Post on 10-Apr-2023
Edited by
SHINMEN Yasushi, Professor, Faculty of Letters, Chuo University, Japan.
SAWADA Minoru, Professor, Faculty of Humanities, the University of
Toyama, Japan.
Edmund WAITE, Researcher, Institute of Education, London University, UK.
MONDE CAUCASIEN ET TATAR - ASIE CENTRALE ET HAUTE ASIE
Dirigé par Th. Zarcone
___________________________ III ________________________
MUSLIM SAINTS AND MAUSOLEUMS
IN CENTRAL ASIA AND XINJIANG
EDITED BY
SHINMEN YASUSHI, SAWADA MINORU
and EDMUND WAITE
LIBRAIRIE D AM RIQUE ET D ORIENT
JEAN MAISONNEUVE SUCCESSEUR 3 Bis, PLACE DE LA SORBONNE, PARIS (5e)
___
2013
Monde Caucasien et Tatar Asie Centrale et Haute Asie
Dirigé par Thierry Zarcone
Already available in the series – disponibles dans la collection
Chamanisme et Islam en Asie centrale. La Baksylyk hier et aujourd’hui
Patrick Garrone
ISBN 2-7200-1130-4
Soufisme et Politique entre Chine, Tibet et Turkestan. Etude sur les Khwajas Naqshbandis
du Turkestan oriental
Alexandre Papas
ISBN 2-7200-1150-9
Muslim Saints and Mausoleums in Central Asia and Xinjiang
Edited by Shinmen Yasushi, Sawada Minoru and Edmund Waite
ISBN 978-2-7200-1187-0
Cover image: Story tellers in a mazar in Khotan (photographed by R. Dawut, May 2009)
Librairie d‟Amérique et d‟Orient, Paris, 2013
Jean Maisonneuve, 11, rue Saint Sulpice (Paris 6e)
3 bis, Place de la Sorbonne (Paris 5e)
« La loi du 11 mars 1957 n‟autorisant, aux termes des alinéas 2 et 3 de l‟article 41, d‟une
part, que les „copies ou reproductions strictement réservées à l‟usage privé du copiste et non
destinées à une utilisation collective‟ et, d‟autre part, que les analystes et les courtes
citations dans un but d‟exemple et d‟illustration, „toute représentation ou reproduction
intégrale, ou partielle, faite sans le consentement de l‟auteur ou de ses ayants droits, est
illicite‟ (alinéa 1er de l‟article 40).
Cette représentation ou reproduction, par quelque procédé que ce soit, constituerait donc une
contrefaçon sanctionnée par les Articles 425 et suivants du Code Pénal ».
ISBN 978-2-7200-1187-0
Thierry ZARCONE
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM:
THE CASE OF THE SALOMON THRONE
(KYRGYZSTAN),
QADAM-JĀY, JINNS-CULT AND ITINERARY-PILGRIMAGE
There are several places in the Muslim world, from Algeria and as far as
Turkestan which are dedicated to the cult of the king Solomon. In Asia, these
places which are usually exceptional mountains, peaks or hills, bear in most of the
cases the name of “Throne of Solomon,” for at least two reasons. First, these places
are so wonderful that, according to the legends, only King Solomon, with his
creative powers and with the help of his jinns, could have created such sites.
Second, mountains and high hills and every elevated place are considered as an
intermediary space, situated between earth and heavens, between the world of the
living and that of the spirits. According to the Muslim tradition this intermediary
world corresponds precisely to the kingdom ruled by Solomon and where his
“throne” was established. The “Throne,” as a symbol of both absolute spiritual and
temporal power is already mentioned in the Quran (13:2): “God is He who raised
up the heavens without pillars you can see, then He sat Himself upon the Throne.
He subjected the sun and the moon, each one running to a term stated. He directs
the affair”.1
Some of these Solomonian mountains are situated in Azarbaijan, in the Elburz
(Iranian Mazanderan), in Afghanistan, in Badakhshan, in Baltistan and in
Kashmir.2 But the most famous, because of its importance as a holy Muslim place
1 Translation by A.J. Arberry. The “Throne” is famous in the Turkish literature: for exemple, in Yunus
Emre‟s poetry (thirteenth century); “Knows that you sit happy on the throne of Solomon / Notice that you clearly order the demons” (Süleyman’ın tahtına şād olup oturdun bil / Dive perīye düpdüz
hükümleri etdün tut), quoted in Gölpınarlı, Abdülbaki 1965. Yunus Emre. Risālat al-Nushiyya ve Divān,
Istanbul: Sulhi Garan Matbaası, p. 43. See also Akkaya, Hüseyin 1997. The Prophet Solomon in Ottoman Turkish Literature and the Süleymāniye of Şemseddin Sivāsi, Harvard: Harvard University
Press, vol. 1, pp. 74–76. 2 About a Takht-i Sulaymān which is located near Tabriz see Masuya, Tomoko 1997. “The Ilkhanid
Phase of Takht-i Sulaimān,” PhD, New York University, 2 vols.
Thierry ZARCONE 74
which draws every year thousand of pilgrims and visitors, although it is not the
oldest, is situated in Central Asia, in the city of Osh (Eastern part of the Ferghana
Valley), in the former USSR and present-day Republic of Kyrgyzstan. Osh was a
strategic city on the old caravan‟s route to Kashgar and India.3 The “Solomon
Throne” named Takht-i Sulaymān in Oriental Turkish, is a bare high ridge of
rugged stone, with few plants and trees, standing on the edge of the town. One of
its summits (160 meters) has a shrine dedicated to the celebrated king.
In this article, I‟ll focus on three characteristics of the Throne of Solomon that I
consider significant and worth questioning: 1. the Throne as a qadam-gāh or
qadam-jāy (place of arrival, station, privy) and not as a mausoleum (mazar); 2. the
ambiguous situation of the Throne as the place for the veneration of Solomon and
of his jinns; 3. the pilgrimage at the Throne as an “itinerary-pilgrimage”, i.e. a
planned itinerary. These three characteristics make this holy place quite atypical
among the other saint cults of Central Asia.
THE THRONE OF SOLOMON: A BRIEF HISTORY
From the chronicles of the Emperor Babur, we learn that the hill wasn‟t
associated with the name of Solomon in the sixteenth century. However from the
thirteenth century onwards, it became the site of a mazar (mausoleum) dedicated to
Asaf b. Barakhyā, the fictive vizir of King Solomon.4 There are also ancient
inscriptions and graves stones dated from the thirteenth century written in Arabic
in the cemetery situated at the bottom of the hill.5 Babur writes that the place was
A nice mountain called Bara Kūh” with two pavilions and a mosque
at its feet: “On the south eastern side of the fortress is located a well-
proportioned mountain called Bara Koh. On the summit of this
mountain Sultan-Mahmud Khan built a pavilion. Farther down from
that pavilion, on a spur of this same mountain, it had a porticoed
pavilion built in the year 902 [A.D. 1496]. Although the former
pavilion is higher up, the latter is situated much better because it
overlooks the whole town and outskirts below. (…) On the slower
slopes of Bara Koh, between the town and the mountain, is a mosque
called the Gemini Mosque…6
3 See Zarcone, Thierry 1996. “Une route de sainteté islamique entre l‟Asie centrale et l‟Inde : la voie
Ush-Kashghar-Srinagar,” in Zarcone, Th., (ed.) Inde-Asie centrale. Routes du commerce et des idées,
Cahiers d’Asie Centrale, Aix-en-Provence: Edisud, 1-2, pp. 227–254. 4 According to Jamāl al-Dīn Karshī (thirteenth c.), quoted by Ogudin, V.L. 2003. “Tron Solomona.
