pre-Islamic Yemen," in L 'Arabiedu Sud: Histoire et Civilisation, vol. 1, ed. JosephChelhod (Paris, 1984), 259-69, 271-78.

46. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, 193-97; Irit Bligh-Abramski, "TheJudiciary (qd4is) as a Governmen-tal-Administrative Tool in Early Islam,"Journal oftheEconomic and Social History ofthe Orient 35 (1992):47, 53-54. The mother of Abu Hanifa is said tohave sought legal assistance from a qass connectedwith a mosque rather than accept the opinion ofher own son (Gordon D. Newby, 'The Sirah as aSource for ArabianJewish History,"Jerusalem Stud-ies in Arabic and Islam 7 (1986): 129-30.

47. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, 195-96.

48. Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijfn, 152,11. 1-6, 10-11.

49. Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 152, 11. 7-10.

50. Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitiib al-Tijan, 152, 11. 13-14.

51. Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitabal-Tijan, 152, 1. 16-153,1. 1.

52. Tabarl, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 574, 11. 3-8; TheHistory of al-Tabari, vol. 3, The Children of Israel,trans. W. M. Brinner (Albany, N.Y., 1991), 153.

53. Tabari, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 575, 11. 2-10;Tabari, History, 3:154.

54. Tabari,Jami' al-Bayan (Cairo, 1954), 22:69,11. 7-11.

55. Tawfiq Fahd, "Le merveilleux dans la faune, laflore et les mineraux," in L Etrange et le merveilleuxdans l'Islam mediival (Paris, 1978), 125.

56. Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitib al-Tijan, 156, . 13-14;157, 11. 5-17; 159, 1. 16; 160, 1. 5; Tabari,Jami' al-Bayiin, 19:148, 158-61, 165-67.

57. Tabarl,Jami' al-Bayan, 23:156-60.

58. Bishr Fares, "Figures magiques," in Aus der Welt derislamischen Kunst, ed. Richard Ettinghausen (Ber-lin, 1959), 155-56, fig. 2.

59. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, "Geschichte Davids,"23,1. 15-27, 1. 10 (pp. 96-107); 29 (pp. 112-15).

126


60. Ibn Ishaq Ahmad al-Tha'labi, Kitab Qisas al-An-biyk' (Cairo, 1297/1880), 293, 11. 8-10.

61. Shihab al-Din al-Ibshihl, al-Musta.traf(Beirut, 1987),1:147, ?. 22-148, 1. 5; Shihab al-Din al-Ibshihi, al-Mostatraf, trans. G. Rat (Paris, 1899), 1:300.

62. Cyril Mango, The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312-1453: Sources and Documents (Englewood Cliffs,NJ., 1972), 209-10.

63. Thaclabi, Kitab Qisas al-AnbiyS, 292, 11. 3-19.

64. Tha'labi, Kitab Qisas al-Anbiy&t, 292 11. 26-30.

65. Wahb's older contemporary cUbayd b. Sharyah al-Jurhumi recited South Arabian history and leg-ends for Mucawiyah (Nabih A. Faris, ed. and trans.,TheAntiquities of South Arabia [Princeton, 1938], 2-3,99).

66. Tabari,Jami' al-Bayan, 22:70-72.

67. Musa O. A. Abdul, The Qusran: Shaykh Tabarsi'sCommentary (Lahore, 1977), 3-42.

68. Shaykh Abi All al-Tabarsi, Majma' al-Bayan,(Beirut, 1986), 7:599, 1. 24-600, 1. 3.

69. Tha'labi, Qisas al-anbiygP, 293, 11. 1-5, Tabarsi,Majma' al-bayan, 7:600.

70. Ibn Qutayba, Kitab al-Mairif (Cairo, 1969), 32, 11.2-3.

71. Tabari, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 622,11. 3-5; 626, 11.3-5; 632, 11. 3-4; Tabari, History, vol. 4, trans. M.Perlmann (Albany, N.Y., 1987), 23, 26, 31.

72. A. F. L. Beeston, 'The Religions of Pre-IslamicYemen," 259-69.

73. Mario Grignaschi, "La Nihayatu-l-'Arabfi Ahbari-l-Furs wa-l-Arab," Bulletin des tudes orientales 22 (1969):17-67; M. Grignaschi, "La Nihayatu-l-'Arab fiAhbiiri--Furs wa-l-Arab et les Siyaru Muluki-l-'Agamdu Ps. Ibn al-Muqaffa'," Bulletin des itudes orientales26 (1973): 83-184, for Solomon, see 87-88.

