האוניברסיטה העברית בירושלים The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

הפקולטה למדעי הרוח Faculty of Humanities

החוג ללימוד האסלאם והמזרח התיכון Department of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies

עבודה סמינריונית מחקרית בנושא:

Animals in the Gift Exchange Diplomacy of the (1260-1335)

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Degree of Master in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

May 2019

מוגש על ידי לאון וולפובסקי

Submitted by Leon Volfovsky

בהנחיית פרופסור מיכל בירן

Supervisor: Prof. Michal Biran

Table of Contents Abstract ...... 1 Introduction ...... 3 Chapter 1: Livestock Animals ...... 9 Chapter 2: Hunting Animals ...... 30 Chapter 3: Exotic Animals ...... 53 Conclusions ...... 70 Bibliography ...... 81 Appendix I – List of Delegations and Gifts ...... 93

Abstract

Hülegü (1256-1265) established the Ilkhanid (1256-1335) following a military campaign in the . The dynasty was one of the Mongol that rose to power as the result of the dissolution of the Mongol , established by Chinggis Khan (1206-1227).

The Ilkhans maintained diplomatic relations with multiple contemporary dynasties in Asia, Europa and Africa, both Mongol and otherwise, including also hostile polities, such as the

Sultanate of (with which peace was established in 1323). These diplomatic relations involved gift exchange, of which animals played a significant role.

This thesis examines how did the establishment of the Ilkhanid dynasty in the Iranian region and the dynasty’s diplomatic relations influence the movement of animals in Eurasia. Who were the individuals who chose the exchanged animals; why were the animals chosen as diplomatic gifts; what was the role of the animals in comparison to other royal gifts; which transformations in the exchange of animals occurred throughout the Ilkhanid period. This adds another facet to the ongoing study of mobility of people, knowledge, commodities and artifacts across Eurasia due to

Mongol policies. While some arenas of exchange, such as historiography, astronomy, geography, medicine and agriculture, have received extensive scholarly attention, the influence of the in general and the Ilkhans in particular on the movement of animals was only partially examined.

The thesis examines the exchange of three kind of animals in Ilkhanid diplomacy: livestock, hunting partners and exotic animals. In each case it reveiwes the functions of such animals to the

Mongols and their use in diplomatic exchange in the United (1206-60) and in the

Ilkhanid realm, sometimes bringing also examples from the other Mongol .

The thesis demonstrates that the Ilkhanid dynasty contributed to the movement of animals in

Eurasia through the use of diplomatic missions. Out of 120 embassies which the Ilkhanid dynasty

1 exchanged with contemporary dynasties, 42 included animals that were chosen as gifts to foreign rulers or were received as gifts to the Ilkhans. Througout its exisatnce, the Ilkhanid dynasty was able to establish diplomatic relations with dynsties in Eastern and Western Asia, in Africa and in

Europe, and exchanged animals with all of these polities.

This thesis demonstrates that the Ilkhans received animals from across Eurasia; moreover, they connected the remote corners of Eurasia by sending embassies to their various allies, often carrying more than one specie of the same animal. More importantly, the Mongols had direct influence on the movement of animals throughout the continent. Their nomadic background influenced their interaction with animals, for example their great interest in hunting partners and livestock animals.

Moreover, Mongol and Ilkhanid preferences for specific animals accelersted the movement of such animals across the continent. The Ilkhans preferred livestock and hunting animals, such as horses, camels and various raptors to exotic animals, such as elephants or giraffes, which were popular among the rulers of sedentary dynasties, in the and . In addition, following the establishment of diplomatic relations between the various Mongol dynasties, membrs of the Mongol elite personaly choose the animals which they wished to receive as gifts.

2

Introduction

The State of Research

The topic of this thesis combines three research fields: diplomacy, human-animal relations, and the exchange of gifts. The diplomatic relations between the various Mongol polities, as well as between the Mongols and the non-Mongol contemporary dynasties, have already received considerable scholarly attention.1 Reuven Amitai-Preiss and Anne Broadbridge examined the relations between the Ilkhanid dynasty and the Mamluk Sultanate.2 In addition, Na’ama Arom examined the development of the Ilkhanid diplomacy during the reign of the dynasty’s first two rulers, Hülegü and Abaqa.3 Other studies examined the diplomatic connections between the

Golden Horde and the Mamluk Sultanate, and the Mongol diplomatic relations with the Delhi

Sultanate.4

Thomas T. Allsen’s Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia is a prominent example in the field of Mongol diplomatic and cultural exchange. Allsen examined the relations between the

Ilkhans and the Qa’ans of the , the Ilkhans’ titular rulers.5 Allsen demonstrated how the diplomatic relations and the military alliance between the two Mongol dynasties led to an extensive exchange of knowledge and products between western and eastern Asia. Most

1 Michal Biran, “Diplomacy and Chancellery Practice in the Chagataid : Some Preliminary Remarks,” Oriente Moderno 88, 2 (2008): 382; Salikh Zakirov, Diplomaticheskie Otnoshenie Zolotoi Ordy s Egiptom (XII- XIV vv.) (: Nauka, 1966), pp. 39-97; Peter Jackson, The : A Political and Military History, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), pp. 93, 141, 208-209, 302, 314. 2 Reuven Amitai-Preiss, Mongols and the : the Mamluk-Ilkhanid War, 1260-1281 )Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Reuven Amitai, Holy War and Rapprochement: Studies in the Relations between the Mamluk Sultanate and the Mongol Ilkhanate (1260-1335) (Turnhout: Brepols, 2013); Anne F. Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008). 3 Na’ama O. Arom, “Beyond Bow Range: The Formation of Mongol Foreign Relations in the Middle East 1253- 1282,” PhD. dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2016: 1-2. 4 Zakirov, Diplomaticheskie Otnoshenie, pp. 39-97; Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, pp. 93, 141, 208-209, 302, 314. 5 Thomas T. Allsen, Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia (Cambridge, U.K.; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2001), pp. 17-40.

3 importantly, Allsen explained that this exchange occurred under the supervision of the Mongol rulers who influenced the spheres of exchange, picking and choosing the mediators of knowledge and the topics of exchange.6 Thus Allsen established that the Mongol rise to power throughout

Asia not only initiated a globalization process, but that the Mongol elites shaped it.

However, Allsen presented only a brief examination of the exchange of animals between the two polities.7 In his other book, The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History, where Allsen elaborated on the

Mongols’ use of animals, he did not focus on the aspect of exchange.8 An additional work on animals examining the Ilkhanid period is Housni Alkhateeb Shehada's book, Mamluks and

Animals: Veterinary Medicine in Medieval . However, it dealt with hunting, animal representations, and veterinary medicine during the Mamluk period (1250-1517), and mentioned only partial examples of exchange.9

Marcel Mauss developed the research of the gift exchange, focusing on the social perspective.10

Later works either expanded the theory of gift exchanges,11 or focused on gift exchanges in specific periods and areas, addressing also the Islamic and Middle Eastern perspectives.12 More recently, in her book Practicing Diplomacy in the Mamluk Sultanate: Gifts and Material Culture in the

Medieval Islamic World, Doris Behrens-Abouseif examined the topic of the “Maussian gift” in the

Ilkhanid context. However, as the book's title suggests, this research did not focus on the Mongols

6 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, pp. 189-211. 7 Ibid, p. 44. 8 Thomas T. Allsen, The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, c2006). 9 Housni Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals: Veterinary Medicine in Medieval Islam (Boston: Brill 2013), p. 70. 10 Marcel Mauss, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, trans. W.D. Halls (New York: W.W. Norton, 1990). 11 E.g., Caroline Humphrey and Stephen Hugh-Jone, Barter, Exchange, and Value: An Anthropological Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). 12 E,g., Wendy Davies and Paul Fouracre, The Languages of Gift in the Early (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,c2010); Hans Bielenstein, Diplomacy and Trade in the Chinese world, 589-1276 (Leiden: Brill, 2005).

4 or on the Ilkhanate, but rather on the diplomatic delegations and gift exchanges from the perspective of the Mamluks of Egypt and . Thus, exchange of animals as gifts in diplomatic missions was limited only to the occasions when such exchange existed between the Mamluks and the Ilkhanate.13 Donald Little also studied the gift exchange between the Mongols and the

Mamluks, though without focusing on animals,14 while Komaroff’s Gifts of the : the Art of

Giving in Islamic Courts neglected the Mongol period and Ilkhanid dynasty altogether.15

In conclusion, previous works that dealt with Ilkhanid diplomacy or gift exchange provided only a few examples, rather than a full examination of the Ilkhanids’ animal exchange practices. They did not focus on the Ilkhanid dynasty, nor did they examine all the regions and dynasties with which the Ilkhans had diplomatic relations. Some areas, such as and the Indian

Subcontinent, were neglected entirely.

Research Questions

What role did animals play in the diplomatic exchange? How did the establishment of the Ilkhanid dynasty in the Iranian region and the dynasty’s diplomatic relations influence the movement of animals in Eurasia? Which animals did the Ilkhans use, and which animals arrived at the Ilkhanate as royal gifts? Who were the individuals that chose the animals, why were the animals chosen for their role as diplomatic gifts? What was the role of the animals in comparison to other royal gifts?

Which changes in the exchange of animals occurred throughout the Ilkhanid period?

The main research method has been a close reading of primary sources from the Mongol period, such as historical chronicles, travelogues, encyclopedias etc., mainly in and Persian.

13 Doris Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy in the Mamluk Sultanate: Gifts and Material Culture in the Medieval Islamic World (London: I.B. Tauris, 2014). 14 Donald P. Little, “Diplomatic Missions and Gifts Exchanged by Mamluks and Ilkhans,” in Beyond the Legacy of , ed. by Linda Komaroff (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 30-42. 15 Linda Komaroff, Gift of the Sultan: the Art of Giving at the Islamic Courts (Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 2011).

5

Primary sources in additional languages, such as Chinese or Latin, were examined in their translated editions, including the materials from the JPP-Spring database of the project “Mobility,

Empire and Cross-Culture Contacts in Mongol Eurasia”. Persian terms have been transliterated according to the Arabic transliteration rules.

This thesis focuses on three kinds of animals that were important in the Eurasian nomadic cultures and were exchanged as gifts by sedentary polities throughout the Old World: livestock, hunting, and exotic. A separate chapter is dedicated to each of these three categories, and provides a cultural and historic background to the use of each in the Mongol culture and the Mongol empire, before examining the exchange by the Ilkhans.

Livestock animals were perhaps the most important to the survival of the nomads, as the whole structure of nomadic societies was a distinct form of food production, with flocks of sheep at its center.16 Other livestock animals, such as camels, horses, goats, and cattle, allowed the mobility that made pastoral nomadism possible, and provided the much-needed resources for the survival of the nomads.17 Hunting animals were also used by Eurasian elites, both nomad and sedentary, and hence were exchanged frequently by various rulers.18 Finally, exotic animals were among the most valuable commodities to be exchanged in diplomatic relations.19 Thus, focusing on the exchange of animals in the context of the nomadic Mongols’ transformation into the elite of a newly found empire may shed some light on the Mongol influence on the diplomatic relations in

Eurasia.

16 Anatoly M. Khazanov, Nomads and the Outside World, trans. Julia Crookenden (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, c1994), pp. 15-33. 17 Ibid, pp. 46-48. 18 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, pp. 7-10. 19 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 17-26.

6

Mongol society allowed many opportunities for exchanging gifts, including animals. One example is the coronation of the new rulers, Qa’ans and Khans, who were obliged to present gifts to their subjects for maintaining the wealth of the nomadic element in their empire.20 In addition,

Mongol customs and practices such as the takshīmīshī (a ceremonial presentation of a gift upon a meeting with a ruler) also encouraged gifts of various kinds.21 Finally, visitors to the empire, such as the Friars John of Plano Carpini and , recorded numerous occasions in which

Mongols of various ranks requested them relentlessly to provide gifts on their journey to the

Qa’an.22

More importantly, the establishment of the four separate Mongol polities after 1260 led to an exchange of diplomatic missions within the Mongol world; at the same time each of the polities developed independent diplomatic relations with non-Mongol polities in Asia, Africa, and Europe, where the Ilkhans had Mongol and non-Mongol allies and rivals. To maintain their foreign relations and in addition to their personal involvement, the Ilkhans employed advisors, messengers, and diplomatic delegations. The messengers (ilchī) served as the Ilkhans’ representatives, delivering their messages and executing their orders.23 At times of peace these messengers carried gifts to allied rulers, a practice that was common not only in the Mongolian culture,24 but also in

20 ʿAlā’-al-Dīn ʿAṭā-Malik Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, ed. Muḥammad Qazwīnī, vol. 1 (Tehran: Hermes, 1387), pp. 252, 310; ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik Juvaini (Juwaynī), Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror, trans. John Andrew Boyle (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997), pp. 189, 254-255; Nikolay Kradin, “Structure of Power in Nomadic of Inner Asia: Anthropological Approach,” Hierarchy and Power in the History of Civilizations, ed. Leonid E. Grinin, Dmitri D. Beliaev and An-drey V. Korotayev (Moscow: URSS, 2007), 105-6, 109-14. 21 Gerhard Doerfer, Türkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen: unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Älterer Neupersischer Geschichtsquellen, vor allem der Mongolen- und Timuridenzeit, vol. 2 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, 1965), pp. 531-533. 22 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars: Friar Giovanni di Plano Carpini’s Account of His Embassy to the Court of the Mongol Khan, trans. Erik Hildinger (Boston: Branden Pub. Co., 1996), pp. 66, 95; William of Rubruck, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Mongke, 1253-1255, trans. Peter Jackson, ed. David Morgan (London: Hakluyt Society, 1990), p. 120. 23 Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 247-248. 24 Ibid.; Giovanni diPlano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 70, 80; William of Rubruck, The Mission, p. 247.

7 the general diplomatic norms of that era.25 These messengers and the gifts they carried is the focus of this thesis.

With the disintegration of the Mongol Empire, the Khans of the various Mongol polities ruled over different regions and had different resources at their disposal, including different breeds of local animals they could exchange. The effect of the locality over which the Ilkhans ruled and its indigenous animals on their diplomatic norms is also examined.26

Within the framework of this thesis, gift-bearing diplomatic delegations refer to those sent by foreign dynasty rulers, such as the Mongol Qa’an and Khans, European Kings, and Muslim

Sultans. In addition, gifts from subordinate rulers and local governors are also examined.

25 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 11-26. 26 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 44.