Istoriya formirovaniya kul‟ta,” in Podvizhniki Islama. Kul’t svyatykh i sufizm v Srednej Azii i na
Kavkaze, Moscow: Izdatel‟skaya Firma “Vostochnaya Literatura” RAN, p. 71. 5 Cumagulov, Çetin 2001. Oş Şehrinin Epigrafik Anırları, Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı
Y, pp. 10–19 (Turkish translation of Zhumagulov, Ch 1982. Kirgizstandin epigrafik estetikleri, Frunze). 6 Zahiruddin Muhammad Mirza Babur 1993. Baburnama, transl. W.M. Thackston, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, pp. 4–5; see also Barthold, W. [1928]. Turkestan Down to the Mongol Invasion, rééd.
Taipei: Southern Material Center, n.d., p. 157; and Petrash, Jurij Grigor‟evich 1961. Svyatye mesta obmana, Frunze: Kirgizskoe Gosudarstvennoe Izdatel‟stvo, pp. 5–22.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
75
Later, the Russian traveller Efremov who visited Osh in 1786 noticed the
presence of a wide cemetery on the hill but didn‟t find any trace of a “Solomon
Throne”.7 Actually, it seems, from documentary evidence, that the cult dedicated to
Solomon started in the nineteenth century, although pilgrimage to Asaf b.
Barakhyā‟s mausoleum was celebrated earlier8. Then the place began to be named
after Solomon.9 Although the “Throne” wasn‟t an ancient shrine, it has quickly
became a reputed pilgrimage destination and one of the prominent places for saint
cult in Central Asia.10
At the end of the nineteenth century, several oral traditions
dealing with Solomon were collected and edited in 1885, then translated into
Russian in 1913.11
The information provided by this book is complementary to the
researches undertaken by Russian and Soviet ethnologists on the mazar and to my
own fieldwork carried on at Osh in 1995-1996. In addition to Solomon some other
biblical prophets influenced the history of Osh: Yūnus (Joseph), „Īsà (Jesus) and
366 other prophets, were all supposed to have visited the city12
. Also, according to
the legends, Solomon ordered the building of a mosque (masjid) at the top of the
hill; this mosque became the centre of a major pilgrimage which attracted non
Arab believers (‘ajam). Pilgrims used to perform a two raka‘a prayer at the time of
the festival of ‘ayd qurbān. Visiting the Solomon shrine was considered a “great”
pilgrimage (hajj), equated with the pilgrimage to Mecca. In this way, the
pilgrimage to the “Makka-i „Ajam” has replaced the pilgrimage to the “Makka-i
„Arab”.13
Finally the Solomon shrine became the Mecca for the Persians (i.e. the
Central Asians), then a Second Mecca. In the middle of the twentieth century, a
curator of the shrine affirmed that there were two Mecca; “one in Arabia and the
other in Osh”.14
According to another legend, Solomon reached the Ferghana Valley followed
by his army and carriages pulled by cows. In order to stop the carriage at the very
place where Osh was due to be built, he cried „Ho-Osh‟, like the Farghanian
peasants to theirs cows. Thus the cry became later the name of the city. From this,
7 Quoted in Petrash 1961. 15.
8 Mīr „Izzatullāh 1845. “Travels Beyond the Himalaya,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 7:14, p.
324. 9 For more details on the history of the Throne, see Ogudin 2003. “Tron Solomona. Istoriya
formirovaniya kul‟ta,” pp. 69–102. 10
On the popular traditions regarding Solomon in Central Asia, see Zhoraev, Mamatqul, ed. 1993. Ipak
Yoli afsonalari. Joy nomlari bilan boghliq afsonalari, Tashkent: Uzbekiston Respublikasi, pp. 27–31, 69–70. 11
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla,” published by Ostroymov‟, N. 1885. In Musulmanskoe skazanie o
gorode Osh - Ūsh Shahrī Risālasī, Tashkent: Tipo-Litografiya S. I. Lakhtina; Russian translation by Zimin, L. 1913. In “Musulmanskoe skazanie o gorode Osh - Ūsh Shahrī Risālasī,” Protokol Zasedanij i
soobshcheni chlenov turkestanskogo kruzhka lyubitelej arkheologii, Tashkent, pp. 3-16. A very similar
text (nineteenth century) exists in the Jarring Collection (Prov. 407, University of Lund, Sweden). 12
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 5. 13
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 8. 14
Petrash 1961. p. 16. Like in several Solomonian shrine, there was a labyrinth at the “Throne”, but
there is no trace of it nowadays; see Zhusupakmatov, L. Tajny labirinta na tahti-i-Sulejman goroda Osh, Osh: n.d., pp. 3–95.
Thierry ZARCONE 76
we can deduce that Solomon should not only be considered as the builder of the
Throne but also as the patron saint and founder of the city of Osh.15
In the Soviet era, the Throne was described as one of the more popular and
“dangerous” saint cults, in the eyes of the Communists, equivalent to those of
Bahā‟ al-Dīn Naqshband, at Bukhara, and of Shāh-i Mardān, in Ferghana, and it
was quickly desecrated and closed16
. Nowadays, after the disintegration of the
USSR (1991), the pilgrimage has been reactivated and is again considered as a
“Second Mecca”. It draws hundred of pilgrims particularly during the Muslim
festivals.17
Mention should be made that in contrast to a great number of saint
shrines, the Solomon Throne is not linked to the Sufi tradition, although some of
the curators were depicted as “shaykhs”18
and a Sufi lodge was installed in its
proximity.19
THE QUESTION OF THE QADAM-JĀY
The “Throne of Solomon”, although it shares a great number of practices and
devotions with the saint cult in general, appears as an atypical saint place. From
several sources, both written and oral, we learn that the Throne is not presented as
the place for a tomb or a mausoleum (mazar, ziyārat) – which is the key element in
saint cult – but as a “station”, a “place of arrival” (qadam-jāy – qadam-gāh) –
mesto sleda in Russian – where the king Solomon was supposed to have walked
and also where he stayed for a while. One of the first scientific studies of the
Throne, made by the French Scientific Expedition in Russia, Siberia and
Turkestan, in 1878, mention that the little shrine at the summit of the mountain is
called “khodjamné-Djaï” (qadam-jāy).20
This distinctive feature of the Solomon
Throne and of the qadam-jāy in general led me to rethink the classification of saint
cults adopted by the great majority of researchers. Classifications are usually based
on the identity of the deceased buried in these places: i.e. Prophets or Imams,
kings, Muslim warriors and martyrs, Sufis, etc.21
Although these classifications are
15
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 4; Castagné, Joseph 1951. “Le Culte des lieux saints de
l‟Islam au Turkestan,” L'Ethnographie, Paris, 46, pp. 81-82. This tradition is mentioned also by Petrash
1961. p. 6. 16
See Bennigsen, Alexandre 1986. Le Soufi et le Commissaire, Paris: Seuil, pp. 205–206; and “Islamic
Revival and the Anti-Islamic Campaign in the USSR” 1987. The Central Asian Newsletter, Oxford, 6:5,
pp. 5–6. 17
Personal observations during ‘Ayd al-Kabīr festival in 1995. 18
In 1915, the famous Uzbek writer Chūlpān wrote that the mountain (tāv) bore the name of « Hazrat
Sulaymān » (the Venerable Solomon) and that the tomb (mazar) situated on the top was occupied by
shaykhs and Quran readers (qārī); Chūlpān 1915. “Ūsh,” Shūrā, Orenbourg, 9, pp. 287–288. 19
According to Schuyler, Eugene 1876. Turkistan. Notes of a Journey in Russian Turkistan, Khokand,
Bukhara, and Kuldja, London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle and Rivington, vol. I, p. 45. 20
de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd, Ch. E. 1878. Le Kohistan, le Ferghana et Kouldja, Paris: Ernest
Leroux, p. 97. 21
I have followed myself such a classification in my articles: Zarcone 1995. “Le Culte des saints [en
Turquie et en Asie centrale],” in Chambert-Loir, Henri and Guillot, Claude (eds.), Le Culte des saints
dans le monde musulman, Paris: Ecole Française d‟Extrême-Orient, pp. 267–307; and Zarcone 2002.