74. Grignaschi, "La Nihayatu-l'Arab," 39-40.

75. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 152-63.

76. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-7Tijn, 152.

77. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 152,1. 16-153, 1. 1.

78. Tabari, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 582,1. 16-583,1. 2;Tabari, History, 3:162.

79. On Zawbaca, see Stefano Carboni, "inn delKitib al-Bulhan e Scienza Talismanica nel Mon-do Islamico," Annali di Ca'Foscari 25, 3 (1986):98-99, 102.

80. Ibn Munabbih, Kitib al-Tijan, 161, 11. 5-18.

81. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tjiin, 161, 11. 18-20.

82. Ibn Munabbih, Kitib al-7ijan, 162, 11. 1-7, quota-tion 11. 6-7.

83. Ibn Munabbih, Kitib al-7ijan, 162, . 8-9.

84. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 163, U. 10-11; foranother example of Ibn Munabbih's colloquialnarrative style, see the dialogue between Luqmanand his wife, trans. H. T. Norris, "Fables andLegends in Pre-Islamic and Early Islamic Times,"in Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period,380-81.

85. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 162, 11. 11-12.

86. Ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 162, 11. 12-14. Thismay be an editorial commentary added by a trans-mitter or by Ibn Hisham.

87. Tabari, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 583,1. 15-584,1. 2;Tabarl, History, 3:163.

88. Abfi Mansfir 'Abd al-Malik al-Thacalibi, Latii'ifal-ma'rif, trans. Clifford Edmund Bosworth (Edin-burgh, 1968), 40.

89. Mutahhar ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi, Kitab al-bad' wa al-taiikh, ed. and trans. Clement Huart (Paris, 1899-1919), 3:106.

90. Tabarl, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 180,11. 5-17, trans.modified from Tabarl, History, vol. 1, trans. FranzRosenthal (Albany, N.Y., 1989), 349-50.

91. Tabari's description of the jinn's activities is verysimilar to a passage in Shaykh Tabarsi's tafsironsura 34:12/13 (Majma' al-Bayan, 7: 599,11. 5-15).It would be instructive to compare Tabari's textwith the descriptions of both Jamshid and So-lomon in the Pseudo-Asmaq, Nihayat al-'Arab fiAkhbr al-Furs wa-l-'Arab (for references, see aboven. 73).

92. Khoury, Wahb b. Munabbih, "Geschichte Davids,"29, 1.23 (pp. 114-15).

93. Wabh ibn Munabbih, Kitab al-Tijan, 152, 1.13.

94. Arthur Christensen, Les Types du premier homme etdu premier roi, pt. 2, "Jim" (Leidlen, 1934), 121-26.

127

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

95. Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Muqaddasl, Ahsan al-Taqaisimfi Ma'rifat al-Aqaizlm, ed. M.J. de Goeje,2nd. ed. (Leiden, 1906), 444, 1. 9.

96. GuyLeStrange,PalestineundertheMoslems (Beirut,1965), 337, 339-41; al-Hasan b. Ahmad al-Ham-dani, The Antiquities of South Arabia, 50.

97. Muqaddasi, Ahsan al-Taqasim, 185,1. 11-186,1. 1;Abi al-H. asan cAli, Kitab al-Isharat, ed. J. Sourdel-Thomine (Damascus, 1953), 20, 1. 16-21,1. 5.

98. Stefano Carboni, Kitab al-bulhan di Oxford (Turin,1988), Or. 133, fol. 35v, pp. 8, 75-76, pl. 31. Iwould like to thank S. Carboni for drawing myattention to this illustration .

99. Anonymi Auctoris, Chronicon ad annum Christi1234Pertinens, vol. 1, trans. I.-B. Chabot (Louvain,1952), 255. Iwould like to thank R. R. R. Smith forassistance in translating this passage.

100. Although this building was exacavated some yearsago, the results were never published; GideonFoerster, "Tiberias," in Encyclopaedia ofArchaeolog-ical Excavations in the Holy Land, ed. Michael Avi-Yonah and Ephriam Stern (Englewood Cliffs,N.J., 1978), 4:1171-72.