8

Chapter 1: Livestock Animals

Domesticated livestock animals were at the center of the Mongols’ nomadic way of life, and

Mongol rulers occasionally awarded and received such animals as gifts. While the Ilkhans did not exchange such animals as sheep, goats, or cattle as part of the diplomatic missions, they awarded and received mostly horses and camels (mules were included among the gifts on a much smaller scale). Most importantly, since the Ilkhans had access to both Mongolian and Western horses, as well as to both Bactrian and Arabian camels, the Ilkhans connected the furthest regions of Asia by delivering animals from eastern Asia to the west and vice versa. Consequently the combination of the Ilkhanate’s geographical location and the Ilkhanid network of diplomatic alliances contributed to the movement of livestock across Asia.

Livestock Animals in Mongol Society – Cultural, Economic and Military Importance

Livestock animals were the ones with which the Mongols had the closest and most intensive contact. The Mongols practiced pastoral nomadism, and possessed five kinds of domesticated animals: horses, camels, sheep, goats and cattle.27 In the harsh conditions of the Mongolian steppe, the Mongols had to exploit these animals to provide themselves with most of the necessities of life, e.g. food, fuel, clothes, and housing (tents).28

Some of the domesticated animals were also of ritualistic importance. The Mongols used animal bones for the divination of the future (scapulimancy) and for the creation of new idols.29 Animals were also sacrificed during special rituals. For example, when Chinggis Khan passed away, the

Mongol notables sacrificed choice horses, and a similar ceremony possibly took place following

27 Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of and the Mongol Empire (New York, NY: Facts on File, 2004), pp. 14-15. 28 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 52-54; William of Rubruck, The Mission, pp. 75, 79-83, 90-91; Atwood, Encyclopedia, pp. 14-15, 173-174. 29 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 42-43; William of Rubruck, The Mission, p. 193.

9

Hülegü's death in 1265.30 Apparently, the Mongols continued to sacrifice horses to Chinggis Khan long after his death.31 Additionally, the libation of mare’s milk took place in a variety of ceremonies.32

In the course of the establishment of the empire the Mongols accumulated many riches.

However, the importance of livestock did not diminish in the eyes of the elite that rose to dominate most of Asia (but remained nomad), and the Qa’an incorporated nomadic taxation practices into imperial policy. Rulers such as Chinggis Khan (r. 1206-27), Ögödei (r. 1229-41), and Möngke (r.

1251-59) imposed the qubchur tax on their subjects. During the reigns of Chinggis Khan and

Ögödei this tax was set at one cattle head in a hundred. After the death of Güyük, his wife and then regent of the empire, Oghul Qamish, raised the tax to one in ten beasts. Later Möngke lowered the tax again to the original decree, exempting people who owned less than a hundred animals. It is interesting that while Chinggis Khan originally imposed that tax on the nomadic population of the empire, it was later imposed on the sedentary population, with a set monetary value of dinars instead of animal ownership.33

Livestock animals had an important position in the nomadic way of life even during the imperial period. Travelers to the Mongol Empire noted the large herds and flocks that they encountered in the Mongolian camps. John of Plano Carpini described the Mongols as “rich in animals”, possessing camels, cattle, sheep, goats, and horses in such multitude, that he and his European companions “did not think that there were so many in the world”.34 One can learn of the importance

30 Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 252; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 189; William of Rubruck, The Mission, p. 95. 31 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, p. 43. 32 E. Dora Earthy, “The Religion of Genghis Khan (A.D. 1162-1227),” Numen 2, 3 (1955): 229; Atwood, Encyclopedia, pp. 221, 466, 589, 33 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 67-76; Peter Jackson, The Mongols in the Islamic Lands: From Conquest to Conversion (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2017), pp. 112-113. 34 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, p. 41.

10 of such animals in the Mongol society from the great interest the Chinggisid elite had in their condition in Europe. William of Rubruck described how wealthy Mongol descendants of Chinggis

Khans inquired about Europe, specifically asking whether the countries of Europe contained many sheep, cattle, and horses. When Friar William and his companions attended the court of Möngke, the Qa’an repeated the same question.35

One notable example of the economic importance of livestock in the early Mongolian society took place following the Baljuna incident, when two Mongolian servants, Kishlik and Bada, received such gifts for their loyal service. The pair served Ong Khan (d. 1203), Chinggis Khan’s ally turned enemy; they decided to inform Chinggis Khan of an impending attack by their master, the eventual assault from which the former escaped to the Baljuna valley.36

After the eventual victory over Ong Khan, Chinggis Khan bestowed upon Kishlik and Bada animals such as cattle and horses. The two also received the status of , becoming exempt from taxes and entitled to parts of the booty taken in military campaigns, and receiving slaves.37

That is an early example of a reward from a Qa’an to his loyal servants. The inclusion of livestock alongside other meaningful gifts demonstrates their importance in the Mongol society.

Livestock remained an important resource in the Ilkhanate as well. Following ’s rise to power in 1295 he reformed the upkeep of his own herds, as an inspection of his livestock led to the discovery that the ’s officials apparently had stolen all of his camels and cattle.38

35 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 141-142, 180. 36 De Rachewiltz, Igor, trans., The Secret History of the Mongols: A Mongolian Epic Chronicle of the Thirteenth Century, vol. 1 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2013), pp. 87-89; Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 136-137; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 36-37. 37 De Rachewiltz, The Secret History, vol. 1, pp. 108-109; Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 137-138; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 37-38. 38 Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh, ed. Muḥammad Rawshan and Muṣṭafā Mūsawī, vol. 2 (Tehran: Nashir al-Burz, 1373/1994), pp. 1517-1518; Rashīd al-Dīn, Rashiduddin Fazlullah's Jami'u't-tawarikh: a History of the Mongols, trans. W. M. Thackston, vol. 3 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Dept. of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, 1998-1999), pp. 750-751; Rashīd al-Dīn, Sbornik Letopisei, trans. A. K. Arends, ed. A. A. Romaskevich, E. E. Bertelʹs and A. Iu. Iakubovski, vol. 3 (Moscow: Nauka, 1946), pp. 302-303.

11

To conclude, it is hard to imagine the nomadic Mongols without the five animals that accompanied them during their migrations and eventually on their conquests throughout Eurasia.

Since most of the Mongol elite adhered to nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle, the value of livestock did not decline even after the establishment of the empire, when the riches of the conquered civilization were available to the Qa’ans and to the members of the Mongol elite. All these aspects make it evident that the possession of livestock was crucial for the survival of the

Mongol tribes, and that those animals had a great effect on the Mongol society, culture, economy, and even rituals and religion.

Livestock Animals as Gifts in the Mongol Empire

In addition to their cultural and economic importance, livestock animals, most notably horses, were also crucial for military campaigns, as these allowed the establishment of the empire in the first place. The Mongols relied on their steeds for warfare and on their herds for the supply of food.

On many occasions we see such animals mentioned alongside weaponry, as part of the crucial resources needed for future campaigns and battles. For example, during the conflict in Central Asia

Ariq Böke issued a yarliq with the order to collect cattle, horses, and weapons in Central Asia during the ensuing Tulouid conflict. 39

Whenever the Mongols were engaged in military campaigns, they were accompanied by their mounts, usually geldings or mares. Each warrior could possess many horses, from six to eighteen, and Mongol warriors usually brought at least five mounts to a battle, which they used to replace exhausted horses.40 The Mongolian horses were smaller than the European or Arab breeds, but

39 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 881-883; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 430-431; Rashīd al-Dīn, Sbornik Letopisei, trans. Iu. P. Verkhovski, ed. I. P. Petrushevski, vol. 2 (Moscow; Leningrad: Akdemia Nauk SSSR, 1960), pp. 163-164. 40 John Masson Smith Jr., “Ayn Jālūt: Mamlūk Success or Mongol Failure?,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 44, 2 (1984): 314.

12 they were very sturdy and strong, and were raised in harsh environments. The horses were also trained to search for food in the steppe to survive in the harsh conditions.41 The Ilkhanid army did not differ from the earlier Mongol armies in that it continued to rely heavily on light cavalry even in later periods, such as the reign of Ghazan (r. 1295-1304).42

More importantly, following the establishment of the Empire Ögödei established the post stations. The stations were set up in intervals, where messengers and travelers could exchange their weary animals for rested mounts, mostly horses. The system allowed the Mongol army to pass information in a quick manner.43

The Mongols awarded livestock animals as gifts already in the early days of the Mongol Empire.

In the early days of Chinggis Khan’s conquest the Mongols interacted with nomadic notables, who shared a common nomadic background. As the Mongols advanced farther from the Eurasian steppe, they encountered new breeds of livestock, as well as new rulers with whom they could interact and from whom to receive animals.

At least on one occasion Chinggis Khan used a gift of livestock to strike an alliance, when he awarded a thousand sheep to Ozar, a Qarluq of Quyas. A cattle thief turned Khan, Ozar gathered around himself a gang that eventually helped him take control of several cities, such as Almaliq

(in today's north ) and Pulad (in ). Ozar’s increasing power eventually brought him into contact with Chinggis Khan, to whom he submitted; he even wed a daughter of

Khan, the eldest son of Chinggis Khan. Chinggis Khan’s gift was made not only to show his grace to Ozar, but also to make him refrain from his crimes and raids. Hence such a gift probably served

41 Timothy May, The Mongol Art of War: Chinggis Khan and the Mongol Military System (Yardley, Penn.: Westholme, 2007), pp. 54-57; Denis Sinor, “The Inner Asian Warriors,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 101, 2 (1981): 137-38. 42 Reuven Amitai, “Whither the Ilkhanid Army? Ghazan’s First Campaign into Syria (1299-1300),” in Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800), ed. Nicola DiCosmo (Leiden: Brill, 2002), pp. 222-23. 43 May, The Mongol Art of War, p. 65; Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, pp. 66-67.

13 as economic compensation for the losses Ozar would suffer if he stopped raiding and stealing animals.44

While servants and allies received animals, defeated and subjugated enemies were a source of livestock, as they often provided gifts to the Mongols. Already during the early conquests of

Chinggis Khan the Qa’an levied a large number of camels, probably Bactrian, after subjugating the Tangut people (of today's north-western ).45

In summary, during the early reign of Chinggis Khan and the Mongol conquests livestock animals such as sheep, horses, and camels were included among the gifts that the Qa’an could award or receive. Such gifts were important not only because of the act of exchange itself, but also due to their practical and economic aspects, of which the nomadic Mongols were well aware.

As the conquests advanced, the Mongols encountered more and more sedentary populations.

Even though the Mongols were ready to attack cities and destroy them if necessary, they dispatched messengers offering the city dwellers to surrender. The rulers of the cities and the forts threatened by the Mongols often provided them with gifts and support. For example, in the town of Zarnūq in Central Asia the people chose to surrender and provided Chinggis Khan with presents (nuzlhā), while the people of Nūr (Nurata in today’s ) offered food and presents (targhū wa nuzl).

The two cities sent delegations to the Great Khan, and eventually some of their men joined the

Mongol army.46

The Mongols demanded complete surrender and military support from the sedentary populations they encountered.47 When Chinggis Khan arrived at the city of , the presents were not sufficient to spare the city from destruction. The city inhabitants chose to surrender and presented

44Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 164-165; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 75-76. 45 De Rachewiltz, The Secret History, vol. 1, pp. 177-178. 46Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 183-186; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 99-102. 47 Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 246.

14 the Great Khan with food and presents (targhū wa pīshkish). However, the Mongols could not trust the people of Balkh not to join forces with the Khwārazm Shāh, and so to prevent a future rebellion they executed the city dwellers.48

Additional Mongol commanders received gifts from cities that surrendered during the conquest of Central Asia, and on several occasions livestock animals were included among these presents.

During his pursuit of Sultan Muḥammad Khwārazm Shāh the Mongol commander Jeme arrived to (in western ). The ruler of the city, ʿAlā' al-Dawla, submitted to Jeme and presented to him mounts (markūb), in addition to food, prisoners, and drink.49 During the conquest of Khurasan reached the city of Marv. The ruler of the city, Mujīr al-Mulk, chose to surrender and presented Tolui with a variety of the city’s horses, camels, and mules (khuyūl wa jimāl wa bighāl). However, this gift did not prevent the tragic fate of the city inhabitants, as eventually the

Mongols killed the majority of them.50

To conclude, on several occasions during the early invasion of the Islamic world the Mongols received gifts from the subjugated local populations. Several cities surrendered to the Mongols and so were spared from annihilation; the locals were able to provide the invaders with resources such as food and livestock, which were probably used during future campaigns. However, on other occasions the Mongols annihilated cities even after receiving gifts, including livestock, from people who chose to surrender, i.e. the gifts presented to the Mongols were not sufficient to prevent annihilation.

Furthermore, Mongol expansion provided the Mongols with opportunities to encounter new breeds of familiar animals, such as horses. Juwaynī documented a notable example: after Jochi

48Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 204-205; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 130-131. 49Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 217-219; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 145-147. 50Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 227-229; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 159-162.

15 had driven the game (mostly wild oxen) from the plain of Qipchaq and returned to his father and brothers, he presented Chinggis Khan with a gift of twenty thousand grey horses.51 The coat of the horses was described as khing, possibly hinting at the same horses that existed in the Persian region already during the days of the Sāmānid dynasty (r. 819-999).52 This gift was mentioned later in additional chronicles: Waṣṣāf (fl. 1329) mentioned a gift of twenty thousand white horses,53 while

Shabānkārahī (b. 1297), described a gift of twenty thousand grey horses.54

Animals of white color were desired throughout Asia, by the Mongols as well as by the Iranians, the Turks, and the Kitans. Such animals were believed to bring good fortune, and were used in ceremonies and sacrifices.55 The color white was identified with good fortune and as such was an integral part of the Mongol imperial ideology, which explains the demand for white animals.56

In 1237, following the assault on , ’s men took one tenth of the city resources as tribute, including one tenth of the horses according to their color, capturing white, black, brown, and spotted horses.57 This example demonstrates how the Mongols did not rely only on their ponies, but would capture foreign breeds of horses as well.