“Le Culte des saints au Xinjiang (de 1949 à nos jours),” Journal of the History of Sufism, Paris, 3, pp. 133–172. See for ex. the classification for mazars in Turkey by Ocak, Ahmed Yaşar 1984. Türk Halk
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
77
acceptable, I should like to affirm that an upper classification, wider in scope,
would come before and might integrate the classifications indicated above,
considering as a first criteria the pristine character of the mazar, i.e. if it is or is not
the place for commemoration of a deceased person.
There is very little evidence at our disposal regarding the case of the qadam-jāy
and only a few researchers working on the mazars have referred to this
phenomenon;22
There is an absence of detailed analysis of this phenomenon. I am
convinced however that this term needs definitively to be questioned. The word
qadam-jāy or qadam-gāh is usually used in Persian to designate a resting place for
pilgrims such as the “Qadam-gāh Caravansaray” on the Mashad road in Iran, and
also for some places visited by the Shi‟i Imams. Mention should be made here of a
famous garden near Nishapur named qadam-gāh because it possesses a piece of
black stone on which, according to the locals, two footprints of Imam Riza have
been carved.23
The term qadam-jāy is very popular in Central Asia24
(but very rare
in the rest of Turkic world, for example in Turkey). For instance, qadam-jāy are
mentioned several times in the famous epic of Alpomish when the bard (bakhshi)
invoked the spirits, the saints, and also their mazars and their qadam-jāy; and there
is an unidentified qadam-jāy at Shahr-i Sabz.25
Another, in Tashkent (Shash), is
dedicated to the great saint Ahmad Yasawī.26
Actually the most interesting remarks on the qadam-jāy phenomenon comes
from the French archaeologist Joseph Castagné who briefly questions the term in
his classical article on the saint cult in Turkistan (1915).27
Castagné writes that the
qadam-jāy are empty tombs which must be considered as “commemorative
monuments” only, since they were built in memory of the arrival of some famous
persons to the place; it is literally the places which have received their feet (qadam
= foot; -gāh / -jāy = place). Castagné gives an example of a mazar in Bukhara
dedicated to a certain “Babaï-Paradous”, patron of the guild of the shoemakers. He
İnançlarında ve Edebiyatında Evliya Menkabeleri, Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı, pp. 9–19; for
Western Central Asia see Snezarev, G.P. 2003. Remnants of Pre-Islamic Beliefs and Rituals among the Khorezm Uzbeks, Berlin: Reinhold Schletzer, p. 213; for Xinjiang see Dawut, Rahilä 2001. Uyghur
Mazarliri, Ürümchi: Shinjang Khälq Näshriyati, pp. 5–10. 22
See for ex. Snezarev 2003. p. 209, and Abashin, S.N. 2003. “Sem‟ svjatykh brat‟ev,” in Podvizhniki
Islama. Kul’t svjatykh I sufizm v Srednej Azii i na Kavkaze, Moscow: Izdatel‟skaja Firma “Vostochnaja
Literatura” RAN, p. 23. 23
Daneshdoust 1993. “Islamic Gardens in Iran,” in Historic Gardens and Sites, Colombo: UNESCO-
ICOMOS, p. 49. 24
Sayrāmī writes for ex., in nineteenth century, that Eastern Turkestan got many mazars, qadam-jā and
ziyārat-gāh (wa bu Yatti Shahirlar zaminlarida mashā’ikh-i karam ‘ali maqam wa mazar ziyarat-gāh
‘ali qadam-jālar tuladurlar): Mullā Mūsā Sayrāmī 1740. “Tārīkh-i Amniyya,” manuscript Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, Collection P. Pelliot, B 1740, 196 r. 25
Alpomish 1993. Reedition of the version written by the bakhshi Fādil Yuldāh Ughlī (1873-1953),
edited by Hamīd „Alīmjān, Tashkent: Uzbekiston, pp. 103–105. 26
Yasawī‟s followers set up a dervish lodge (langar) at the place where the saint stopped, and then
called it a qadam-gāh; see Ahrār 2002. Maqāmāt-i Khwāja Ahrār - Memoirs Concerning Khwāja Ahrār
(1404-1490), edited by Kawamoto Masamoto, Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of
Asia and Africa, Persian text, p. 128. 27
“Modestes sanctuaires, humbles oratoires votifs, simples enclos...” Castagné 1951. pp. 46–48.
Thierry ZARCONE 78
thought that this tomb may be depicted as a qadam-jāy, commemorating the
coming of the saint to Bukhara, since the real mazar of this saint was located in the
surrounding of Chust (Ferghana Valley).28
Then Castagné concludes that these
qadam-jāy are simple shrines, small chapels/oratories.29
This is certainly the case
for the large majority of the qadam-jāy of Central Asia, but not for the Throne of
Solomon which is far from being a “modeste sanctuaire” or a “simple enclos.”
However, it is astonishing that Castagné devoted a few lines only to the Solomon
Throne and doesn‟t mention that it was considered as a qadam-jāy30
.
Most of the qadam-jāy of Turkestan are linked to biblical or Quranic
personalities supposed to have entered Central Asia but who didn‟t die there (it is
also the case of the Throne). Among them, the Shi‟i imams are particularly
renowned in Central Asia where several mausoleums bear their names; most of
them are qadam-jāy of Imam „Alī31
. One of these, called “Kalla-Mazar” in Western
Turkestan, near Chirabad, is believed to be imprinted with the hoof of „Ali‟s
horse.32
There is another qadam-jāy of „Alī in the Pamir area which was described
by the second Danish Expedition in 1898-99. O. Olufsen who edited the travelogue
of the expedition published a drawing of the interior of this small mud-built house.
Instead of a tomb there was a cubical clay “altar” upon which was two large
rounded black stones, cow horns, lamps, candlesticks and a yak-ox hail.33
Another
qadam-jāy of „Alī is situated in Ush-Turfan (Xinjiang) and commemorates a
miracle accomplished by Imam „Alī.34
A third one, close to Maralbashi (Xinjiang),
is described by Forsyth: “nine miles to the north-est of Maralbashi is a huge black
rock apparently basaltic, with a treble peak, rising to a height of some 2,500 feet
above the plain. It is very rugged and quite inaccessible and forms a conspicuous
landmark. It is called „Pir Shereh Kuddum Moortaza Ali Tagh‟, „the Prophet Ali‟s
footstep‟. At its foot on the north side is a mazar of great sanctity.”35
Furthermore,
many other qadam-jāy of „Ali are located in the valley of Ferghana.36
Historical personalities also have their qadam-jāy; the best exemple being the
Naqshbandī King Āfāq Khwāja Hidāyatullāh (prominent Sufi and leader of the
Khwāja dynasty who ruled over Kashgharia in seventeenth-eighteenth century) to
whom several qadam-jāy are dedicated in Eastern Turkestan. From a nineteenth
century Chagatay source, we learn that one of these qadam-jāy is located at
approximatively 15 metres from the mazar of Ashāb al-Kahf/Tuyuq Khwāja, the
28
Castagné 1951. pp. 75–77. 29
Castagné 1951. p. 47. 30
Castagné 1951. pp. 81–82. 31
„Ali and the other Shi‟ī imams are praised in Xinjiang popular literature; see Karl Reich 2003. “Hero
and Saint: Islamic Elements in Uighur Oral Epics,” Journal of the History of Sufism 3: pp. 7–24. 32
Castagné 1951. p. 117. 33
Olufsen 1904. pp. 157–164. 34
Mullā Mūsā Sayrāmī, 1905. Tārīkh-i Aminiyya, Kazan: Madrasa-i „Ulūm, pp. 316–317. 35
Forsyrh, T.D. 1875. Report of a Mission to Yarkund, Calcutta: The Government Press, pp. 227. I
would like to thanks Hamada Masami (Kyoto University) who draw my attention to several sources
quoted in this paragraph. 36
Abashin 2003. p. 23.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
79
most venerated mausoleum of Eastern Turkestan. This qadam-jāy commemorates
the coming to Ashāb al-Kahf of Āfāq Khwāja Hidāyatullāh.37
We learn that Āfāq
Khwāja performed a forty-day retreat there, close to the place where he established
his tent; the place is also called chilla-khāna (house for retreat).