101. Moshe Dothan, 'Tiberias Hammath," in Encyclo-paedia ofArchaeologicalExcavations in theHoly Land,4:1178-84, and M. Dothan, Hammath Tiberias:Early Synagogues and the Hellenistic and Roman Re-mains (Jerusalem, 1983), 3-6.

102. E. D. Oren, "Early Islamic Material from Ganei-Hamat (Tiberias)," Archaeology 24 (1971): 274.

103. The question of how and when the Byzantinebath became linked to Solomon may be dis-cussed in a book on legends associated withTiberias (A. Shitoni, Hamei Tveria be-Halacha ube-Aggade [Tiberias, 1962]).

104. Ahmad b. Jabir al-Baladhuri, The Origins of theIslamic State: Kitab Futiih alBuldan, trans. P. K.Hitti (New York, 1968), 1:50-56.

105. Oleg Grabar et al., "Sondages Khirbet el-Minyeh," IsraelExplorationJournallO (1960): 226-43.

106. [Al-Baldhuri], Anonyme arabische Chronik, vol.11, ed. W. Ahlwardt (Greiswald, 1883), 164,1.16-165,1. 2; 200,11. 11-17; L. A. Mayer, "A.sSinnabra,"Israel Exploration Journal 2 (1952): 185-87; LeStrange, Palestine under the Moslems, 52-53, 335.

107. Tabarl, Annales, vol. 2, pt. 3, pp. 1831-33; Tabarl,History, vol. 26, trans. Carol Hillenbrand (Albany,N.Y., 1989), 189-92.

108. Tabarl, Annales, vol. 2, pt. 3, p. 1833, 11. 7-9, trans.Tabari, History, 26:192.

109. Tabarl, Annales, vol. 2, pt. 3, p. 1833, 11. 9-11,trans. Tabarl, History, 26:192.

110. For information on earlier winter palaces in theregion, see E. Netzer, "The Hasmonean andHerodian Winter Palaces atJericho," IsraelExplo-rationJournal 25 (1975): 89-100; and E. Netzer,G. Foerster, and G. Bacchi, "Jericho from thePersian to the Byzantine Periods," in Encyclopediaof Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 2(1976): 564-65; in the Byzantine period monas-teries in Jerusalem owned property nearJericho(M. Avi-Yonah, "The Economics of Byzantine Pal-estine," IsraelExploration Journal 8 [1958]: 47).

111. Avi-Yonah, Holy Land, 164-65, 198, 214-16.

112. Baladhurl, Origins oftheIslamic State, 1: 220-21; LeStrange, Palestine under the Moslems, 303-8.

113. Anonymi Auctoris, Chronicon ad annum Christi1234 pertinens, 1:255.


115. Anonymi Auctoris, Chronicon ad annum Christi1234pertinens, 1:255. Iwould like to thank R. R. R.Smith for assistance in translating this passage.

116. R. Cohen, "Monasteries," in Encyclopedia ofArchae-ologicalExcavations in the Holy Land 3 (1977): 876-77,881-82; E. Netzer, G. Foerster, and G. Baachi,'Jericho from the Persian to the Byzantine Peri-ods," in Encyclopedia ofArchaeologicalExcavations inthe Holy Land 2 (1976): 570-75.

117. Avi-Yonah, Holy Land, 198; Avi-Yonah, 'The Eco-nomics of Byzantine Palestine," 47-49.

118. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 42-43.

119. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafjar, 5-6.

120. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafiar, 2, 4, 6.

121. During the Crusader occupation ofJericho (1099-1187) sugar mills near Mount Dok were poweredby a hydraulic system said to be of Herodianorigin (Nachman Avigad, 'Jericho," in IsraelPock-et Library: Archaeology [n.p., 1974], 121).

128


122. Robert W. Hamilton, "Who Built Khirbat al-Maf-jar," Levant 1 (1969): 61-67; R. W. Hamilton,"Khirbat al-Mafj ar: The Bath Hall Reconsidered,"Levant 10 (1978): 135-38; Hamilton, Walid andHis Friends, 18-32.

123. Hamilton, "Bath Hall Reconsidered," 135.

124. Hamilton, Walid and HisFriends, 22, 31-32.

125. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 35-37, figs. 12,12a.