Livestock Animals as Gifts in the Ilkhanid Dynasty

In a similar manner the conquests of Hülegü and of his descendants also presented opportunities to acquire new horse breeds. In 1257, when Hülegü was advancing through the Middle East, he dispatched messengers to the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mustʿaṣim (r. 1242-58), demanding his surrender

51Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 215; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 139-140. 52 Rūdakī, “Būy-i jūy-i Mulian āyad hamī,” retrieved on 08 September 2018 https://ganjoor.net/roodaki/baghimande/sh121/ 53 ʿAbd al-Muḥammad Āyati, Taḥrir-i tarīkh-i Waṣṣāf (Tehran: Pazhūhishgāh-i ʿUlūm-i Insānī wa Muṭaliʿāt-i Farhangī, 1995), p. 303. 54 Muḥammad bin ʿAlī bin Muḥammad Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, ed. Mīr Hāshim Muhaddith (Tehran: Muʾasisih Intishārāt-i Amir Kabir, 1376/1997), p. 240. 55 Allsen The Royal Hunt, p. 145. 56 Ibid, p. 246. 57 M. N. Tikhomirov, ed., Polnoe Sobranie Russkikh Letopisei, vol. 26 (Moscow, Leningrad: Izdatelʹstvo Akedemii Nauk SSSR 1959), p. 71.

16 and the provision of military support against the Ismaʿīlīs. However, the Caliph did not send an army, and the enraged Hülegü was advancing towards .58 To prepare for the Mongols’ arrival, al-Mustʿaṣim consulted his regarding an action that would repeal the Mongol threat.

The vizier proposed to send the Mongols a variety of gifts and rarities, including one thousand choice camels (shutur guzīdah) and one thousand Arabian horses (sar-i asb tāzī), as well as armors.

While initially the Caliph approved of the gifts, Mujāhid al-Dīn Aybak, another official who was not on good terms with the Vizier, explained that such a delegation would only improve the

Vizier’s relations with Hülegü, but will not prevent the Mongol threat; hence the Caliph did not approve of the delegation.59

Following the capture of Bagdad Hülegü plundered additional gifts from the Caliph’s treasury, such as rubies, dinars, precious stones, jewels, pearls, and other rarities. Hülegü gave these items as gifts to his and other people in his attendance.60 This event is similar to earlier assault on the fortress of Alamut, where the ruler, Rukn al-Dīn Khūrshāh (r. 1255-57), negotiated a surrender and proposed to send gifts to Hülegü. However, due to opposition from his men he eventually was unable to send a delegation. When the fortress was captured, Rukn al-Dīn presented Hülegü with its treasures.61 These two examples shed additional light on the limited effect of gifts, since valuable items were eventually captured if not delivered willingly.

In 1313 Öljeitü (r. 1304-16) besieged the castle of Raḥba (near the town of Mayadin in today’s

Syria). When the inhabitants of the castle decided to surrender, Qaḍī Najm al-Dīn Sulkh presented

58 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 997-1000; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 488-490; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 34-36. 59 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1000-1001; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 489-490; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 36. 60 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1017-1018; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 498; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 44. 61 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 990; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 485; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 30-31.

17 gifts (tansūq wa pīshkishhā) to the Ilkhan, including horses (asbān-i ṭūpchāq) and several species of hunting animals (which will be addressed separately in the chapter on hunting animals).62 The word ṭūpchāq was borrowed from Turkish and Uighur languages, meaning “western horse”, with these horses having been taller than the Mongols' regular ponies.63

The Mongols encountered several west Asian horse breeds, such as the Arabian horses (asbān-i tāzī). The exchange of such horses might imply that the Mongols in general and the Ilkhans in particular eventually came to appreciate the local Arabian horses even more than their own Central

Asian ponies.64

For example, during a confrontation in 1269-70 between the Ilkhanate and the Chaghadaid Khan

Baraq (r. 1260-66), Baraq crossed the Amū Daryā (Oxus) river, where he was expected by the

Ilkhanid forces led by Hülegü’s son Tübshin and the high-ranking official, Aqā. One of the commanders in the Ilkhanid forces, Sächäktü, decided to defect to Baraq’s side, joining

Qipchaq, a Chinggisid prince from the line of Ӧgödei. Following the defection Sächäktü gave

Qipchaq a gift of choice horses (performing a takshīmīshī). It is also possible that such a gift improved Sächäktü’s status within the camp he had just joined, and more importantly increased

Baraq’s fighting capabilities.65

Qipchaq ordered Sächäktü to provide Baraq with horses, as Qipchaq currently was in Baraq’s service. Another member of Baraq’s army, Jalāyirtāi, accused Qipchaq of taking the best horses for himself, while giving Baraq horses of lesser quality. Thus not only was Qipchaq supposed to provide his immediate superior with part of the gift that he received, he was also supposed to

62 Abū al-Qasīm Qāshānī, Tārīkh-i Uljāytū: tārikh-i pādishāh saʿīd ghiyāth al-dunyā wa al-dīn Uljāytū Muḥammad sulṭān ṭayab allah marqadih, ed. M. Hambly (Tehran: B.T.N.K, 1969), p. 143. 63 Nicholas Poppe, “On Some Military Terms in the Yüan-ch'ao Pi-Shih,” Monumenta Serica 26 (1967): 515. 64Michal Biran, “The Battle of (1270) – a Case of inter-Mongol Warfare,” in Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800), ed. Nicola DiCosmo (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 207-8. 65 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 1072; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 523; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 73.

18 provide him with horses of the best quality. The argument between the two eventually led Qipcaq to depart from Baraq’s army and to return to the service of Qaidu, taking with him his followers.66

That example demonstrates a protocol that possibly was in use during the Ilkhanid era. The gift of horses was of military importance, as additional horses provided advantage on the battlefield.67

The Chaghadaid Khans also acquired “western horses” and used them in their diplomatic missions as well, for example sending them to the Yuan Qa’ans.68

Alternatively the rulers gave horses to their military commanders, either to those who had distinguished themselves or were in dire need of logistic support. In 1284, following the battle during the war between Aḥmad Tegüder and Arghun, the latter spotted an Arab mare belonging to a commander of the enemy soldiers, named Alinaq. The horse accompanied Alinaq in battles, and he used it as a remount when his own horse became tired. Arghun ordered to surround the animal and capture it, and eventually awarded it to his commander, Nawrūz. Arghun then sent a messenger to Alinaq, informing him that his horse was captured “like a wild ass”, while Alinaq himself was compared to a mountain sheep who fled before the cry of an attacking lion.69 This comparison was without doubt an insult to the mount to which Alinaq was attached, and to Alinaq himself.

Rulers could also provide horses for armies when it was required. When Ghazan was still a prince he once gave horses, fodder, and robes to Nawrūz and his soldiers, after the Chaghadaid prince

Yasawur defeated Nawrūz and his men remained on foot.70

66 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1072-1073; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 523-525; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 73-75. 67 Smith Jr., “Ayn Jālūt,” 314. 68 Biran, “Diplomacy and Chancellery,” 382. 69 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1136-1137; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 553-554; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 105. 70 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 178.

19

Livestock Animas as Gifts Received by the Ilkhans

It appears that the Ilkhanid dynasty received gifts, including livestock, from a variety of sources, and that on several occasions they received horses from their subordinates. In 1289, when Prince

Ghazan arrived at the province of Juwayn (in Khurasan), the local ruler (mihtar) Najīb al-Dīn

Farash arrived at Ghazan’s service and presented him with “incredible horses” (basbān bighāyat nīkū) as a gift (performing a takshīmīshī).71 When Ghazan later arrived at Jājirm, Niẓām al-Dīn

Yaḥya arrived from the province of Bayhaq and presented the Ilkhan with horses (asbān-i qubchāq), golden and silver utensils, tents and pavilions, , vessels, mules, and camels

(astarān wa shuturān).72

Additional gifts of livestock from subordinate commanders were recorded during the reign of

Öljeitü. In 1306 Öljeitü possibly received Arabian horses (tāzī sīr bād pāyān) from messengers who had arrived from Rūm.73 In 1314-15, when The Chaghadaid prince Yasawur defected to the

Ilkhanate, he presented gifts (pīshkish wa hadāyā) to prince Abū Saʿīd and sent messengers to

Öljeitü with additional gifts, including precious stones, pearls (lālī), and Turkish slaves.74 In response Öljeitü sent Yasawur a horse (asb), a royal robe, a caftan, a hat, a belt, military equipment, a tent and a tent maker, a musician, and a drum.75 In addition to Öljeitü, prince Abū Saʿīd responded to Yasawur in the same year and provided him with Arabian horses (asbān-i tāzī) with saddles, a hat, a belt, gold, and additional presents and rarities (tukhaf wa gharāyib).76

71 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 1221; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 596-597; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 145. 72 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1222; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 597; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 146. 73 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, pp. 52-53. It is not clear from the text whether the gift included Arabian horses or Arabian hunting hounds. 74 Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al-tavārīkh-i rashīdī, ed. by Khānbābā Bayānī, (Tehran: Anjiman-i Athār-i Mīllī, 1350/1970), pp. 112, 115. 75 Ibid, p. 115. 76 Ibid, p. 112.

20

Yasawur was associated with another example of a livestock gift. When Amir Yasawul desired to marry a Yasawurid princess, he prepared Arabian horses (asbān-i tāzī), two thousand sheep

(gūsfand), gold and gemstones, bejeweled hats, golden pavilions and vessels, Turkish slaves, as well as food and drink.77 However, the sheep were likely prepared for the wedding feast, and so were not to be delivered to Yasawur directly, as sheep, horses, and other animals continued to be served in public feasts in the Ilkhanate.78

Additionally the Ilkhans maintained diplomatic relations with contemporary dynasties. The

Ilkhans established diplomatic relations with the Delhi already during the reign of Hülegü

(r. 1256-65), and that of his son and successor Abaqa (r. 1265-82).79 Öljeitü maintained friendly relations with the Delhi Sultanate, and exchanged diplomatic delegations with the Delhi Sultan,

ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn al-Khalijī (1296-1316). However, there was no exchange of animals between the two polities during that period.80 The Delhi Sultan executed the envoys in one of Öljeitü’s delegations: they were trampled under the feet of elephants, after they demanded that Delhi Sultan surrender and proposed a marriage between his daughter and the Ilkhan.81

One important delegation from the Delhi Sultanate arrived at the Ilkhanate in 1328, during the reign of the Ilkhan Abū Saʿīd (r. 1316-35). The Sultan of Delhi, Muḥammad bin Tughluq (r. 1325-

51), desired to establish a military alliance with Abū Saʿīd against a common enemy, the

Chaghadaid Khanate. In a diplomatic mission that brought a variety of hunting and exotic animals,

77 Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al-tavārīkh-i rashīdī, p. 124. 78 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 245. 79 Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 129-32. 80 Roohi Abida Ahmed, “Foreign Relations of Delhi Sultanate,” PhD. Dissertation, Aligarh Muslim University, 1991: 116-19. 81 Ibid, pp. 117-118; Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 225.

21 the Sultan also included bakhri horses.82 The inclusion of such horses is interesting, because they were usually delivered from the Persian Gulf to .83

It is possible that these horses originally arrived to India from outside the Ilkhanid domains, for example from Aden in the Arabian Peninsula, where trade with India was established already during the .84 Even if the horses were originally from the Persian Gulf, they were probably included in the gift delegation in order to impress Abū Saʿīd. Ibn Baṭṭuṭah mentioned another delegation, from the Delhi Sultan to the Yuan Qa’an, that included “one hundred thoroughbred horses” (Māyat fars min al-jiyād) chosen to surpass the gifts that were sent previously from China.85

It is worth mentioning that some of the best horse breeds in Eurasia were located in the Ilkhanid domains. For example, horses bred in the Persian regions of Qazvin, Kurdistan, Lor, Shelstan,

Isfahan, Shiraz, Shabānkārah, and Kohistan were highly sought by contemporary polities, and were usually shipped from Kīsh and Hormuz.86 The Ilkhans employed ortaq merchants (merchants who operated with Ilkhanid capital; sometimes they also served as diplomatic envoys), who managed the bustling horse trade.87

82 Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, p. 288. 83 Ralph Kauz, “Horse Exports from the Persian Gulf until the Arrival of the Portuguese,” in Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, ed. Bert G. Fragner and Velizar Sadovski (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009), pp. 130-31. 84 Ranabir Chakravarti, “Equestrian Demand and Dealers: The Early Indian Scenario (up to c. 1300),” in Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, ed. Bert G. Fragner and Velizar Sadovski (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009), pp. 152-153 85 Ibn Baṭṭuṭah, Riḥlat Ibn Baṭṭuṭah: tuḥfat al-nuẓār fī gharāiʾb al-amṣār va ʿajāiʾb al-asfār, ed. by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Munʿan al-ʿAryān and Muṣṭafā al-Qaṣṣāṣ (Beirut: Dār Akhyāʾ al-ʿUlūm, 1417/1996), p. 542 ; Ibn Baṭṭuṭah, The travels of Ibn Battutah, A.D. 1325-1354, trans. H. A. R. Gibb and C. F. Beckingham, ed. C. Defremery and B. E. Sanguinetti, vol. 4 (Cambridge : Published for the Hakluyt Society at the University Press, 1958-2000), p. 773. 86 , Marco Polo: The Description of the World, trans. A. C. Moule and Paul Pelliot, vol. 1 (London: Routladge and sons, 1938), pp. 116-117. 87 Atwood, Encyclopedia, pp. 429, 253; Kauz, “Horse Exports,” 130-31.

22

Ortaqs were involved in the extensive horse trade with India, where there was a constant demand for good-quality horses due to the lack of proper mounts of local stock.88 For example, the Delhi

Sultanate, which evaded a Mongol conquest similar to Iran or China, but continued to face Mongol threat from the Chaghadaid Ulus, constantly needed horses to supply its own armies.89 The horses of the Persian Gulf were known as bakhri, for their seaborne shipping to India. These horses were an expensive commodity, earning great revenue for the Persian traders.90

The extensive horse trade between Persia and India overshadowed the diplomatic exchange between the Ilkhanate and the Delhi Sultanate. While the exchange between the rulers of the two polities was limited, taking place mostly during the reign of Öljeitüi and Abū Saʿīd, with only modest exchange of animals,91 the trade between the two polities flourished, as the export of horses to India was conducted by merchants.92 Although the Delhi Sultan possessed many riches, it is possible that livestock was not included among his possible gifts of choice.93

Another polity with whom the Ilkhans exchanged livestock animals was the Mamluk Sultanate, with the rulers of the two polities exchanging gifts despite the mutual hostility since the early days of the Ilkhanate. The Ilkhan Abaqa presented Baybars (r. 1260-77) unspecified presents (hadāyā) as a symbol of the Mamluk Sultan’s subordinate status, while on a later occasion Baybars sent a gift of weapons that were interpreted negatively in the Ilkhanate.94

88 Bahrani Pour, “The Trade in Horses between Khorasan and India in the 13th-17th Centuries,” The 11 (2013): 130-34. 89 Andre Wink, Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World, vol. 2 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997), pp. 202-212; Simon Digby, War-Horse and Elephant in the Delhi Sultanate: a Study in Military Supply (Oxford: Orient Monograph, 1971), pp. 23-33. 90 Digby, War-Horse and Elephant, p. 29; Kauz, “Horse Exports,” 132-33. 91 Abida Ahmed, “Foreign Relations of Delhi Sultanate,” 118-21, 142-50. 92 Kauz, “Horse Exports,” 130-31. 93 Abida Ahmed, “Foreign Relations of Delhi Sultanate,” 117-18. 94 Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology, pp. 32-36.