According to the source mentioned above, there is another qadam-jāy of Āfāq
Khwāja in the same oasis of Turfan (at the village of Sayyid Khān) about which
notable explanations are given regarding its transformation into a tomb. Āfāq
Khwāja stayed a few days at the mazar of Sayyid Dehqān, the patron of the guild
of the peasants.38
A monument was then built at the place where Āfāq Khwāja had
erected his tent. The monument was provided with a cupola (kunbaz) and the locals
made inside a dome / bump (qubba) which resembles a tomb (maqbara).39
Then
the following inscription was written on the arch (tāq) of the building: “Qadam-
jāyi Hidāyatullāh”.40
We can see here clearly how the place has became a fictive
mausoleum which then authorizes the emergence of saint devotion and rituals. We
can infer from the history of this qadam-jāy that a similar process would have
happened at the Solomon Throne, although Solomon had never been to Osh. There
is a confirmation of my analysis in the travelogue of the British traveler Schuyler,
at the end of the nineteenth century, since Schuyler was told by the locals that
Solomon died at Osh and that his mazar (he doesn‟t use the term qadam-jāy)
which surmounted the hill, was covering his body.41
Thus, the process of
identifying the qadam-jāy with a mazar was in progress.42
The Solomon Throne is without doubt what the contemporary French
historiography calls a “lieu de mémoire” (realm of memory),43
i.e. a place for the
cultivation of the remembering of any people or event. Here, it is Solomon‟s life
and actions which are remembered. Whereas there is no tomb in the funerary room
of the qadam-jāy, all the rituals of saint devotion are performed, including the
ritual of intercession which is usually addressed to a death. Nowadays these
37
Qurbān „Alī Vālid-i Khālid Hājjī Ayaghūzī 1889. Tārīkh-i jarīda-yi jadīda, Kazan: Qazān
Univīrstītī), pp. 22–23; id., “Tārīkh-i jarīda-yi jadīda,” Ms Turki 2, India Office Library, London, f. 23).
About the coming of Āfāq Khwāja Hidāyatullāh to this place, see also Shinmen, Yasushi 2003. “The
History of the Mausoleum of the Ashāb al-Kahf in Turfan,” The Memoirs of the Toyo Bunko 61, pp. 86–
87, 92. There is another qadam-jā of Āfāq Khwāja in Eastern Turkistan, at Fayz Ābād, near Kashgar; see Papas, Alexandre 2005. Soufisme et Politique entre Chine, Tibet et Turkestan. Etudes sur les
khwajas naqshbandis du Turkestan oriental, Paris: Jean Maisonneuve, pp. 123, 137. Let mention also a qadam-jā (previously a mosque) of the leader of the Ishaqiyya sufi branch; see Kerimi, Niyaz 2000.
Shinjangning Qädimki Karvan Yolliri, Ürümchi: Shinjang Khälq Näshriyati, p. 137. 38
On the present situation of this qadam-jā, see Dawut 2001. pp. 213–214. 39
Kunbaz binā qīlib ichīda maqbara shabīh qubba qīlmīshlar; Qurbān „Alī Vālid-i Khālid Hājjī
Ayaghūzī 1889. p. 10; id. Ms Turki 2, India Office Library, London, f. 9 r. v. 40
Id. 41
Schuyler 1876. I, p. 43. 42
Snezarev make an interesting remark, indicating that in Khorezm the “qadam-jā has also the form of
a mausoleum (sagona),” Snezarev 2003. p. 210. 43
See Nora, Pierre (ed.) 1984-1992. Les Lieux de mémoire, 7 vols., Paris: Gallimard.
Thierry ZARCONE 80
devotions are still visible both at the Solomon Throne and at the “Qadamjā-yi
Hidāyatullāh” in the Turfan oasis.44
As a conclusion to this section, we must keep in mind that the qadam-jāy
should have been sacred places apart from the mausoleum, situated somewhere
between the mosque and the mazar. Nevertheless, since such a place of devotion
doesn‟t exist, the qadam-jāy have adopted the shape of the mausoleum and then it
has captured the whole of the practices and devotions of saint cult. Actually there
was no other way in Islam for the sanctification of a place or building. Then, the
upper classification, I propose above, would consider: 1. the mazars with the grave
of a real or a fictive saint; 2. the mazars which wasn‟t originally a place for the
burying of a saint, i.e. qadam-jāy or chilla-khana (a retreat place where the saint
lived for a while as a recluse): these qadam-jāy are of two kinds: 2-1: qadam-jāy
without a grave (for ex. the Solomon Throne), and 2-2: qadam-jāy with a fictitious
grave (for ex. the Qadamjāyi Hidāyatullāh).
FROM SAINT CULT TO JINNS CULT
Muslim tradition emphasizes an association between Solomon and water, a
question which is prominent at Osh. At the Throne, Solomon is supposed to have
made the springs flow from the hill, thanks to his jinns.45
According to another oral
tradition collected in 1878, Solomon opened the mountain range in the vicinity of
Osh and made a way for the river Ak-Boura to water the city46
. Here we have an
explanation of the reason for which Solomon is associated with the city since he
exercised a power over the springs and over the jinns associated with water. This is
perhaps one of the origins of the Throne. Nowadays, among the Kazakhs, Solomon
is seen as the master of the jinns of the water, a resource of vital importance in the
steppe area.47
And, in Khorezm, the jinns include a special sub-class, the water-
pari (supari, suw-pari).48
Moreover, the relation of Solomon with water and
sources is emphasized at some other Salomon shrines in the Muslim world,
particularly in Algeria where there is a holy bath (the Solomon Bath / Hammam
Sidī Slīman) supposed to have been carved in the mountain by the jinns upon the
order of Solomon.49
Mention must be made here that the jinns can be in turn good
or bad, depending on the circumstances; bad jinns were usually the pre-Islamic
jinns who never converted to Islam and the good ones were those who have
adopted the religion of the Prophet, heretic jinns (al-jinn al-muslimūn) versus
44
Personal observations at Solomon Throne in 1995 and 1996, and at the Qadamjā-yi Hidāyatullāh
(Ashāb al-Kahf) in 2004. 45
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. pp. 10–15. 46
de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd 1878. p. 98.
47 See Privatsky, Bruce 2001. Muslim Turkistan. Kazak Religion and Collective Memory, Richmond -
Surrey: Curzon, 2001, p. 223.