126. Hamilton, Walid and HisFriends, 38-42, figs. 13-18.

127. Robert Hillenbrand, "La Dolce Vita in Early Islam-ic Syria: The Evidence of Later Umayyad Palaces,"Art History 5, 1 (March 1982): 1-35. Detailedcharacterizations of Walid b. Yazid are also con-tained in F. Gabrielli's 1934 essay and in D. Der-enk's 1974 monograph on Walid's life and poet-ry, both of which discuss the location andidentification of Walid's residences. F. Gabrieli,"al-Walid ibn Yazid. II califfo e il poeta," Revistadegli Studi orientali 15 (1934): 1-64, esp. 6 n. 4; D.Derenk, Leben und Dichtung des OmaiyadenkalifenAl-Walid ibn Yazid (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1974),esp. 31-35, 121.

128. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 170, "the estab-lishment in the Ghawr" is "as yet unrecognizedamong places named in published sources." Hil-lenbrand, "La Dolce Vita," 2, "in no single case isthere precise evidence as to the patron or thedate."

129. Hamilton, Khirbat al-Mafar, 40, 46-47, 103.


131. Yabyd Zuka', Taikhchah-i skhtamanha-yi arg-isullani-i Tihran va r&hnama-yi kkh-i Gulistan (Teh-ran, 1347/1970), 41-110. I would like to thankJudith Lerner for bringing this publication to myattention.

132. Ebba Koch, "Jahangir and the Angels: RecentlyDiscovered Wall Paintings under European Influ-ence in the Fort of Lahore," in India and the West,Proceedings of a Seminar Dedicated to the Memory ofHermann Goetz, ed.Joachim Deppert, South AsianStudies no. 15 (New Delhi, 1982), 173-95. Iwould like to thank Ebba Koch for bringing thispublication to my attention.

133. Zuka', Tankhchah, 41-49, 67-72, 87-91.JenniferScarce, "Arts of the Eighteenth to Twentieth

Centuries: Architecture," in From Nadir Shah tothe Islamic Republic, in Cambridge History of Iran,vol. 7,ed. P.Averyetal. (Cambridge, 1991),915-16.

134. Zuk', Tarkhchah, 49-52, 91-100. A. D. Tush-ingham, "The Takht-i Marmar (Marble Throne)in Tehran," in Iranian Civilization and Culture, ed.CharlesJ. Adams (Montreal, 1972), 121-32.

135. S.J. Falk, QajarPaintings (London, 1972), fig. 14;Fath cAli Shah holds a staff surmounted by ahoopoe (hudhud), a bird traditionally identifiedas Solomon's messenger.

136. Koch, "Jahangir and the Angels," 176, 184, 192,nn. 61, 63.

137. Koch, 'Jahangir and the Angels," 174, 177, fig. 2.For an exterior view of this structure, see SaminaQuraeshi, Lahore: The City Within (Singapore,1988), 151-52.

138. Stephen P. Blake, Shahjahanabad: The SovereignCity in Mughal India, 1639-1739 (Cambridge,1991), 38-39.

139. Zuk', Tarikchah, 89-100, figs. 20,34,38-45; Tush-ingham, "The Takht-i Marmar," 121-31; JudithLerner, "A Rock ReliefofFathcAli Shah in Shiraz,"Ars Orientalis 21 (1991): 37-38, figs. 10-11.

140. Zuka', Taikchah, fig. 38; Lerner, "Rock Relief,"fig. 11.

141. Tushingham, "The Takht-i Marmar," pls. 19-20.

142. Falk, QajarPaintings, pls. 2, 42.

143. Falk, QajarPaintings, pls. 14, 20-21.

144. Zuk', Tahikchah, 93-99; the panels contain all ofthe first qait da but only eight of the thirty bayts ofthe second, nos. 1-3, 15-16, 20, 23-24.

145. L1. 23 and 24 which also contains the poet's penname "Saba'" and an ambiguous chronogramyielding the date 1221 (1806) or 1226 (1811),Zuka, Tarikchah, 93 n. 1, 95-96.

146. Zuk', Tainkchah, passim; Qur-an 27: 23, 26, 38,41-42; J. Sadan, Le mobilier au Proche Orientmidiival (Leiden, 1976), 33-34,36-51.

147. Zuk', Tarikchah, qag da 2, 11. 6, 7, 30.

148. Zuk', Tatikchah, qaSida 1, 1. 2, Alexander's mir-ror; 1. 5, homage of the qaysar of Rum and the

129

PRISCILLA P. SOUCEK

khusraw-i zang (zanj?); qasida 2, 1. 2, Jamshid andFaridun; 1. 34, Dara.