23

Gifts were exchanged only during the reign of the Ilkhan Abū Saʿīd, who established peace with the Mamluks (1323).95 The rulers of the Ilkhanate and the Mamluk Sultanate began the exchange of gifts in 1320, when an early delegation from Egypt to the Ilkhan Abū Saʿīd brought many gifts, among them fifty camels (jamal) and twenty horses from Sultan al-Naṣir Muḥammad’s personal stables (al-khayl min marākīb al-sulṭān).96

It is worth mentioning that while the Mamluks and the Ilkhans exchanged diplomatic delegations before the reign of Abū Saʿīd, the majority of them did not carry animals, or at least were not recorded as such. Persian sources are silent about Abū Saʿīd’s diplomatic efforts towards the

Mamluk Sultanate, but Arabic sources mention many delegations carrying specific gifts, and even names of some of the delegations’ leaders.97 In total 44 embassies were exchanged during the reign of Abū Saʿīd between the Ilkhanate and the Mamluk Sultanate, more than all the delegations between the Ilkhanate and the Mamluk Sultanate during the reigns of previous Ilkhans. Thus the peace between the two polities increased significantly the Ilkhanate’s opportunities’ for exchange and the number of diplomatic delegations.

In addition to the rulers of the various dynasties, local rulers were also active in the exchange of livestock animals. For example, Muhannā b. ʿĪsa, a local ruler of territories in Syria and , who held the title of Amīr al-ʿArab (“commander of the Bedouins”), was involved in diplomatic- economic ties with both the Mamluk Sultanate and the Ilkhanate. In 1321, when attempting a rebellion against the Mamluk Sultanate, Muhannā sent animals as gifts to Abū Saʿīd, among them seven hundred camels (baʿīr) and seventy horses (faras).98

95 Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology, p. 99. 96 Mufaḍḍal Ibn Abī al-Faḍā'il, Ägypten und Syrien zwischen 1317 und 1341 in der Chronik des Mufaḍḍal b. Abī l- Faḍā'il (Freiburg im Breisgau: K. Schwarz, 1973), p. 15; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 66-67. 97 K. V. Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane in den Jahren 690-741 der Hiǵra nach arabischen Handschriften (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1919), pp. 177-190. 98 al–Malik al-Muʾayyad ʿImād al-Dīn Ismāʿil IbnʿAlī Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al-mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al-bashar, vol. 4

24

The military value of livestock animals probably also affected their distribution, and so it seems logical that horses and camels were exchanged between the Ilkhans and mostly the Mamluks, after the peace agreement between the two polities (1323). It is worth mentioning that the early mission from the Mamluk Sultanate to the included weaponry.99 In a similar manner the

Delhi Sultan sent to the Ilkhan bakhri horses, possibly the finest in his stables. The gifts were brought by a delegation that attempted to establish a military alliance between the two dynasties, and the horses were possibly sent to encourage the Ilkhan’s trust in the Delhi Sultan and in his proposal. The numerous embassies between the Ilkhanate and the Yuan dynasties were possible due to peace that was established in Central Asia during Abū Saʿīd’s reign.

Livestock Animas as Gifts Sent by the Ilkhans

The Ilkhanid dynasty sent livestock animals as gifts to several contemporary polities such as the

Yuan dynasty, the chief ally of the Ilkhanate; the two dynasties maintained positive diplomatic relations since their establishment, with the Yuan Qa’an serving as the titular ruler of the Ilkhan.100

Missions that included the exchange of livestock on a regular basis between the two polities were initiated during the reign of Abū Sa'id's (r. 1316-1335).

Abū Sa'id’s many delegations arrived safely in China, due to the peaceful relationships between the Mongols in Central Asia. Following the death of the Chaghadaid Khan Esen Boqa (r. 1309-

18), in 1322-23 the new Chaghadaid Khan, (r. 1320-25) established peace with both the

(Egypt: al-Maṭba’ah al-Ḥusainiyah, 1960), p. 90; Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, p. 70. 99 Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar wa jāmiʿ al-ghurar, ed. H. R. Romer, vol. 9 (Cairo: al-Maʿhad al-Ālmānī Lil-Athār, Qism al-Dirāsāt al-Islāmiya, 1960), pp. 279-281; Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad bin ʿAbd al-Wahāb al- Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, ed. Fahīm Muḥammad ʿAlawī Shaltūt, vol. 32 (Cairo: Vizārat al- Thaqāfa val-Irshād al-qūmī. Al-Muʾasasa al-Miṣriya al-ʿAma Lil-Tālīf Val-Tarjama Val-Ṭibāʿa Val-Nashr, 1998), pp. 254-255, 323-326; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 64-65. 100 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, pp. 17-40.

25

Ilkhanate and the Yuan dynasty.101 In total during his reign, Abū Sa'id sent 7 gift-bearing embassies to the Yuan dynasty, more than the previous Ilkhans.

Several missions arrived at Yuan China, bringing with them horses and camels. For example, during 1326 four missions from Abū Saʿīd brought the Yuan Qa’an “western horses” (in February),

“camels and horses” (in August), “precious stones and single humped camels” (in November), and finally “horses” (in December). In the following year an additional mission brought “tigers, western horses, daggers, pearls, and other valuables”. In return the delegation received “gold and cash reckoned at 10,000”, which were probably used for the purchase of local items.102

Although the two polities exchanged missions before the reign of Abū Saʿīd and maintained an extensive exchange of knowledge,103 no earlier examples of diplomatic exchange of livestock animals between the two polities have been found. Perhaps in a manner similar to the Indian example, merchants or travelers between the two regions managed that exchange.104 Alternatively, it is possible that the establishment of peace allowed changing the use of horses as a crucial military resource to diplomatic use instead. Hence it is difficult to understand the impact of Abū Saʿīd’s delegations in comparison to earlier periods.

The Mamluk Sultanate received multiple delegations from the Ilkhanate, which like the

Ilkhanid embassies to China presented gifts of several species of both camels and horses. In 1324

Abū Saʿīd sent a delegation to al-Naṣir Muḥammad, which included eleven caparisoned Bactrian camels (bukhtiyyi), loaded with chests that were filled with 700 pieces of fabric adorned with the

101 Liu Yingsheng, “War and Peace between the Yuan Dynasty and the Chaghadaid Khanate (1312-1323),” in Mongols, Turks and Others: and the Sedentary World, ed. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2005), pp. 351-353. 102 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 44. 103 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1237-1238; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 606; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 154; Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, pp. 49, 205, 208; Yasuhiro Yokkaichi “Horses in the East-West Trade between China and Iran under Mongol Rule” in Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, ed. Bert G. Fragner and Velizar Sadovski (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009), p. 90. 104 Yokkaichi, “Horses”, 90.

26

Sultan’s name, as well as horses (ikdish, possibly a mixed-breed or a draft horse) decorated with bejeweled trappings. In 1331 Abū Saʿīd once again sent to al-Naṣir Muḥammad Bactrian camels

(bukhtiyyi, possibly sixteen in total) and ten horses (khuyūl). In 1332 an additional delegation to al-Naṣir Muḥammad brought six Mongolian horses (akādīsh, possibly a mixed-breed horse or a draft horse) and possibly two pairs (qitars) of camels (bukhtiyyi).105

It appears that the Ilkhans had access to several species of horses and camels they could send to their allied polities, and that was how the Yuan Qa’an and the Mamluk Sultan received both western and Mongolian horses, as well as Arabian and Bactrian camels. Interestingly, the Ilkhans did not separate the animals: they did not send the eastern species to the west and the western ones to the east, but rather combined them at the same time.

Livestock Animals as Gifts from Merchants in the Ilkhanate

Although the trade in animals is not the focus of this thesis, it is worth to mention that in the

Ilkhanate merchants were a potential source of the Ilkhans’ livestock animals. For example, in

1294 Malik al-Islām Jamāl al-Dīn Ibrāhīm b. Muḥammad al-Ṭībī, (d. 1330-1331), a well-known merchant and tax farmer, gave the Ilkhan Ghazan a gift of a thousand geldings (akhta) that he brought from his domain in Kīsh and Hurmuz in the Persian Gulf. He also gave Ghazan pearls, cloth of gold, silk, jewels, gold and silver, vessels, and other rarities from China and India.106 In a similar manner, in 1312 the vizier Tāj al-Dīn ʿAlīshāh sent gifts to the Ilkhan Öljeitü, which included nine horses (asb) with golden saddles and one thousand geldings (akhta), in addition to

105 Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, pp. 351, 361, 372; Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al-mukhtaṣar p. 93; Behrens- Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 68-69; Stefano Carboni, The’'Wonders of Creation’: A Study of Ilkhanid ‘London Qazwini’ (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015), p. 27. 106 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 201; A. K. S. Lambton, “Mongol Fiscal Administration in Persia (Part II),” Studia Islamica 65 (1986): 110.

27 bejeweled and golden pavilions and tents, robes embroidered with gold, and one hundred thousand dinars.107

It is possible that horses and other livestock animals were also delivered to China by means of ortaqs or envoys. In 1297 Ghazan dispatched Fakr al-Dīn Aḥmad, the lord of Kīsh, to Temür Qa’an

(r. 1294-1307). Fakr al-Dīn possibly carried with him some animals, but it is unclear whether livestock animals were also delivered.108 The horse trade conducted by Ilkhanid officials might have been the main means of sending animals to the eastern regions. As the merchant-officials represented to some extent the Ilkhanid polity, messengers who carried goods and presents, combining trade and diplomatic missions, could have been sent by the Ilkhans – while merchants from China arrived in Iran and took local animals back to China upon their return. Temür Qa’an sent the envoy Yang Shu, a member of a prominent merchant family, to the Ilkhan Ghazan. When the envoy returned to China he brought with him “white horses” from Hormuz.109 Possibly, additional Chinese merchants brought western breeds of horses back with them.

Conclusions

In conclusion, it appears that the Ilkhans received gifts from a variety of sources that included subjugated enemies, servants, and allies. At the same time the Ilkhans granted gifts to their distinguished servants and allied rulers. Since Hülegü’s invasion of the Middle East the Ilkhans received many gifts, of which animals, particularly livestock, were only one category. A major part of these gifts originated in the Ilkhanate realm rather than having arrived from abroad, such as when the Ilkhan’s subordinates presented horses to their rulers.

107 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 280. 108 Ibid, pp. 261-262; Yokkaichi “Horses,” 90. 109 Yokkaichi, “Horses”, 90.

28

One difference between the Ilkhanid period and the earlier Mongol practices was the absence of giving sheep, goats, and cattle as royal gifts. The two livestock animals that were the most common in diplomatic gifts were horses and camels. The exchanged horses included Mongol ponies, western horses of Arabian and other stocks, mares, and geldings. Horses were the most-often exchanged animals in Ilkhanid diplomacy, and were included as gifts in 20 out of 22 delegations carrying livestock animals. While a gift could include a single horse, especially if the animal belonged to a unique species, horses were usually awarded in great numbers, as an attempt to impress the ruler, as an act of submission, and as military support.

In addition to horses, both single and double-humped camels of western and eastern origins were also a popular gift, mentioned in 8 out of 24 delegations. Other livestock animals were rarely included as gifts (mules for example). Embassies usually combined horses and camels, as the two species were delivered together by 7 out of 8 embassies carrying camels (which were possibly included in additional embassies as pack animals). Livestock animals, most importantly horses, were regarded as a military resource, and were included in diplomatic embassies alongside military equipment. The increased exchange during the reign of Abū Saʿīd may be explained by the peace that was established both in the west with the Mamluk Sultanate and in Central Asia.

The most significant achievement of the Ilkhanid livestock exchange was the introduction of eastern species to the west and vice versa. The Ilkhans sent western and eastern breeds of horses and camels to their allies, for example western horses to Yuan China and Bactrian camels to the

Mamluīs of Egypt. In such a manner the Ilkhanid dynasty promoted the exchange and the introduction of new species across the continent: they were sending species that were not local and somewhat exotic to their allies, with rare versions of familiar livestock animals increasing the value of the gifts.

29

Chapter 2: Hunting Animals

This chapter examines the exchange of hunting animals, or “hunting partners”, as Allsen refers to the variety of animals that were captured, bred, and trained to assist human hunters in their pursuit of wild animals.110 Firstly this chapter reviews the importance of hunting in Mongol society, and the use of hunting partners in all Mongol polities. Secondly the chapter focuses on the hunting partners that were specifically in the possession of the Ilkhanid dynasty, and their incorporation in

Ilkhanid diplomacy. The Ilkhans apparently had at their disposal mostly raptors and felines, and exchanged both of those with other Mongol and non-Mongol polities in Asia, in Europe, and in

Africa.

Hunting in Mongol Society

Hunting was an important practice in the Mongol culture since before the rise of Chinggis Khan, during his and his successors’ reigns, and even following the disintegration of the unified Empire.

While in the pre-Imperial period hunting was an important means of sustaining the Mongol population, and providing it with food and much needed resources (e.g., furs),111 during the conquests the chase maintained the Mongols’ military capabilities, as there were many similarities between the their hunting and warfare practices.112

With the establishment of the empire the chase also became a favorite leisure activity of the

Mongol ruling elite, and remained a favorite practice of the Mongol rulers and princes throughout the continent, who invested resources to ensure the quality of the experience. That was done mainly through the construction of hunting parks,113 with Ögödei Qa'an being the first to construct such a park. He ordered the creation of a jihik (a wall of wood and clay with gates set in it, with the length

110 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, pp. 52-82. 111 De Rachewiltz, The Secret History, vol. 1, pp. 2, 39-40, 112-113, 196. 112 Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 130; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 27. 113 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, pp. 43-44.