48 Snezarev 2003. pp. 25, 49.
49 There is a chapter about the Solomon Bath in the book of Khenchelaoui, Zaim 2001. Le Roi
Salomon. Mythographie d’un prophète paradigmatique, Toulouse: Centre d‟Etudes du Monde Arabe et
de l‟Asie - Université de Toulouse le Mirail, pp. 167–208. On the Solomon legend, see also Akkaya 1997. vol. 1.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
81
muslim jinns (al-jinn al-mushrikūn).50
However the shaytān (Satan), a class of
muslim jinns among many others, are usually considered bad creatures.51
Some of the jinns present at the Throne bore a Zoroastrian name, ahramānd,
from Ahriman52
, the incarnation of the evil principle. The use of ahramānd to
qualify jinns is not very common in Central Asian Islam, although there are other
Zoroastrian words for the jinns: i.e. div and pari, and also Arabic words, jinn,
shaytān, arwāh.53
According to Muslim traditions, Solomon was associated with
the jinns because he needed their help for the building of gigantic edifices54
. Then
the jinns have become more and more influential in the life of the King and they
have constituted a prominent element of his myth. At the Takht-i Sulayman, the
jinns were also helpful to Solomon in searching for springs. From this, we must
admit that the Throne is a place for the encounter between men and jinns. As the
Algerian anthropologist Zaïm Khenchelaoui points out, “the demons are frightened
of Solomon”55
: here is one part of the key to understanding the devotion to this
prophet. Salomon forces the jinns to be obedient to the humans and to help
pilgrims whenever they came to the hill to pray to him, and indirectly his jinns.
From a local tradition collected in 1885, Solomon died at Osh and his corpse was
brought to his native country (in the Middle East) on the back of a white camel.
Then all his jinns have gone away with the exception of some of them staying on
the hill to protect the treasures of their deceased master. Let me quote the
following proverb in use among the Uzbeks and Tajiks of the Zarafshan district
(Samarqand): “after Solomon died, the jinns became free” (Sulaymān oldi divlar
qūtūldi).56
Thus the jinns who didn‟t go away are now the residents of the
Throne.57
Consequently, the place became their home and all cults performed there
have been implicitly a cult of the jinns.
There is an interesting case of jinn devotion in a little village of the Bukhara
district. The village is called Jinn Kishlaq (village of the jinns) from the name of
the spirit of a bad man buried in the vicinity. According to legendary accounts, the
ghost of this man was responsible for the mysterious death of a great number of
50
El-Zein, Amira 1996. “The Evolution of the Concept of the Jinn from pre-Islam to Islam,” PhD,
Georgetown University, vol. 2, 194. 51
Masson, Denise 1976. Monothéisme coranique et monothéisme biblique, Paris: Desclée de Brower,
p. 188 52
There are other ways to write this word in Persian: ahrāman, āhrāman, āhraman, āhrīman. 53
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. pp. 13–14; “Hazrat Sulaymān alya’l-salām diyūrlārnī va
ahrimandlārnī būyūrdīlār shūl tāghnī kasīb sū utkūzūnnglār dīb diyūlār va ahrimandlār ūl tāghgha
bārīb īshlārdīlār”. It is to be regretted, however, that Ahrimānd is translated by divy i demon in the Russian translation of this text by Zimin; Protokol Zasedanij i soobshcheni chlenov turkestanskogo
kruzhka ljubitelej arkheologii, p. 8. Let mention however that ehrimen (ahramānd) is employed in some
Ottoman literary sources on Solomon; Akkaya 1997. vol. 1, 37, pp. 86–88. 54
Solomon is attributed also the building of the city of Khazarap in Khorezm; Snezarev 2003. p. 26. 55
Khenchelaoui 2001. pp. 143–165. 56
Murodov, O. 1979. Drevnie obrazy mifologii u tadjikov doliny Zeravchana, Dushanba: n.p., p. 25.
Nevertheless, according to local oral sources collected by Schuyler in 19th century, Solomon, or
another local saint or hero “confounded with the Jewish king”, died at Osh (Schuyler 1876. I, p. 43). 57
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 18.
Thierry ZARCONE 82
villagers. Therefore the cult of this jinn started when the locals decided to made
prayers at his tomb in order to attenuate his anger and to perform pilgrimage
actions like lighting candles, bringing banners, ram horns (ovis polis), pieces of
cloth, and making animals sacrifices. Moreover, Castagné observes a quite
surprising phenomenon at this shrine: there were two banners lying on the soil in
the shape of a cross, instead of standing up as is usual at the site of saint cults.
Castagné suggests that it is a symbol for a place devoted to the worship of a bad
jinn58
I have never heard about any other holy place in Central Asia with such a
symbol. Without doubt, this question needs further investigation.
Finally, it is striking that Solomon was not the most venerated patron of the
islamized shamans of Central Asia, i.e. the bakhshis, who are professional dealers
with the bad jinns and who know how to use them for healing. However, Solomon
is invoked by the shamans under his proper name or under the name of the
“Throne”.59
At the end of the nineteenth century, during a shamanic ceremony, the
name of the “Throne of Solomon” appeared in the ritual with the names of some
other saints and jinns: “O, Throne of Solomon, please, help me!”60
In another
shamanic ritual, Salomon is invoked as “the breath of Solomon sitting on his
Throne”.61
Furthermore, some jinns/spirits invoked by the shamans bore the name
of their master: “Sulaymān”.62
“ITINERARY-PILGRIMAGE” CULT
The Solomon Throne belongs in my opinion to a category of saint cult with a
rich and complex ritual of devotion. First, there are several places of devotion
located in the site, all disseminated on the hill; second, the pilgrimage is a planned
route, beginning and finishing at very precise places. The itinerary followed by the
pilgrims is divided into several stations with shrines, graves and sacred natural
elements, springs, caves, rocks, trees, all being places for devotions (Figure 5.1).
Furthermore, the ritual of circumambulation (tavaf) which is pivotal in saint cult is
replaced here by the itinerary. I propose to call this category of saint cult
“itinerary-pilgrimage cult,” contrary to the great majority of the other saint cults
which focus usually on a lone devotion, and sometimes on more devotions but
without order or planned itinerary. To the category of “itinerary-pilgrimage cult”
58
“Deux perches auxquelles sont fixés des chiffons en guise d‟ex-votos, sont posées à même le sol,
formant une croix. Ce fait mérite d‟être souligné, car les perches sont toujours debout sur les tombeaux
des saints musulmans et jamais en croix” ; Castagné 1951. pp. 108–110. 59
Garrone, Patrick 2000. Chamanisme et Islam en Asie centrale. La Baksylyk hier et aujourd’hui,
Paris: Librairie d‟Amérique et d‟Orient Jean Maisonneuve, pp. 153, 173. 60
Divaev‟, A.A. 1899. Iz Oblasti Kirgizskikh’ Verovanij. Baksy, Kak’ Lekar’ i Koldun’, Kazan:
Tipografiya Imperatorskago Universiteta, quoted by Garrone 2000. p. 67. 61
Garrone 2000. p. 152. 62
Murodov 1975. “Shamanskij obryadovyj folklor y Tadzhikob srednej chasti doliny Zerashana,” in
Domusulmanskie verovaniya i obryady ve Srednej Azii, Moskva: Akademiya Nauk SSSR, p. 100.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
83
belong some saint cults in the Muslim world among which the most remarkable is
the Haji Bektash complex in Central Anatolia.63
The focus of the pilgrimage in the Osh complex is a little shrine at the top of
the hill, inside of which, according to traditional accounts, is the throne of King
Salomon; i.e. the throne where he was supposed to order the jinns and rule the
entire world. Regarding the practices which are performed at the Throne, most are
similar to the devotions at the saint shrines: prayers for intercession conducted by
the curator of the shrine, offering, animal sacrifices, and pieces of cloth attached to
the trees: healing of the sterility of women and of other diseases. The
circumambulation (tavaf) is generally replaced by the itinerary but some pilgrims
are still performing it around the shrine. Today, the place is especially visited by
women, as is the case with other saint cults. Some of them come from other cities
of the Ferghana valley and also from remote cities of Central Asia. They are
usually guided by experts (otin) who knows the devotions to be performed at any
places on the itinerary and the repertoire of prayers and invocations. In May 1995,
during the festival of the ‘ayd kabīr, when a crowd of pilgrims visited the Throne, I
was in the company of a group of women from the city of Andijan, walking the
itinerary with them and observing the ritual they worked at every station. I have
also profited from the explanations given by the otin of the group.