149. For the relationship among various demonicforms, seeJoseph Chelhod, Les Structures du sacrichez lesArabes (Paris, 1964), 67-92.

150. Hans Wulff, The Traditional Crafts of Persia(Cambridge, 1966), 128-29, fig. 198.

151. Wulff, Traditional Crafts ofPersia, 128-30, fig. 199.

152. Wulff, Traditional Crafts ofPersia, 129-30, fig. 201.

153. 'Amal-i kamtarin ghulim Muhammad IbrahimIsfahan!" (made by the humblest of slaves, Mu-hammad Ibrahim Isfahani); Zuka, Tanikchah, 99;Tushingham, "The Takht-i Marmar," 123.

154. Zuka', Tainkchah, 41-48.

155. Tabarsi, Majma' al-bayan, 7:598-99.

156. A. S. Melikian-Chirvani, "Le Royaume deSalomon," Le MondeIranien et l'Islam 1 (1971): 1-41.

157. Zuka', Tanikchah, 96, qassida 2, 11. 17 ff, 24 ff.

158. Zuka', Taiikchah, 46-47, 52-66.

159. Ibn Miskawayh, Tajarib al-umam, ed. and trans.H. F. Amedroz (Oxford, 1921),1:161-62,313-18,4:181-82, 354-59.

160. Ibn Miskawayh, Tajarib al-umam, 1:318, 4:359.

161. Ibn Miskawayh, Tajarib al-umam, 1:162, 4:182.

162. Blake, Shahjahanabad, 38-39.

163. Koch, 'Jahangir and the Angels," 177-78, figs. 4-5, 8-9.

164. Koch, 'Jahangir and the Angels," 177.

165. Tabari, Annales, vol. 1, pt. 1,593; Tabarl, History,3:171.

166. Koch, 'fJahangir and the Angels," 174-77,182-85.

Solomon with the legendary rulers of Iran. One,concerningJahangir and dated 1027 (1617-18),links him to Solomon, Gayumarth, and Alex-ander; the second, concerning Shah Jahan anddated 1041 (1631), equates him with Jamshid,Solomon, and Saturn (W. E. Begley and Z. A.Desai, TajMahal: TheIllumined Tomb [Cambridge,Mass., 1989], 279, figs. 163-66).

168. Priscilla Soucek, "Persian Artists in Mughal India:Influences and Transformations," Muqarnas 4(1987): 169-75, figs. 3-4.

169. I. Luschey-Schmeisser, "Der Wand- und Decken-schmuck eines Safavidischen Palastes in Nayin,"ArchaeologischeMitteilungen auslran, n.F. 2 (1969):183-92, pls. 69, 71, 76-77.

170. Prudence Harper, 'Thrones and EnthronementScenes in Sasanian Art," Iran 17 (1979): 49, 58-59, pl. IV; the model of a similar domed pavilionwhich perhaps served as an incense burner wasrecently excavated from an Umayyad context inAmman (Der Kdnigsweg: 9000Jahre Kunst und Kul-tur inJordanien [Cologne, 1987], no. 369, p. 358).

171. Deborah Thompson and Eva Baer have notedparallels of both design and execution betweenthe Khirbat al-Majfar stuccos and those fromlate Sasanian and early Islamic sites near Rayy(D. Thompson, Stuccosfrom Chal Tarkhan-Eshqa-bad near Rayy [Warminster, Wiltshire, 1976], 19,27-30, 34-37 and passim; Eva Baer, "A Group ofNorth Iranian Craftsmen among the Artisans ofKhirbet el-Mefjer?," Israel Exploration Journal 24[1974]: 237-40).

172. Harper, "Thrones," 59-60, pl. I; Bernard Gold-man, "The Celestial Chariot East and West," Bul-letin of the Asia Institute, n.s. 2 (1988): 92-99, figs.11-12,19-20.

173. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 98-100.

174. Tabari, Annales, vol. 2, pt. 3, p. 1744, 11. 3-8;Tabarl, History, 26:92 ; another version of thisverse is cited and translated by Hamilton (Walidand His Friends, 99, and appendix III, no. 38, p.182).

175. Hamilton, Walid and His Friends, 148.167. Mughal inscriptions from the Lahore Fort pair

130

Date post:	24-Jan-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	10 times
Download:	0 times