30 of two days’ journey) in his winter quarters. The Khan’s soldiers would form a circle and drive the game towards the wall, and he and his retinue would then approach the animals and hunt them.114

Ögödei’s brother Chaghadai created another park with the same design,115 while later parks had a different design that did not necessarily incorporate the Mongols’ circle-hunting technique.116

The Mongols' Hunting Partners

During hunts the Mongols came into close contact with different animals, not only the ones they chased, but also those that assisted them. In hunting as in warfare they relied on steeds for transportation, usually on horses.117 In addition to steeds, the Mongols possessed various hunting partners assisting them in their hunts, namely raptors such as falcons-gyrfalcons and many other species, felines such as cheetahs and lions, and hunting hounds.118

The acquisition, training, and grooming of such animals required a special kind of knowledge and training. The hunting partners, both raptors and felines, were under the care of specially appointed caretakers, cheetah keepers (barschiān) and falconers (qūshchiān), who were recruited from the khans’ personal guard, the keshig.119 The Mongols valued experienced animal keepers, and transferred them (and their animals) throughout the continent during their conquests.120

114 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, p. 672; Rashīd al-Dīn, The Successors of Genghis Khan, trans. John A. Boyle (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), pp. 64-65; Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, pp. 41-42; Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 43; Chloé Capel, “La Question des Parcs de Chasse à l’époque Abbasside: le Cas Emblématique de Sâmarrâ’,” Remmm, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 130 (2012): 172, note 21. 115Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 44. 116 Ibid. 117 Timothy May, “The Training of an Inner Asian Nomad Army in the Pre-Modern Period,” The Journal of Military History 70, 3 (2006): 630. 118 Polo, The Description of the World, pp. 177-178; Thomas T. Allsen, “The Circulation of Hunting Leopards in Eurasia, Seventh-Seventeenth Century,” in Contact and Exchange in the Ancient World , ed. Victor H. Mair (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press; London, Eurospan distributor, 2005), 125-26. 119 Charles Melville, “The Keshig in Iran: The Survival of the Royal Mongol Household,” in Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan, ed. by Linda Komaroff (Leiden: Brill, 2006), p. 150; Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, pp. 769-770; Rashīd al-Dīn/Boyle, p. 151; Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, p. 91. 120 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 47; Allsen. The Royal Hunt, p. 261.

31

The Mongols practiced falconry, and the visitors to the Mongol Empire described the quality and quantity of the falcons in the Mongol realm.121 Throughout Mongol Eurasia hunting raptors were exchanged and gifted on various occasions. A ruler could award an animal to his subordinates upon their rise to a certain rank or office. For example, the Qipchaq official El Temür (d. 1333),122 upon receiving the title of tarkhan (a person exempt from taxation), received one white gyrfalcon, three blue falcons, one white hawk, and twenty panthers, all presumably from the Yuan .

In addition a member of a royal dynasty could gift his relatives,123 for example on their birthdays.124

Another important hunting partner was the cheetah. Known as yūz in Persian and fahd in Arabic, the species used in Asia was most probably the Asiatic Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus venaticus).125

While today this species is concentrated mostly in Iran, Middle Eastern hunters were familiar with several Syrian and Egyptian breeds. Ibn Mankalī cited Al-Asadī (12th century), who described the variety of cheetah breeds throughout the Levant, such as the samāwah (located in

Iraq and Syria), the coastal cheetahs that were located in ʿAsqalān (Ascalon), the misriyat of Egypt, the hijazi of the Arabian Peninsula, the tharthara of Sanjar region, and cheetahs from the Sha'm region (Greater Syria).126

121 De Rachewiltz, The Secret History, vol. 1, p. 111; Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, pp. 671-672; Rashīd al- Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 329; Rashīd al-Dīn/Boyle, p. 63; Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, p. 41; Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, pp. 171, 185, 229-230; William of Rubruck, The Mission, pp. 85, 111, 179, 259; Joseph Kler, “Hunting Customs of the Ordos Mongols,” Primitive Men 14, 3 (1941): 38. 122 Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 166. 123 Victor Spinei, “Hunting in the Mongol Society during the Great Expansion Age in Eurasia,” Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 21 (2014-2015): 236. 124 Āyati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 258. 125 H. Jowkar, L. Hunter, H. Ziaie, L. Marker, C. Breitenmoser-Wursten and S. Durant, “Acinonyx jubatus ssp. venaticus.” The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008, retrieved on 08 September 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T220A13035342.en; 126 Ibn Manklī, Kitāb uns al-malā bi-waḥsh al-falā )Beirut: Muʾasasat al-Risālah, 1994), pp. 128-137; Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, pp. 279-280. The different breeds of cheetahs varied among themselves according to size, fur color, geographical location and their preffered use.

32

Zakarayāʾ b. Muḥammad b. Maḥmūd al-Qazwīnī (1203-83) described the cheetah as a hybrid of a lion and a tiger, with a narrow body and strong anger, which can jump to long distances and can get accustomed to humans.127 In the zoological part of his geographical work Nuzhat al-qulūb, written in Iran in the , Ḥamdallāh Mustawfī Qazwīnī (1281-1349) described the cheetahs as a “tempered animal, very fierce and somnolent”, capable of being trained.128

As in previous periods, the Mongol rulers transferred cheetahs throughout the continent. There was special interest in cheetahs in Yuan China, a region where these animals were not native, but rather were acquired mostly from southern and western Asia, and brought to the Qa’an’s court by tributaries and merchants.129 Özbeg Khan of the Golden Horde also had cheetahs, which he probably received as a gift from the Mamluk Sultanate.130

Marco Polo described the use of felines in the hunting expeditions of the Yuan court. Qubilai possessed leopards, lynxes, and lions. The leopards and lynxes were used to chase deer; the lions, which were described as larger than the Babylonian ones, streaked with white, black, and red stripes, were used for the chase of wild oxen and asses, bears, stags, roebucks, and other animals.

The felines were kept in cages placed upon carts, locked with a dog with which they were familiarized. Apparently the felines were kept in cages in order to maintain control over them: they were so eager to chase prey that they would leap immediately at the sight of game, and it would be impossible to control them otherwise.131

127 Zakaryā b. Muḥammad b. Maḥmūd al-Qazwīnī, Kosmographie: Kitāb ʿajāyib al-makhlūqāt, ed. Ferdinand Wüstenfeld, vol. 1 (Göttingen: Dieterichsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1849), p. 399; Carboni, The Wonders of Creation, p. 34. 128 Ḥamd-Allāh Mustawfī Qazwīnī, The Zoological Section of the Nuzhatu-l Qulūb of Ḥamdullāh al-Mustaufī al- Qazwīnī, ed. and trans. Lieut.-Colonel J. Stephenson (London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1928), p. 33. 129 Allsen, “Circulation of Hunting Leopards,” 125. 130 Ibid, p. 126. 131 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, pp. 227-228.

33

It is not surprising then that with the great interest of the Mongol elites in the hunt, the acquisition of hunting partners became an important matter under the care of professional officials in the service of the Khans, who were meant to maintain a variety of available animals at the

Khan’s disposal, should he desire to hunt. As this interest was prominent across all of the Mongol polities, as virtually all Mongol Khans were interested in hunting, each Mongol royal household not only maintained enough hunting partners for personal use, but also could exchange such animals with allied dynasties or bestow them upon servants. This known affection for hunting and hunting partners could have been used by high officials involved in politics and diplomacy within the Mongol empire, and later between the various Mongol polities.

Hunting Partners in the Ilkhanate

The Ilkhans did not differ from other Mongol polities in their affection for hunting.132 The Italian missionary Riccoldo da Montecroce, who visited the Ilkhanate in the late 13th century and early

14th century, described the Mongols of the Ilkhanate: “they were [a nation of] shepherds and dealt in hunting”.133 The Ilkhanid dynasty and its nomadic subjects clearly shared the culture of their brethren in other Mongol polities when it came to the chase of wild animals.

Just like Chinggis Khan and his sons, who chased wild animals during their military campaigns,134 the conquest of the Levant also provided Hülegü with opportunities for the chase of local animals. One interesting event occurred following the 1256 crossing of the Amū Daryā, when

Hülegü noticed lions. He ordered his riders to form a circle (nerge/jerge) around the beasts, but since the horses were afraid of the lions, the riders had to dismount and ride camels instead. Ten lions were eventually killed.135

132 Spinei, “Hunting in the Mongol Society during the Great Expansion Age in Eurasia,” 235-37. 133 Ibid, p. 220. 134Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 215; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 139-140. 135 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 980, Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 480; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends,

34

Among the Ilkhans it was Ghazan who ordered the construction of an enclosed hunting reserve.

While on his way to in 1301 Ghazan hunted in the mountains of . He ordered the build of a wall made from tree trunks and branches, in the length of one day’s ride, and another blockade made of wood. The soldiers drove various animals into this enclosure, while Ghazan

Khan and his wife Bulughan watched them from the top of a bridge that was constructed over the enclosure. Some of the animals were killed, and others were released.136 The enclosure probably was not used afterwards, unlike the previously mentioned hunting parks.137

Raptors and cheetahs were available in the Ilkhanid provinces, and were collected by individuals who were not directly employed by the Ilkhans. Those individuals delivered the captured beasts to the official falconers and cheetah keepers in exchange for supplies, provisions, and wages. By the reign of Ghazan the collectors seriously abused the Yam system and the population in the provinces, leading Ghazan to reform the system in an attempt to ensure minimal disturbance to his subjects by the animal collectors. The maximum number of animals to be collected from the Ilkhanid provinces (vilāyāt) was set at 1,000 raptors and 300 cheetahs (probably at any given time). However, this decree did not solve the problem, and similar abuses still took place during the reign of Abū Saʿīd.138

The Ilkhans had in their possession a variety of raptors. In the Persian sources the birds themselves were referred to as unspecified or hunting animals (jānur), referring to both falcons

vol. 3, p. 25; Allsen. The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History, pp. 27-28. 136 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 1302; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 651; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, p. 189. 137 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, p. 672; Rashīd al-Dīn/Boyle, pp. 64-65; Allsen, The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History, pp. 43-44. 138 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1518-1523; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 751-754; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 303-306; Allsen. The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History, p. 94.

35 and hawks,139 or as hunting birds (morgh-i shekārī).140 On other occasions specific breeds were mentioned. The Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh mentions mostly three distinct species: falcon (bāz),141 gyrfalcon (sanqūr)142, and royal falcon (shāhīn).143 Bird species were mentioned in greater variety in Qāshānī’s Ta’rīkh-i Uljāytū. Öljeitü was described as having affection for various hunting animals, among them different species of raptors, such as Frankish gyrfalcons (sanqūr-i farangī),

Turkish goshawks (shahbāz-i turkī), royal sea falcons (shāhīn-i bahrī), and Mountain eagles

(ʿuqāb-i kuhī).144

Most of these raptors were also mentioned in other Ilkhanid works. Zakarayāʾ bin Muḥammad bin Maḥmūd al-Qazwīnī mentioned several raptors such as the bāzi, sanqūr, shāhīn, ʿuqāb, and saker.145 All those birds were also mentioned in Mustawfī Qazwīnī‘s Nuzhat al-qulūb, in addition to a trainable sparrow hawk (bāshaq) that was possibly also used by the Ilkhans, for example by

Ghazan.146

Hunting with animals was probably part of the training for Ilkhanid princes, similar to horse riding practiced by Mongols from childhood. When Abaqa was informed that his grandson, the future Ilkhan Ghazan, was already riding a horse at the age of three years, he wished to train the young prince in hunting with birds. Young Ghazan practiced with a sparrow hawk (bāshih) and

139 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, pp. 672-673; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 426; Rashīd al-Dīn/ Verkhovski, vol. 2, p. 159. 140 Āyati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 258. 141 Qazwīnī, The Zoological Section of the Nuzhatu-l qulūb, p. 63. 142 Ibid, p. 76. 143 Ibid; Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1096-1097; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 535; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86; Carboni, The Wonders of Creation, p. 35. 144 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 53; Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 249; Qazwīnī, The Zoological Section of the Nuzhatu-l qulūb, p. 78. 145 al-Qazwīnī, Kosmographie, vol. 1, pp. 407, 416-419. 146 Qazwīnī, The Zoological Section of the Nuzhatu-l qulūb, p. 63; Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 843- 844; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 590-591; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 138-139.

36 merlin (ṭoromtāi), two species that were probably small enough and as such fit for a child falconer.147

Thus it is possible that in the same manner as with the training in horseback riding the Mongols, especially those of higher birth, were taught to hunt from a young age, and the use of hunting raptors was incorporated into coming-of-age ceremonies related to hunting. For example, the

Mongols had a hunting coming-of-age ceremony, when a child’s thumbs were smeared with the flesh and fat of his first kill. When at the age of eight Ghazan killed his first pray using a bow and an arrow, his fingers were smeared with oil according to the Mongol custom. Qubilai and Hülegü also passed such a ceremony after killing a hare and a wild goat.148

Raptors as Gifts Received by the Ilkhans

Due to the high demand for hunting partners across the Mongol world, such animals were popular as gifts. The Ilkhans, like the rest of the Mongol rulers, also incorporated the hunting partners into their diplomatic efforts,149 and received such animals from Mongol and non-Mongol Polities.

Several examples of receiving falcons include diplomatic relations with the Golden Horde.

Abaqa (r. 1265-82) was the first Ilkhan to receive a documented diplomatic gift of hunting falcons.

In November 1270 the Golden Horde Khan Möngke Temür (r. 1267-80) sent messengers carrying a variety of gifts, among them three different falcon species: gyrfalcon (sanqūr), falcon (bāz), and royal falcon (shāhīn). The gifts, including the raptors, were sent to commemorate Abaqa’s victory over Baraq (r. 1266-71) in the battle of Herat that took place earlier that year.150 Interestingly,

Möngke Temür previously supported Baraq’s invasion of the Ilkhanate, as the Golden Horde was

147 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1208-1210; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 590-591; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 138-139. 148 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 1211; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 591; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 141; John Andrew Boyle, “A Eurasian Hunting Ritual,” Folklore 80, 1 (1969): 12-6. 149 Little, “Diplomatic Missions and Gifts Exchanged by Mamluks and Ilkhans,” 38. 150 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1096-1097; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 535; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86.

37 involved in warfare against the Ilkhans already since the 1260s, over the control of the southern

Caucasus region.151 The delegation was sent after the Qa’an had sent to the Ilkhanate a delegation of his own, to confirm Abaqa as the official ruler.152 Möngke Temür had probably considered this development when initiating the said delegation, maneuvering within the greater context of the inter-Mongol diplomatic relations.