The pilgrimage started at the foot of the hill, went up to the qadam-ja, and then
went back, on the other side of the mountain, through a wide cemetery (Figures
5.3, 5.4).64
Several places of devotion situated on the itinerary commemorate the
coming of Solomon: prints of his knees, of his hands, of his feet; spring water
compared to his tears. We meet also two springs Solomon discovered with the help
of the jinns. Finally, the last station of the itinerary, at the foot of the other side of
the hill, is the mausoleum of his imaginary vizir Asaf b. Barakhyā. Everywhere on
the road, trees are covered with pieces of cloth; they symbolize the vows made by
the pilgrims (niyat aghachlari / vows trees). There are seven major stations which
constitute the itinerary: the visiting of the throne of the King (i.e. the qadam-jāy) at
the top of the hill; the “slipping on the rock”; the “passing of the Sirāt bridge”; the
“water drops cave”; the “Solomon stone”; the mausoleum of Asaf b. Barakhyā; and
the “spring of Paradise.”65
All these stations are places for devotions: some refers
to Solomon‟s mythic biography; others to the Quran (imitations of the pilgrimage
at Mecca); and other to Solomon‟s magical powers.
1. The qadamjāy is a quite simple and new building, in contrast to the majestic
mausoleum of Ahmad Yasawi at Turkistan, or of Afaq Khwaja at Kashgar. It is a
63
See Zarcone 1995. “Le Mausolée de Hācı Bektāş Velī en Anatolie centrale (Turquie),” in H.
Chambert-Loir and C. Guillot, eds., Le Culte des saints dans le monde musulman, Paris: Ecole
Française d‟Extrême-Orient, pp. 309–319. 64
About this cemetery and some of the graves which are ancient, see Cumagulov, Çetin 2001. Oş
Şehrinin Epigrafik Anırları, Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi Başkanlığı Y. 65
Ogudin 2003. pp. 83–87, 91–92. In 1878, only three of these stations were visited and considered
sacred: the “slipping on the rock”, the “water drops cave”; and the “Solomon stone”; see de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd 1878. p. 98.
Thierry ZARCONE 84
little cupola-topped structure with a façade66
. From a drawing by M. Müller, in
1878, we can see that its present architecture is similar to the old one67
(Figures
5.2, 5.9). Upon the entrance gate, there is a geometrical representation of the
Solomon seal (muhr-i Sulaymān), the six-branch star. Inside the structure there is
neither tomb no sarcophagus, contrary to the other mausoleums, since only the
throne of the King is supposed to be there. According to the written tradition, a
prayer with two prostrations (raka‘at) performed at the qadam-jāy is equated with
a prayer with 200 prostrations elsewhere68
. So the Throne is atypical among the
qadam-jāy since it was never completed with a tomb (maqbar) (Figures 5.5, 5.6,
5.7, 5.8).
2. The second station in the itinerary is the “slipping on a rock” (sirg’an
chek)69
. Pilgrims use to slip over a long and flat stone in order to prevent or heal
their back diseases. The rock alludes to the therapeutic power of Solomon. The
slipping on the rock is also believed to alleviate women‟s sterility (Figure 5.10).
3. The third station is the passing of the Sirāt bridge which is mentioned in the
Muslim tradition. This bridge allows travellers to cross over hell and can be passed
by good Muslims only. It is a dangerous section of the itinerary which frightens the
pilgrims (Figure 5.11).
4. The fourth station is the “water drops cave” (zakka tomor gori). It is a cave
with a spring identified with the Zamzam spring of Mecca; but only a few drops
emerge there. These drops are supposed to be the tears of Solomon and heal the
eyes diseases. The pilgrims bring the drops to their eyes. According the oral
tradition, the Solomon tears transmit also the King‟s clairvoyance to the pilgrims.
5. The fifth station is the “stone of the cradle” (beshik tāsh) or “Solomon stone”
(Sulaymān tāsh). It is a hole in a section of a wide rock in front of which the
pilgrims kneel down and into which they put their head three times. This action has
two consequences: first, as a “cradle stone”, it has the power to cure women‟s
sterility and bring them a child;70
second, it transmits to the pilgrim Solomon‟s
wisdom which actually consists of magical powers (Figures 5.12, 5.13).
Khenchelaoui considers the Solomon stone to be an imitation of the place at the
Ka‟ba where the black stone is situated.71
6. The pilgrimage goes back on the slope of the mountain through a wide
cemetery up to the sixth station, the mazar of Asaf b. Barakhyā (seventeenth
century), which is situated at the foot of the mountain (Figure 5.14). According to
66
A map of the shrine was published in Bernishtam, A.N. 1950, Arkhitekturnye pamjatniki kirgizii,
Moscow: AN SSSR, p. 119. See also the very detailed description of the shrine in 1878, in de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd 1878. p. 97. 67
In de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd 1878. p. 99. 68
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 5. 69
“Sigalchik tash”, according to Ogudin 2003. p. 83. 70
Petrash 1961. p. 20, emphasizes this aspect. 71
Khenchelaoui 2001. p. 158.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
85
the sources, this mazar is depicted as a ziyārat-gāh (and not a qadam-jāy).72
It is
actually the only grave venerated during the pilgrimage, although a fictive one
since Asaf b. Barakhyā was the imaginary vizir of the King. But it is the most
ancient section of the itinerary. According to the chronicles of Jamal al-Din Karshi
(thirteenth century), the mazar of Asaf b. Barakhyā was present on the mountain,
centuries before the place was known as the Solomon Throne73
. Asaf b. Barakhyā,
a closer assistant of the King, was reputed to know several of the secrets of his
master.74
Usual saint devotions are performed on this place, like the lighting of
candles and the saying of vows (niyāz). The building was wider until the end of the
nineteenth century, with a lot of secondary structures (Figure 5.18).75
Most of them
were destroyed by the Russian military during the Basmachi uprising since the
insurgents made the Throne one of their fortresses. The mausoleum was restored in
the 1990s.
7. The pilgrimage ends with the passing over a little stream (perhaps the
irrigation canal mentioned in Babur chronicles). Oral tradition views this stream as
the “Paradise spring” (Jannat suyi); its water is considered sacred and miraculous
by the pilgrims who fill up their bottles with it.
From written sources, we learn that several conditions must be followed by the
pilgrims. The pilgrimage have to be performed at the time of the ‘ayd qurbān (it is
nowadays respected). The pilgrims must drink the waters from the Zamzam (or
Kawthar) spring and also from the “Paradise spring”. This water could be used also
for the ablutions (ghusl tahārat) before to perform the prayers at the Asaf b.
Barakhyā‟s tomb. Also the circumambulations (hājj tavāf) are recommended, and
the pilgrim must stay three or forty days on the mountain. All these actions will
“free the believers from the fire of hell” (ātash dūzakh)76
.
CONCLUSION
As has been demonstrated above, the Solomon Throne is clearly an atypical
saint cult: first, it belongs to the quite ambiguous class of the qadam-jāy and
should constitute, in my opinion, a chief model for this category. The qadam-jāy
never constituted an autonomous place of devotion, because, for centuries, the
mazars have monopolized Muslim devotions and were actually the sole focus for
it. There wasn‟t any chance for the qadam-jāy to challenge the mazar.
Consequently, the former was integrated into the category of saint cult and was
given, in some cases, a fictive grave to fit with this category. Second, the Throne of
Solomon is implicitly a place for jinns cult and for getting magical powers.
Actually, the pilgrims can capture some of the magical powers of the King, his
72
“Asafnī shūl jāyda dafn qīlsūn Ajam khalqīgha ziyāratgāh būlsūn dīb fī’l-hāl Hazrat Asaf b.
Barakhyānī tāghnī tūbīda āftāb yūlī tarafīda dafn qīldīlār”; “Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. p. 3. 73
See Ogudin 2003. p. 71. 74
On him, see Akkaya 1997. vol. 1, pp. 55–56, and Khenchelaoui 2000. pp. 91–94. 75
Mīr „Izzatullāh 1845. p. 324. See the description and the photographs published by Zimin 1913. p.14.
About the history and architecture of the monument, see Dujsheev, B. 1986, Pamjaty Tjan-Shanja,
Frunze: Mektep, p. 76. 76
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. pp. 5, 6–7, 15.
Thierry ZARCONE 86
clairvoyance and his wisdom, and especially the command to the jinns. The jinns
cult needs to be questioned and calls for further investigations. In this connection,
it will be of interest for example to analyze the mazars frequented by the shamans
who are researching the help of the spirit; for the shamans the mazar is clearly a
place to invocate both saints and bad or good jinns. Third, the Throne is what I
would venture to call an “itinerary pilgrimage”. Few saint places display such a
planned journey, divided in stations visited one after the other, and integrating
other mazar (mausoleum of Asaf b. Barakhyā). Of course, the reason for this at the
Throne is geographical, because the pilgrimage consists primarily in the ascension
of the hill; however the veneration here regards the mountain as a whole and not
the qadam-jāy or Asaf b. Barakhyā‟s tomb only. Finally, the Throne might be
equated with some other saint places, even if the devotions are accomplished there
without any order, like the mazar of Ordam Padishah (Kashgar, Xinjiang), where
we can find numerous stations and mausoleums disseminated in a wide sandy area
in the Taklamakan desert.77
Both belong to a wider category of pluri-devotion
mazars.
Thierry ZARCONE
Postscript:
There are two manuscripts concerning the Solomon Throne in the Biruni library in
Tashkent I haven‟t seen: 1. “Fadīlat-nāma-yi Ush wa qarārgāh Sulaymān (Ush
shahrīning risālasī),” n° 509 (end of 19th century); 2. “Wā‟qa-yi ziyārat dar takht-i
Sulaymān dar zamīn-i Ush,” n.d., n° 569 (cf. Babadjanov, Bakhtiyor; Krämer,
Annett; Paul Jürgen (eds.) 2000. Handlist of Sufi Manuscripts (18th-20th
Centuries) in the Holding of the Oriental Institute, Academy of Sciences, Republic
of Uzbekistan, Biruni, Berlin: Das Arabische Buch, 175, p. 190.)
REFERENCES
Abashin, S.N. 2003. “Sem‟ svyatykh brat‟ev,” in Podvizhniki Islama. Kul’t svyatykh i sufizm
v Srednej Azii I na Kavkaze, Moscow: Izdatel‟skaya Firma “Vostochnaya
Literatura,” pp. 18–39.
Abbas, Ablät 1993. “Ordam tarikhidin omumi bayan,” Yengishähär Tarikhi Materyalliri,
Kashgar, 1, pp. 123–175.
Ahrār 2002 Maqāmāt-i Khwāja Ahrār – Memoirs Concerning Khwāja Ahrār (1404-1490),
edited by Masatomo Kawamoto, Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages and
Cultures of Asia and Africa.
77
On this mazar, see Abbas, Ablät 1993. “Ordam tarikhidin omumi bayan,” Yengishähär Tarikhi
Materyalliri, Kashgar, 1, pp. 123-175; Sawada, Minoru 2003. “The System of Ordam-Padishāh (The Oasis of Yangi Hisar),” Journal of the History of Sufism 3, pp. 89–112.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
87
Akkaya, Hüseyin 1997. The Prophet Solomon in Ottoman Turkish Literature and the
Süleymāniye of Şemseddin Sivāsi, Harvard: Harvard University Press, vol. 1.
Alpomish 1993. edited by Hamīd „Alīmjān, Tashkent: Uzbekiston.
Babadjanov, Bakhtiyor; Krämer, Annett; Paul Jürgen, eds. 2000. Handlist of Sufi
Manuscripts (18th - 20th Centuries) in the Holding of the Oriental Institute,
Academy of Sciences, Republic of Uzbekistan, Biruni, Berlin: Das Arabische Buch.
Babur, Zahiruddin Muhammad Mirza 1993. Baburnama, transl. W.M. Thackston, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Barthold, W. [1928]. Turkestan Down to the Mongol Invasion, Reed. Taipei: Southern
Material Center, n.d.
Bennigsen, Alexandre 1986. Le Soufi et le Commissaire. Paris: Seuil. Completed version of
the English Mystics and Commissars: Sufism in the Soviet Union, Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1985.
Bernishtam, A.N. 1950. Arkhitekturnye pamyatniki kirgizii, Moscow: AN SSSR.
Castagné, Joseph 1951. “Le Culte des lieux saints de l‟Islam au Turkestan,” L'Ethnographie,
Paris, 46, pp. 46–124.
Chūlpān 1915. “Ūsh,” Shūrā, Orenbourg, 9, pp. 287–288.
Cumagulov, Çetin 2001. Oş Şehrinin Epigrafik Anırları, Ankara: Atatürk Kültür Merkezi
Başkanlığı Y.
Daneshdoust 1993. “Islamic Gardens in Iran,” in Historic Gardens and Sites, Colombo:
UNESCO-ICOMOS.
Dawut, Rahilä 2001. Uyghur Mazarliri. Ürümchi: Shinjang Khälq Näshriyati.
“Description of the town of Osh”. Manuscript Prov. 407, University of Lund, Sweden.
Divaev‟, A.A. 1899. Iz Oblasti Kirgizskikh’ Verovanij. Baksy, Kak’ Lekar’ i Koldun’, Kazan:
Tipografiya Imperatorskago Universiteta.
Dujsheev, B. 1986. Pamyaty Tyan-Shanya, Frunze: Mektep.
El-Zein, Amira 1996. “The Evolution of the Concept of the Jinn from pre-Islam to Islam,”
PhD, Georgetown University, 2 vols.
Forsyth, T.D. 1875. Report of a Mission to Yarkund, Calcutta: The Government Press.
Garrone, Patrick 2000. Chamanisme et Islam en Asie centrale. La Baksylyk hier et
aujourd’hui, Paris: Jean Maisonneuve.
Gölpınarlı, Abdülbaki 1965. Yunus Emre. Risālat al-Nushiyya ve Divān, Istanbul: Sulhi
Garan Matbaası.
“Islamic Revival and the Anti-Islamic Campaign in the USSR,” 1987. The Central Asian
Newsletter, Oxford, 6:5, pp. 5-6.
Kerimi, Niyaz 2000. Shinjangning Qädimki Karvan Yolliri, Ürümchi: Shinjang Khälq
Näshriyati.
Khenchelaoui, Zaim 2001. Le Roi Salomon. Mythographie d’un prophète paradigmatique,
Toulouse: Centre d‟Etudes du Monde Arabe et de l‟Asie - Université de Toulouse le
Mirail.
Masuya, Tomoko 1997. “The Ilkhanid Phase of Takht-i Sulaimān.” PhD, New York
University, 2 vols.
Mīr „Izzatullāh 1845. “Travels Beyond the Himalaya,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
7:14, pp. 283–342.
Thierry ZARCONE 88
Masson, Denise 1976. Monothéisme coranique et monothéisme biblique, Paris: Desclée de
Brower.