Falcons were also delivered by delegations attempting to persuade a ruler to adopt a certain policy or to gain his support. In 1301-1302 , the Golden Horde Khan (r. 1291-1312), sent messengers to Ghazan’s court. The envoys were dispatched not to ally with the Ilkhans, but rather to trumpet the illegitimacy of Ilkhanid rule. The messengers explained that the lands ruled by the

Ilkhans belonged to Toqta, according to the division of Chinggis Khan. Additionally Toqta’s messengers spilled a bag of millet, explaining that Toqta’s army was vast and ready for warfare.

In response Ghazan ordered to bring hens and let them eat the millet, explaining that the Ilkhans previously conquered their land, and that should the need arise, the Ilkhanate’s forces will defend and recapture it.153

It is interesting that such diplomatic mission was not sent by one ally to another, or by a subordinate ruler to his superior, and it is an example of hunting falcons given as gifts. Toqta

Khan’s son Tamtaī advised his messengers to carry with them hunting birds and animals to the

Ilkhan’s court, and indeed the messengers brought with them 21 hunting falcons (bazān-i shikārī).

In exchange Ghazan paid a sum of 1,000 dinars for each of the falcons.154 Even though the falcons were exchanged for currency and not for other gifts or rarities, it is possible to classify this incident

151 Amitai-Preiss, Mongols and the Mamluks, pp. 78-79. 152 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1096-1097; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 535; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86. 153 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, pp. 221-222. 154 Ibid, p. 222.

38 as a failed gift attempt. The raptors were probably chosen as a gift; however Ghazan possibly chose not to give a gift in return, due to the offensive message that the delegation delivered.

It is possible that other embassies arrived at the Ilkhanate from the Golden Horde, carrying with them an additional hunting partner. Rashīd al-Dīn mentioned that Noqai (d. 1299), a high ranking commander of the Golden Horde who maintained independent foreign relations and deified the

Golden Horde Khans,155 constantly sent delegations to the Ilkhan with requests for help against

Toqta, who also sent messengers to Ghazan.156

The host that arrived at the Ilkhan court was a large one, provoking the Ilkhan’s rage, and having him complain that the numbers were not large-enough for warfare, but larger than he would expect from a regular diplomatic mission, and that it was sent to strain the resources of his provinces. Was it possible that in addition to the messengers themselves, the falcons were sent to extract additional funds from the Ilkhanid dynasty? Although its embassies often combined diplomacy with trade, it is unclear why the Ilkhan did not give falcons or animals of his own in exchange. Perhaps such animals were unavailable; or rather, that paying to the foreign delegation was a gesture of expressing superiority, in a manner similar to that of the Qa’ans who paid money to merchants and guests from abroad.157

Another example is that of , a great-grandson of Jochi and the Khan of the White Horde

(r. 1299-1304). After succeeding his father, Bayan was on friendly terms with Ghazan and often sent messengers to him. At the same time, Bayan was involved in the succession struggles of the

Golden Horde, and in the fighting between the factions of Toqta Khan and Noqaī. Bayan allied himself with Toqta and informed Ghazan on the developments of the fighting, in order to prevent

155 Atwood, Encyclopedia, pp. 406-407. 156 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, pp. 747-748; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 366; Rashīd al- Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, pp. 86- 87. 157Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 274; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 214.

39 the Ilkhan from assaulting his ally. In 1302-1303 Bayan sent messengers to Ghazan, carrying falcons and additional unspecified presents. When the messengers arrived they informed Ghazan that Bayan had allied himself with Toqta Khan. In return the Ilkhan sent to Bayan and his wives gold, clothing, and other gifts.158

These three Golden Horde missions are interesting due to the hostile relations between the two polities in a period during which the falcons were sent to the Ilkhanate.159 Thus, even though both rulers were at war with one another, they belonged to the same culture and adhered to the same code of conduct, and this led the Khans of the Golden Horde to send raptors as a gift to their rival.

Bayan’s delegation is an example of the complexity of the inter-Mongol diplomacy, and of an exchange even with a potential ally within a hostile Mongol polity. That exchange was a possible attempt of Bayan to utilize his good relations with Ghazan to secure or even to strengthen his position within the Golden Horde.

Falcons were also received at the Ilkhante during the reign of Öljeitü. On several occasions the

Yuan Qa’ans sent messengers carrying falcons to the Ilkhan. In 1306, while Öljeitü was hunting, messengers arrived from Temür Qa’an (r. 1294-1307) carrying with them a gyrfalcon (sanqūr) and another species of bird, probably a smaller breed of falcon (jirih bāzd).160 On another occasion, in 1316, messengers from China brought Öljeitü a variety of birds, including a saker (chergh) gyrfalcon (sanqūr) and a royal falcon (shāhīn).161 The exchange of hunting birds with the Yuan dynasty continued further into the rule of Abū Saʿīd, who sent gyrfalcons to the Yuan Qa’an along with other animals.162

158 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, pp. 712-713; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 349-350; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 67-68. 159 Giovanni di Plano Carpini, The Story of the Mongols, p. 80. 160 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 49. 161 Ibid, p. 205. 162 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 43.

40

While the exchange with the Golden Horde is peculiar, the exchange with the Yuan dynasty is natural, since the two dynasties shared not only a bond of kinship, both belonging to the Tulouid branch of the Chinggisid line, but also an important alliance since the days of the Tuloid civil war between Ariq Böke and Qubilai against common enemies.163 During the reign of Öljeitü the Yuan and Ilkhanid dynasties shared a common enemy, the Chaghadaid Khan Esen- (r. 1309-18).164

Consequently, the exchange of delegations and embassies during this period can be explained as part of greater cooperation between two close allies, who in addition to the exchange of much knowledge and many products, exchanged hunting animals as well.165

To summarize the inter-Mongol exchange, it seems that the Ilkhans received hunting birds from several Mongol dynasties, including the allied Yuan court, and from a lesser Khan allied with the

Golden Horde. While some delegations had a political intent, at least one was outspokenly hostile.

It is not clear what the Khans of the Golden Horde, Möngke Temür, and Toqta hoped to achieve, other than simply ensuring that their delegation would be granted access to the Ilkhan.

Non-Mongol polities also presented hunting birds to the Ilkhans, such as the English king

Edward I (r. 1272-1307) who maintained diplomatic relations with the Ilkhans long before the animals in question were exchanged. In 1271, then the heir to the English Throne, Edward attempted to secure an alliance with the Ilkhans against the Mamluks. Following his arrival in Acre in 1271 CE Edward dispatched messengers with a letter to the court of Abaqa. Abaqa accepted the offer, and answered with a letter of his own, in which he explained the details of a future joint assault,166 which however was never finalized.167

163 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, pp. 17-40. 164 Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 86. 165 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, pp. 83-185. 166 Amitai-Preiss, Mongols and the Mamluks, pp. 98-99; Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 93. 167 Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 95-6; Peter Jackson, The Mongols and the West (Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2005), p. 167; L. Lockhart, “The Relations between Edward I and Edward II of England and the Mongol Īl- Khāns of Persia,” Iran 6 (1968): 24.

41

A 1276 letter to King Edward I from Abaqa's messengers, the brothers Johan and Jacque

Vassali,168,expressed the Ilkhan's interest in European raptors. In the letter the two brothers identified as the Ilkhan’s official messengers to the Pope, to the king of Sicily, and to the English king. As they were waiting for the response of the Pope and of the king of Sicily at the city of

Viterbo in central Italy, they discovered that other agents of the Ilkhan, “Catalans and Nestorians”, had fooled the king of Sicily by presenting themselves as the Ilkhan’s official envoys. In truth, they were not envoys, but rather were given money only to purchase falcons in Europe, presumably in a manner similar to the ortaq merchants who collaborated with the Khans. The two envoys warned Edward I not to provide the impostors with any falcons and not to treat them as envoys.169

During the reign of Arghun (r. 1284-91), the Ilkhans once again attempted to arrange a joint campaign with the crusaders in Syria. A Genoese messenger was sent from Persia to Europe, arriving at the court of Phillip the Fair in 1289. In addition to the proposal of a joint campaign he also conveyed Arghun’s request of gyrfalcons and precious stones. The same envoy later arrived at the court of Edward I, conveying the same request. The English ruler complied, and sent a mission from England to the Ilkhanid court carrying gyrfalcons for the Ilkhan.170 However, by the time the mission arrived the Ilkhan had already passed away, and the mission was accepted by his successor Geikhatu (r. 1291-95) in 1292.171 In that case the gyrfalcons were obviously sent due to the expressed desire of the Ilkhan.

That example shows that the exchange of animals accompanied the broader diplomatic relations between the Mongols and the West. While what brought the various rulers together was their shared hostility towards the Mamluk Sultanate, the diplomatic exchange was also used to get

168 Lockhart, “Edward I,” 24. 169 Jackson, The Mongols and the West, p. 314. 170 Lockhart, “Edward I,” 26-7. 171 Allsen The Royal Hunt, p. 257; Lockhart, “Edward I,” 27.

42 access to European falcons. It seems that Abaqa attempted to purchase such falcons on his own by sending messengers to Europe, but at the same time he attempted to receive such raptors as gifts from two European kings.

Abaqa’s efforts of acquiring foreign breeds of raptors are impressive. The Syrian knight Usāma bin Munqidh (1095-1188) described how his father spared no expense on purchasing hunting raptors, buying them from as far as Constantinople.172 Abaqa’s and Arghun’s attempt to possess

European falcons and Qāshānī’s mention of the variety of raptors in Öljeitü’s reign, demonstrate that the Ilkhans went to great lengths to purchase new raptors, possibly introducing new species to their domains, and suppressing the hunters of previous generations.

In 1313 Öljeitü besieged the castle of Raḥba. When the inhabitants of the castle decided to surrender, they presented gifts before the Ilkhans, including several species of birds, such as royal falcons (shāhīn-i shāhī), sea falcons (sanqūr-i bahrī), and land eagles (ʿuqāb-i barrī).173 Such exchanges were common already in the early days of the Mongol conquests, when people who had been defeated gave tribute to the Mongols with the hope to avoid dire consequences.174

The exchanges between the Ilkhans and their allies, especially the attempts to establish a military or a marriage alliance, were a continuation of practices from an earlier period of the unified

Empire. An interesting example of presenting hunting animals to achieve a diplomatic goal is mentioned by Rashīd al-Dīn in his description of a gift received by Qubilai from Ariq Böke.

Following the death of Möngke a succession struggle was ensuing. As Qubilai was fighting in

China, Ariq Böke was attempting to seize control. When Qubilai became aware of Ariq Böke’s

172 Muʾayyad al-Dawlah Abū Muẓaffar Usāmah Ibn Murshid al-Kinānī al-Shayzarī Ibn Munqidh, Usāmah's Memoirs: Entitled Kitāb al-iʻtibār, ed. Phillip K. Hitti (Princeton : Princeton university press, 1930), p. 199; Muʾayyad al-Dawlah Abū Muẓaffar Usāmah Ibn Murshid al-Kinānī al-Shayzarī Ibn Munqidh, The Book of Contemplation: Islam and the , Penguin Classics, trans. Paul M. Cobb (London: Penguin 2008), p. 208. 173 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 143. 174Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 229; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 161.

43 intentions, Qubilai’s son Dorji advised Ariq Böke to send Qubilai “messengers with falcons and

[hunting] animals”, so that he may “feel secure and grow careless”. The other hunting animals mentioned were likely other breeds of raptors; indeed, Ariq Böke dispatched five falcons.175

That example shows how the act of gifting hunting birds was supposed to influence the receiver of the gift and to affect his judgement. In this case of sending a gift that may be perceived as a tribute, the animals were not given as a sign of respect to a superior, or awarded as part of a ceremony such as a coronation, a birthday or an individual’s promotion to a new rank or office; rather, it was a clear attempt at using Qubilai’s affection for hunting and hunting birds to cloud his judgment, and to prevent him from suspecting his brother’s maneuvers. Ariq Böke’s gift was an attempt to fake his loyalty to his brother Qubilai by sending him a tribute.

Raptors as Gifts Sent by the Ilkhans

The Ilkhans themselves also presented raptors to allies and rulers. For example, the Ilkhan could bestow hunting birds upon officials after their appointment. Such was the case of Malik al-Islām

Jamāl al-Dīn Ibrāhīm b. Muḥammad al-Ṭībī, (d. 1330-31), who received falcons after having received a robe of honor upon his appointment as the tax collector of Baghdad, Shiraz, Kīsh,

Baḥrīn, and an additional region up to the Indian border.176

Eventually the Mamluk Sultanate also participated in the exchange of hunting partners with the

Ilkhanid dynasty, mostly during the reign of Abū Saʿīd after the two polities had signed peace.

Several Egyptian diplomatic missions were received in Iran, and several diplomatic missions to

Egypt from the Ilkhanate were initiated.177 Among the gifts birds were also included. For example, in 1329 an Ilkhanid mission to Egypt carried ten unspecified birds. The purpose of that mission

175 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 873; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 426; Rashīd al-Dīn/Boyle, p. 250; Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, p. 159. 176 Āyati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, p. 189. 177 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 65-69.

44 was to arrange a marriage between Abū Saʿīd and the daughter of Sultan al-Naṣir Muḥammad (r.

1293-1294, 1299-1309, 1310-1341). However, the latter declined the marriage proposal, explaining that his daughter was too young.178

Felines in Ilkhanid Diplomacy

In addition to raptors, the Ilkhans also included cheetahs in diplomatic gifts. The Ilkhanid dynasty was one of the sources of cheetahs received by the Yuan rulers.179 For example, Abū Saʿīd sent several missions to China carrying a variety of gifts, including animals with several cheetahs among them.180 These cheetahs were used for hunting, and were also distributed by the Qa’an to his officials.181

There is one example of a cheetah given as gift to a European ruler: when the messengers of

Edward I arrived from England carrying gifts for the already deceased Arghun, they received a cheetah in return from Geikhātū, the new Ilkhan. Thus, a cheetah was exchanged for the gyrfalcons sent to Arghun.182 Although cheetahs were not very popular in Europe in comparison to raptors,183 it is possible that the Ilkhans sent such animals to their potential allies as a symbol of prestige. The cheetah was possibly the best animal that the Ilkhans could bestow upon other rulers. The fact that cheetahs were collected domestically allowed the Ilkhans to send a relatively rare animal that was also a hunting partner, and as such had a practical use for the elites with whom the Ilkhans interacted.

Further exchange of cheetahs was mentioned during the reign of Abū Saʿīd, who had extensive connections with the Mamluk Sultanate. For example, in 1332 Hajj Aḥmed, the Ilkhanid

178 al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, vol. 9, p. 351; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 68. 179 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 43. 180 Ibid, p. 44; Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 256. 181 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 256; Allsen, “Hunting Leopards in Eurasia,” 125-26. 182 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 257; Lockhart, “Edward I,” 27. 183 Allsen, “Hunting Leopards in Eurasia,” 127.

45 messenger to Egypt and probably a merchant,184 presented gifts that included six Tatar horses

(akādīsh), Bactrian camels (bukhtiyyi), eight mamluks, arrows, local textiles, and three cheetahs

(fuhūd)).185 The Mamluk sultans used cheetahs as one of their hunting partners, and special handlers were employed to train and handle the cheetahs when joining the hunt.186 Hence as the practice of hunting with cheetahs was already established, such a gift had the most practical use.

Another important notable who sent gifts to the Mamluks was Sheikh Ḥassan, a cousin of Abū

Saʿīd. He replaced Amir as the Ilkhan’s deputy, and was married to Chupan’s daughter

Baghdad Khatun before she was wed to Abū Saʿīd.187 Sheikh Ḥassan also sent gifts to the Mamluk court, with one of the two of his delegations carrying two cheetahs (fahdīn).188

It is interesting that Ḥassan, who maintained independent diplomatic relations, was able to establish a dynasty of his own following the demise of the Ilkhanate.189 Such diplomatic practices and the exchange of gifts might indicate the patterns of power and influence in the 13-14th centuries, when the ability to maintain diplomatic relations separately from the titular ruler was an indicator of political might. In a similar manner, when the Chaghadaid prince Yasaur attempted to establish his own power following Öljeitü's death, he attempted to extort gifts from local rulers in the Ilkhanate.190

It appears that the Ilkhans rarely received Cheetahs as gifts from foreign rulers if at all, other than on one occasion. Muhannā b. ʿĪsa, a local ruler of territories in Syria and Iraq, who held the

184 Linda S. Northrup, From Slave to Sultan: the Career of Al-Mansur Qalawun and the Consolidation of Mamluk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678-689 A.H./1279-1290 A.D.) (Stuttgart: F. Stiner, 1998), p. 42. 185 al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, vol. 9, p. 372; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 69. 186 Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, pp. 307-308. 187 Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, ed. Muṣṭafā Ḥijāzī and M. M. Ziyāda, vol. 33 (Cairo: Vizārat al-Thaqāfa val-Irshād al-qūmī. Al-Muʾasasa al-Miṣriya al-ʿAma Lil-Tālīf Val-Tarjama Val- Ṭibāʿa Val-Nashr, 1997), p. 280; Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, pp. 295-296. 188 al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, vol. 33, p. 280. 189 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 69-70. 190 Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al-tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 138.

46 title of Amīr al-‘Arab, was involved in diplomatic-economic ties with both the Mamluk Sultanate and the Ilkhanate; he even had one son, Sulaymān b. Muhannā, in the service of Ilkhan Öljeitü.191

In 1321, when attempting a rebellion against the Mamluk Sultanate, Muhannā b. ʿĪsa, sent animals as gifts to Abū Saʿīd, among them several cheetahs (fuhūd).192 The origin of the cheetahs was not specified, and since cheetahs were prominent throughout the Middle East,193 it is not clear if they were captured locally in Syria, or were previously brought from another region, such as Egypt or

Africa, as a gift to Muhannā b. ʿĪsa. Allsen speculates that those cheetahs may have been delivered further to the east, all the way to China.194 In such a case we can assume that the gift was reused to fit the Ilkhans’ diplomatic needs.

In conclusion, it is possible to determine that cheetahs were considered more exotic than raptors, and throughout Ilkhanid history were gifted to a variety of allied rulers in Asia, in Europe, and in

Africa. It appears that the Ilkhans were among the most important sources of cheetahs during their time. Although the cheetahs reached many destinations, the scope of exchange appears to have been rather limited. The rulers who received the cheetahs, such as the Qa’ans of the Yuan dynasty and the Mamluk Sultans, largely had interest in them; the received cheetahs were probably incorporated in hunting parks and expeditions, and therefore had the most practical use. In this regard it seems that Mongol and non-Mongol rulers shared a similar taste in feline hunting partners.

The limited number of cheetahs sent by the Ilkhans suggests that such animals were sent only to important allies, possibly due to their high price and cost of upkeep.

191 ʿAlī Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al-mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al-bashar, vol. 4, p. 71. 192 Ibid, p. 90; Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, p. 70. 193 Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, pp. 279-280. 194 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 256.

47

Additional Hunting Partners: Hunting Hounds and Elephants

Among other animals used for hunting by other contemporary dynasties were dogs, mostly hunting hounds. In addition to hunting birds and felines, the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria had in their possession a variety of hunting dogs.195 The Muslim Mamluks had to find a religious justification for the use of dogs, which are perceived as unclean in Islamic law, and there were several solutions allowing them to avoid this problem. For example, they had to say a blessing before unleashing the hounds, thus making the meat of the animal caught by the dog legitimate for consumption.196 Interestingly, hunting dogs are rarely mentioned in the Persian sources or in the context of hunting parties arranged by the Ilkhanids, although it is still possible that canines were used or kept by the Ilkhans. Öljeitü’s affection for Arabian hunting hounds (sagān-i tāzī wa bādpāyān-i ḥijāzī) was mentioned by Qāshānī, and it is possible that swift Arabian hunting hounds

(tāzī sīr bād pāyān) were brought to the Ilkhan from Rūm.197

Despite the meager mentions of hunting dogs in the Secret History, in Yuan sources, and by

Marco Polo, apparently the Ilkhans refrained from using them,198 and there are no mentions of their possessing of or hunting with dogs. Nevertheless, an exchange of dogs between the Ilkhans and the Mamluks is mentioned once, when a 1328 Mongol delegation to Damascus brought pairs of birds, felines, and dogs.199 It is not clear if the dogs were indeed used in hunting, or who initiated the diplomatic mission. It is possible that among the Mongols the use of hunting dogs was limited to East Asia, since the Mamluks of Egypt sent hunting hounds neither to the Ilkhans nor to their allies of the Golden Horde.

195 Alkhateeb Shehada, Mamluks and Animals, pp. 276-279. 196 Ibid, pp. 38, 306. 197 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 52; This reference was mentioned in the previous chapter. It is not clear whether the gift included Arabian horses or Arabian hounds. 198 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1. pp. 170-171, 226-229. 199 Ibn al-Jazarī, Tārīkh ḥāwadīth al-zamān wa-anbāʾihi wa-wafayāt al-akābir wa-l-aʿyān min abnāʾihi, ed.ʿUmar ʿAbd al-Salām Tadmirī, vol. 2 (Beirut: al-Maktabah al-‘Aṣriyah, 1998), p. 256.

48

The final hunting partners, which were used by contemporary dynasties that I would like to mention, are elephants. Elephants were used for hunting long before the rise of the Mongol

Empire,200 and were used on some scale by the Yuan dynasty. As a result of their control of China the rulers of the Yuan Dynasty had some access to elephants, those they received as tribute from various rulers, and those they captured from enemy forces in Southeast Asia.201

The descriptions of using elephants for hunting are limited, but in one example Qubilai Qa’an rode a palanquin pulled by four elephants.202 Marco polo describes Qubilai Qa’an as attending hunting expeditions while riding elephants. In the pavilion Qubilai is accompanied by twelve falconers who kept with them his best gyrfalcons. When a bird was spotted by the people who accompanied the Qa’an and rode alongside him on horses, the falconers would unleash their raptors, thus practicing falconry from the back of an elephant.203

While the Ilkhans received elephants as gifts from Indian rulers during the reigns of Ghazan and

Abū Saʿīd (1303 and 1327 respectively), it seems that they did not practice hunting from the backs of elephants. Yet Ghazan rode an elephant in Tabriz in a manner similar to rulers in other regions,204 and I presume it was possible that he attempted to hunt on another occasion; however, there is no description of such an event. It is possible that elephants were a less appealing gift to the Ilkhan rulers, who still had to maintain a nomadic way of life. It is also possible that the establishment by Hülegü of the non-Muslim Ilkhanid state in Persia realigned the tribute and gift

200 Allsen, The Royal Hunt, pp. 70-71, 252-253. 201 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, pp. 290-291, 366-368. 202 Ibid, p. 192-194. 203 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, pp. 229-230; John Ranking, Historical Researches on the Wars and Sports of the Mongols and Romans: In Which Elephants and Wild Beasts Were Employed or Slain (London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, 1826), p. 90. 204 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1316-1317; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 658; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 197; Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, p. 228; Linda Komaroff and Stefano Carboni. eds., The Legacy of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western Asia, 1256-1353 (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2002), p. 136.

49 patterns in the region, creating a new route of animal delivery. Elephants were received in Egypt from Yemen (already during the reign of Baybars, in 1267) and India (arrived much later, in 1512).

It is possible that the elephants of Yemen also originated in the . The elephants were possibly delivered by sea, but the route of delivery is unclear.205

Conclusions

The chase was an activity the Mongols throughout Asia enjoyed and practiced often. The Khans, princes, and military commanders of the various Mongol polities were familiar with hunting techniques and with the use of hunting partners, leading to constant demand for hunting animals, mainly raptors and felines. The broad interest in the acquisition of a variety of raptors, as in the case of Abaqa, Arghun or Öljeitü, can indicate the general interest the Khans had in such animals.

It is not surprising then that such animals were chosen as gifts fit for the Khans. Not only were such animals desired by the Ilkhans, they also had the most practical use in the many hunting expeditions in which the Mongols participated on numerous occasions.

From the several examples in which all the involved individuals (the gift giver, the gift receiver, and the person who advised which animals to send) are known, we can gain some insight into the process of the exchange of hunting animals among the Mongols. We know that the Khans themselves asked for specific animals from their allies, who often complied and sent such animals with their diplomatic missions. Such were also the connections between the Ilkhans and their

European allies.

Another interesting piece of information is the involvement of Mongol princes in the arrangement of diplomatic missions; from the two available cases we learn that the giving of

205 Muḥyī al-Dīn Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, al-Rawd al-zahir fi sirat al-Malik al-Zahir, ed. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Khwaitir. (Riyad: Muʾassasat Fuʾād, 1976), p. 290; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr fī waqaʾiʿ al-duhūr, ed. M. Muṣṭafā, vol. 4 (Cairo: al-Hayʾiah al-Miṣriyyah al-ʿĀmah Lil-Kitāb,1984), pp. 284, 288, 293, 325, 379; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 39, 46.

50 raptors could have been used to influence the gift receiver. Advisors, Mongol princes, or perhaps other individuals in the Khans’ closes circles understood the connections between the Khans and their hunting partners, and wished to utilize them to persuade the Khans or to influence their attitudes. The impact of such influence is unclear, but it indicates that political factors attempted to utilize the cultural similarity between the Mongol elites for their own political gain.

Apparently, within the Mongol world (i.e. the four Mongolian polities) animals were exchanged even between rival rulers, such as the Golden Horde and the Ilkhanate. It also seems that the exchange of animals accompanied the diplomacy between allied polities. The Yuan in China,

Edward I of England, who maintained alliances with the Ilkhans, and finally the Mamluk Sultanate, an enemy turned ally, all exchanged hunting animals with the Ilkhans.

Regarding the scope of the exchanges, it appears that throughout its existence the Ilkhanate conducted 15 successful exchanges of hunting animals. The limited number of exchanged animals suggests that the practice was not very common, limited to important allies. Hunting animals, raptors, and felines were ultimately exchanged with all of the contemporary polities. The inter-

Mongol politics were dynamic, and various princes and notables could initiate diplomatic missions and exchange gifts, even if the rulers of Chinggisid dynasties were at war with one another.

Raptors were the most mentioned hunting partners exchanged as gifts, in 10 out of 15 embassies. The majority of the falcons were sent to the Ilkhans by their allies, on 8 out of 10 occasions raptors were sent to the Ilkhans by the Yuan Qa’ans, by Central Asian Khans, by Edward

I, and by a Delhi Sultan. Based on the increasing number of detailed raptors’ descriptions during the reign of Öljeitü, we can assume that over time the Ilkhans expanded the variety of raptors at their disposal, possibly introducing new species to their domains. The embassies mentioned above support the suggestion that the Ilkhans favored hunting partners in general and raptors in particular.

51

The fact that several delegations carried nothing but raptors is an indication of the high status of raptors as diplomatic gifts, with no additional gift having been fit for a Mongol ruler.

Cheetahs were a rarer gift, as only 6 embassies carried them. However, the value of cheetahs was probably not lesser than that of other hunting partners, as only a small number of such animals was usually included in the diplomatic practices of the Ilkhans and their allies. Three cheetahs were probably the biggest number of such animals to have been carried by a single embassy.

Finally, hunting hounds were the least mentioned hunting partners (only once, or possibly twice). That and the fact that they were mentioned mostly during the reign of the Öljeitü, suggest that unlike their eastern allies, the Ilkhans did not prefer such hunting partners, and also rarely included them in their embassies or received them from contemporary rulers and allies. This difference is interesting because hunting hounds were widely used by rulers and hunters in Egypt and Europe. At the same time, Yuan Qa’ans used hunting hounds. Thus, the Ilkhans differed in this regard from the majority of their contemporaries.

In conclusion, it seems that the exchange of hunting animals, raptors and felines was not only of ceremonial or diplomatic nature, where gift givers and receivers were indifferent to the process of exchange or to the identity of the exchanged animals. Rather, givers were informed about the tastes of the receivers and were trying to satisfy them, at times with the aim of achieving a specific goal, either by complying with the expressed desire of a receiver, or by following the advice of a third party.

52

Chapter 3: Exotic Animals

This chapter examines the exchange of exotic animals – namely, rare non-local animals such as elephants, rhinoceros, zebras, and a variety of others. The Ilkhans’ closest ally, the Yuan dynasty, received such animals as tribute mainly from Southeast Asia, while the neighboring polities of the

Mamluk Sultanates of Egypt and Delhi exchanged such animals, originating in Africa and India respectively, among themselves and with other contemporary polities. However, the Ilkhanid exchange of exotic animals was limited at most: the Ilkhans apparently had neither opportunities nor even interest in the acquisition and exchange of such animals. Many of the exotic animals the

Ilkhans received or awarded were felines such as cheetahs, which they used as hunting partners.

The Ilkhans probably preferred exotic varieties of hunting partners, because they were of practical use.

The Value and Importance of Exotic Animals

While gifts of all kinds were important in the exchange of diplomatic delegations due to their monetary value, many royal gifts were often described as wonders and rarities associated with good fortune, collected and presented by rulers in their treasuries.206

Even though exotic animals had less practical use in comparison to livestock or hunting animals, their rarity increased their value and prestige.207 One example of such rare animal gift from the

Middle East is the white elephant given by ʿAbbāsid Caliph Hārün al-Rashīd to Charlemagne.208

206 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 19-20, 26. 207 Ibid, pp. 18-19. 208 Ibid, p. 19.