Mullā Mūsā Sayrāmī 1740. “Tārīkh-i Amniyya,” Manuscript Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris,
Collection P. Pelliot, B 1740.
Mullā Mūsā Sayrāmī 1905 Tārīkh-i Aminiyya, Kazan: Madrasa-i „Ulūm.
Murodov, O. 1975. “Shamanskij obryadovyj folklor y Tadzhikob srednej chasti doliny
Zerashana,” in Domusulmanskie verovaniya i obryady ve Srednej Azii, Moskva:
Akademiya Nauk SSSR, pp. 94–122.
Murodov, O. 1979. Drevnie obrazy mifologii u tadjikov doliny Zeravchana, Dushanba: n.p.
Nora, Pierre (ed.) 1984-1992. Les Lieux de mémoire, Paris: Gallimard, 7 vols. English
translation: Realms of Memory: the Construction of the French Past, New York:
Columbia Press, 1998.
Ocak, Ahmed Yaşar 1984. Türk Halk İnançlarında ve Edebiyatında Evliya Menkabeleri,
Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı.
Ogudin, V.L. 2003. “Tron Solomona. Istoriya formirovaniya kul‟ta,” in Podvizhniki Islama.
Kul’t svyatykh I sufizm v Srednej Azii I na Kavkaze, Moscow: Izdatel‟skaya Firma
“Vostochnaya Literatura” RAN, pp. 69–102.
Olufsen, O. 1904. Through the Unknown Pamirs. The Second Danish Pamir Expedition
1898-99 (Vakhan and Garan), London: W. Heinemann.
Ostroymov‟, N. 1985. Musulmanskoe skazanie o gorode Osh - Ūsh Shahrī Risālasī,
Tashkent: Tipo-Litografiya S. I. Lakhtina.
Papas, Alexandre 2005. Soufisme et Politique entre Chine, Tibet et Turkestan. Etudes sur les
khwajas naqshbandis du Turkestan oriental, Paris: Jean Maisonneuve.
Petrash, Yurij Grigor‟evich 1961. Svyatye mesta obmana, Frunze: Kirgizskoe
Gosudarstvennoe Izdatel‟stvo.
Privatsky, Bruce 2001. Muslim Turkistan. Kazak Religion and Collective Memory,
Richmond - Surrey: Curzon.
Qurbān „Alī Vālid-i Khālid Hājjī Ayaghūzī. “Tārīkh-i jarīda-yi jadīda,” Manuscript Turki 2,
India Office Library, London.
Qurbān „Alī Vālid-i Khālid Hājjī Ayaghūzī 1889. Tārīkh-i jarīda-yi jadīda, Kazan: Qazān
Univīrstītī.
Reich, Karl 2003. “Hero and Saint: Islamic Elements in Uighur Oral Epics,” Journal of the
History of Sufism, 3, pp. 7–24.
Sawada, Minoru 2003. “The System of Ordam-Padishāh (The Oasis of Yangi Hisar),”
Journal of the History of Sufism, 3, pp. 89-112.
Schuyler, Eugene 1876. Turkistan. Notes of a Journey in Russian Turkistan, Khokand,
Bukhara, and Kuldja, London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle and Rivington, 2
vols.
Shinmen, Yasushi 2003. “The History of the Mausoleum of the Ashāb al-Kahf in Turfan,”
The Memoirs of the Toyo Bunko, 61, pp. 83-104.
Snezarev, G.P. 2003. Remnants of Pre-Islamic Beliefs and Rituals among the Khorezm
Uzbeks, Berlin: Reinhold Schletzer.
de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd, Ch.E. 1878 Le Kohistan, le Ferghana et Kouldja, Paris: Ernest
Leroux.
“Ūsh shahrī khusūsīdaghī risāla” 1885. See Ostroymov‟, N.
ATYPICAL MAUSOLEUM : THE SOLOMON THRONE
89
Zarcone, Thierry 1995. “Le Mausolée de Hācı Bektāş Velī en Anatolie centrale (Turquie),”
in H. Chambert-Loir and C. Guillot (eds.), Le Culte des saints dans le monde
musulman, Paris: École Française d‟Extrême-Orient, 1995, pp. 309–319.
Zarcone, Thierry 1996. “Une route de sainteté islamique entre l‟Asie centrale et l‟Inde: la
voie Ush-Kashghar-Srinagar,” in Th. Zarcone (ed.), Inde-Asie centrale. Routes du
commerce et des idées, Cahiers d’Asie Centrale, Aix-en-Provence: Edisud, 1-2, pp.
227–254.
Zarcone, Thierry 2002. “Le Culte des saints au Xinjiang (de 1949 à nos jours),” Journal of
the History of Sufism, Paris, 3, pp. 133-172.
Zhoraev, Mamatqul (ed.) 1993. Ipak Yoli afsonalari. Joy nomlari bilan boghliq afsonalari,
Tashkent: Uzbekiston Respublikasi, 1993.
Zhusupakmatov, L. n.d. Tajny labirinta na tahti-i-Sulejman goroda Osh, Osh, n.p.
Zimin, L.A. 1913. “Musulmanskoe skazanie o gorode Osh - Ūsh Shahrī Risālasī,” Protokol
Zasedanij i soobshcheni chlenov turkestanskogo kruzhka lyubitelej arkheologii,
Tashkent, n.p.
FIGURES
203
5.1: Drawing of the whole of the Throne of Solomon, Kyrgyzstan, 1995
1. Entrance of the Throne of Solomon 2. Qadam-jāy of Solomon
3. The “slipping on a rock” (sirg’an chek)
or the “stone for slipping” (sigalchik tash)
4. The Sirat Bridge
5. The “water drops cave” (zakka tomor
gori)
6. The “stone of the cradle” (beshik tāsh) or
the “Solomon stone” (Sulaymān tāsh)
7. The cemetery 8. The mazar of Asaf b. Barakhyā
9. Bridge on the river of the Paradise
FIGURES 204
5.2: The qadam-jāy of Solomon, end of nineteenth century, lithography by B. Schmidt from
a drawing by M. Müller (in Ch. E. de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd, Le Kohistan, le Ferghana et
Kouldja. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1878.)
5.3: The entrance of the sanctuary, 1995 (Photographed by Th. Zarcone)
FIGURES
205
5.4: Climbing the hill, 1995 (Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.5: The qadam-jāy of Solomon and the city of Osh in the back, 1995 (Photographed by Th.
Z.)
FIGURES 206
5.6: Uzbek female pilgrims visiting the qadam- jāy, 1995 (Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.7: A lecturer of prayers at the entrance of the qadam- jāy, 1995 (Photographed by Th. Z.)
FIGURES
207
5.8: The qadam-jāy of Solomon, the back section and the cupola (Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.9: Drawing and plan of the qadam-jāy (in A.N. Bernishtam, Arkhitekturnye pamjatniki
kirgizii, Moscou: p. 119)
FIGURES 208
5.10: The “slipping on a rock” (sirg’an chek) or the “stone for slipping” (sigalchik tash)
(Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.11: The Sirat Bridge (Photographed by Th.Z.)
FIGURES
209
5.12: the “stone of the cradle” (beshik tāsh) or the “Solomon stone” (Sulaymān tāsh)
(Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.13: A Pilgrim resting his head on the “Solomon stone” (Photographed by Th.Z.)
FIGURES 210
5.14: The mazar of Asaf b. Barakhyā with the Throne of Solomon in the back
(Photographed by Th. Z.)
5.15: Drawing by Taylor of the ancient mosque, now destroyed, which was close to the
mazar of Asaf b. Barakhyā (in Ch. E. de Ujfalvy de Mezö-Kovesd, Le Kohistan, le
Ferghana et Kouldja. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1878.)