53

While in India elephants were used for warfare,209 for carrying loads210, and for riding,211 the owners of the elephant in Iraq or Europe probably did not use it for any of those purposes.

Nonetheless, the act of the gift impressed Charlemagne and bolstered his status, as the Caliph gave him his only elephant and a rare white elephant at that.212

Therefore rare and exotic animals should be viewed not through the practical use that they might have had, but simply through the prestige and good fortune their possession implied. The value with which such animals provided their owners was not only monetary, but also that of an increased status.213 At the same time, the upkeep of exotic animals was costly and complicated, and it was possible for rulers to decline exotic animals to avoid their upkeep.214 For example, the upkeep of the elephant that Abū Saʿīd sent to Mecca cost 30,000 dirham for the duration of the embassy.215

Exotic Animals as Gifts Received by the Ilkhans

The Ilkhans also received exotic animals as diplomatic gifts, some them from the allied Yuan dynasty. In 1293 a delegation from China arrived at the Ilkhanate. It was sent by Arghun to the

Yuan dynasty, to bring a replacement for Abaqa’s senior wife Bulughan Khatun, who had died in

209 Arrian, Anabasis Alexandri: History of Alexander and Indica, trans. E. Iliff Robson, vol. 1 (London: W. Heinemann, 1966), p. 257; M. B. Charles, "Alexander, Elephants and Gaugamela," Mouseion: Journal of the Classical Association of Canada 8 (2008): 9-20; Konstantin Nossov and Peter Dennis, War Elephants (Oxford: Osprey, 2008), pp. 19-20; E. H. Schafer, "War Elephants in Ancient and Medieval Chine," Oriens 10, 2 (1957): 290-91; Roy Kaushik, Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), p. 133; ʿAbd al-Ḥayy ibn Ḍaḥḥāk Gardīzī, The Ornament of Histories: A History of the Eastern Islamic Lands AD 650- 1041, the Original Text of Abū Saʿīd Abd al-Hayy , trans. and ed. Edmund Bosworth (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011), p. 93. 209 S. J. Raza, " under the ," Proceeding of the Indian History Congress 71st Session (2010- 2011): 213; C. E. Bosworth, The Ghaznavids: Their Empire in and Eastern Iran, 994-1040. (Edinburgh: University Press, 1963), p. 217. 210 L. Renou, The Civilization of Ancient India (Calcutta: Susil Gupta, India, 1959), p. 118. 211 J. M. Kistler, War Elephants (Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2006), pp. 5-6; S. D. Singh, Ancient Indian Warfare with Special Reference to the (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965), pp. 72-73; Nossov and Dennis, War Elephants, p. 8; Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 146. 212 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 19. 213 Ibid, pp. 17-18, 26. 214 Bielenstein, Diplomacy and Trade, p. 357. 215 al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, vol. 33, pp. 310-311.

54

1286. The delegation returned to the Ilkhanate with Kökächin Khatun and with various hunting animals. However, by the time the delegation arrived at the Ilkhanate, Arghun himself had passed away, and Kökächin Khatun was instead taken to his son Ghazan,216 Afterwards Ghazan sent a tiger (babarī ghurrān) to Geikhatu.217

While Spinei referred to this animal as a hunting partner,218 in this thesis tigers are classified as exotic animals, since there are no mentions of them as hunting partners in the Persian sources.

Rashīd al-Dīn, who mentioned Ghazan’s gift to Gheikhatu, referred to hunting felines only as cheetahs (yūz).219 In 1316 a later Yuan delegation to Öljeitü brought a tiger (babar) and several previously mentioned raptors.220 It is possible that an exchange of exotic felines was developed between the two Tuloid polities, as Öljeitü also attempted to send exotic felines of his own to

China.221

The Indian Subcontinent was an additional source of exotic animals. While in Tabriz in 1303,

Ghazan received several elephants from India. The city population was exited, and the Ilkhan ordered a sit to be put on the back of an elephant in order to ride him, as was the custom in India.222

The context of the gift is not clear, and there is no information as to what was the cost of the animals, who handled them, or what were they exchanged for, and whether indeed the Ilkhan sent a delegation of his own to the Delhi sultanate or to another location in India.

216 Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 438. 217 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1237-1238; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 606; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 154. 218 Spinei, “Hunting in the Mongol Society during the Great Expansion Age in Eurasia,” 236. 219 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1518-1523; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 751-754; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 303-306. 220 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 205. 221 Ibid, p 208. 222 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1316-1317; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 658; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p.197.

55

In his description of Ghazan’s funeral ceremony Waṣṣāf wrote: “Many people arrived. They have cut the horses’ mane, covered them in black, and let the saddles upside down. They have cut the ears of the elephants, turned down the flags, and the women wore sackcloth and sat on the ground […]”, indicating that elephants were still present at the Ilkhanate in 1304, about a year after the arrival of the Indian delegation in Tabriz.223

The second example of an elephant received at the Ilkhanate is from the period of Abū Saʿīd. A delegation from the Delhi Sultan Muḥammad ibn Tughluq arrived at the Ilkhanate in 1327.224 That delegation is probably the best example of the exchange of exotic animals in Ilkhanid diplomacy, as in addition to the elephant it also brought a rhinoceros, a tiger, a panther, a zebra, a parrot, and a civet.225 The background of this delegation was Muḥammad’s desire to establish a military alliance between the Delhi Sultanate and the Ilkhanate against the Chaghadaids.226

From the Mamluk Sultanate the Ilkhans received only a zebra (ḥimār waḥsh) in 1320, at the beginning of the diplomatic exchange between the two polities. It seems that when the llkhans and the Mamluks of Egypt had finally established diplomatic relations, the exchange of exotic animals was almost non-existent.227 The absence of exotic animals in the Mamluk delegation is interesting, as the Mamluk Sultans had a variety of such animals at their disposal, some of which were received from Africa and Asia as gifts and tributes.228

The Mamluks had access to African and Asian exotic animals, and sent them (e.g. giraffes) to other cotemporary diplomatic allies.229 For example, various exotic animals such as black lions, elephants, giraffes, and panthers arrived at the Mamluk court from Africa. Elephants and giraffes

223 Ayati, Taḥrir-i tārīkh-i Waṣṣāf, pp. 247-248. 224 Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, pp. 287-288; Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 233. 225 Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al-ansāb, p. 288. 226 Ibid, p. 287; Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, pp. 231-233. 227 Mufaḍḍal, Ägypten und Syrien, p. 15; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 66-67. 228 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 140. 229 Ibid, pp. 140-145.

56 were received also from Northern and Western Africa.230 The Mamluk Sultans also received elephants, tigers, leopards, parrots, a zebra, a rhinoceros, a giraffe, and ivory, from the Rasūlid rulers of Yemen.231 From India the Mamluk Sultan received elephants, pearls, a bākzahr (a stone extracted from animals such as deer (aiyyil) and cattle (baqar), known for its medical faculties as an antidote), and a skink – a lizard whose dried flesh was used as medicine and as aphrodisiac.232

The Indian subcontinent was known as the land of exotic animals, some of which were exported.233

The Mamluks reused their exotic gifts, and sent exotic animals to their allies. The most sensational and exotic animal available to the Mamluks was the giraffe. Throughout history giraffes were received in Egypt as tribute, and the interest in them increased during the Mamluk period. Giraffes were supplied to the Mamluks from Nubia, and they in turn sent them to (r.

1257-66) of the Golden Horde, to Alfonso X of Castile (r. 1252-84), to Manfred of Sicily (r. 1258-

66), to Temür (r. 1370-1405), and to Lorenzo di Medici (1469-1492).234 Elephants were also sent to Berke at the Golden Horde, and to Alfonso X of Castile. The Mamluks continued to send gift elephants even to the Ottoman sultans Murad II (r. 1446-1451), Mehmet II (r. 1444-1446, 1451-

1458) and Selim I (r. 1491-1511).235

The exchange between Berke and Baybars (r. 1260-77) is in contrast to the one between Abū

Saʿīd and al-Naṣir Muḥammad. Berke received many exotic animals when striking an alliance with the Mamluk Sultanate, and Baybars sent a lavish delegation carrying many gifts, including livestock animals, such as Arabian racehorses and rare Nubian camels. More importantly, the gifts

230 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 49-59. 231 Ibid, pp. 37-45. 232 Dāwūd ibn ʿUmar al-Anṭakī, Tadhkirat ūlā ʾl-albāb wa ʾl-jamiʿ li ʾl-ʿajab al-ʿujjāb (Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al- Ḥalbiy, 1952), p. 80; Ibid, pp. 46-47. 233 Joginder K. Chawla, India's Overland Trade with Central Asia and Persia during the Thirteenth and Fourteenth centuries (New Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 2006), pp. 99-103. 234 Ibid, pp. 140-141. 235 Ibid, p. 46; Amitai-Preiss, Mongols and the Mamluks, pp. 140-145.

57 included an elephant, a giraffe, zebras, and monkeys, and all animals were sent with their fine textiles and trappings.236 The alliance was important to both sides, as the two polities shared the

Ilkhanate as a common enemy. Additionally it was an early alliance between a Muslim-Mongol ruler and a non-Mongol ally. These circumstances possibly explain the grandeur of that delegation.

Exotic Animals as Gifts Sent by the Ilkhans

Several of the Ilkhanid attempts at dispatching exotic animals concluded in failure. In 1316 a

Yuan delegation returning to China from the Ilkhanid court, was carrying exotic felines (janūryan) such as lions (shir) and a caracal (yūz-i siah-gush), sent by Öljeitü to the Qa’an. However, the animals did not reach their destination, as the Chaghadaid ruler Esen Boqa (r. 1309-18) captured the delegation.237 The delegation took place during the war between the Yuan dynasty and

Chaghadaid Khanate under Esen Boqa, and was an example of the good relations between the

Yuan and the Ilkhanate, which by then also faced a mutual enemy.238

The choice of felines is interesting, as it appears that none of the species were used as hunting partners by the Ilkhans. In the Mongol periods caracals could be found anywhere between Sicily and Northern China, and could have been used for hunting, although considered to be less prestigious than the cheetah.239 The Persian sources from the Ilkhanate did not mention the caracal in connection with hunting;240 however, Qāshānī describes it as yūz-i syah gūsh, which means that it was possibly included in the general term yūz by additional authors. Similarly, there were no

236 al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, vol. 8, p. 98; al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, vol. 30, p. 88; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 61-62. 237 Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. 208. 238 Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 86. 239 Allsen, Royal Hunt, p. 82. 240 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, pp. 1518-1523; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 751-754; Rashīd al- Dīn/Arends. vol. 3, pp. 303-306.

58 mentions of lions as hunting partners of the Ilkhans, unlike their use in Yuan China that was already discussed.241

The Ilkhans’ use of exotic animals in the dynasty’s diplomatic missions also appears to be quite limited, taking place mostly during the reign of Abū Saʿīd. For example, several delegations to the

Qa’an carried exotic felines such as lions and tigers. Such animals arrived on at least two occasions, one in 1326 and another in 1327.242

The only mentioned use of an elephant in Ilkhanid diplomacy is also attributed to Abū Saʿīd, during his attempts to establish himself as the Sunni patron of Mecca. was reestablished in the Ilkhanate following the death of Öljeitü and the ascension of Abū Saʿīd. That development threatened the Mamluk Sunni patronage over the holy city of Mecca, as Abū Saʿīd attempted to send to the city a palanquin with the Iraqi pilgrimage delegation of 1319. He also sent a new set of curtains to the Kaʿba, to replace the old ones provided by the Mamluk Sultans.

Although the delegation arrived in Mecca, the curtains were never used. On the following year the

Ilkhan sent to Mecca an additional pavilion studded with rubies, pearls, and emeralds.243

As part of his effort to establish himself as the Sunni patron of Mecca, in 1330 Abū Saʿīd sent a young elephant with the Iraqi Hajj delegation to the Hijaz. The elephant was sent to carry the pavilion, and was probably sent with the delegation to increase Abū Saʿīd’s status by impressing the Meccans.244

However, the inhabitants of Mecca were terrified by the sight of the elephant, interpreting his arrival in Mecca as a bad sign due to the previous arrival of elephants to Mecca in "the year of the

241 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, pp. 227-228. 242 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 44. 243 Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology, pp. 102-103. 244 Ibid, p. 128; Charles Mellvile, “’The Year of the Elephant’ Mamluk-Mongol Rivalry in the Hejaz in the Reign of Abu Saʿid (1317-1335)”, Studia Iranica 21, 2 (1992): 208.

59 elephant" (570 AD).245 When the delegation approached the city of Medina, the elephant refused to move further and died. The cost of the elephant’s upkeep, from the beginning of the journey until its death, was 30,000 dirhams.246 In short, this attempt to impress the locals in the Hijaz ended in a disastrous way both politically and economically, having an unexpected effect on the Meccans due to the Ilkhan having been misinformed about the local attitude towards elephants. The demise of this attempt was likely due to the lack of knowledge about the Year of the Elephant tradition, and it is also possible that the delegation did not include professional handlers who could control the animals, or that the weather was not suitable for the elephant.

Finally, the only example of an exotic animal delivered to the Mamluks from the Ilkhanate took place during 1331. A delegation headed by Hajj Aḥmad, a merchant who was in charge of at least one additional delegation to Egypt that presented to the Sultan ten mamluks, two singer slave girls, four maces, textiles, camels, and horses,247 also brought a golden bird (tāʾir dhahab). In return the

Sultan gave the messenger and his companions textiles and a golden girth, a horse with a golden saddle, and robes of honor.248

Other objects that can be counted as exotic animal products are pearls and pearl decorations, which were very popular among the Mongol elite. They were in use since the early days of the

Mongol empire249 not only as a symbol of wealth, power, and prestige, but also due to Mongols’ affinity to the white color as a symbol of fortune and charisma.250 Qāshānī mentioned pearls in his

245 Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology, pp.126-127 ; al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, vol. 33, pp. 310-311; Kistler, War Elephants, pp. 177-180. In the year 570 CE, the Aksumite commander Abraha marched on Mecca with an army which included war elephants, and according to tradition was miraculously stopped, when a flock of birds (ʾabābīl) dropped heavy pebbles on his army. 246 al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, vol. 33, p. 311; Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 341. 247 al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, vol. 9, pp. 361, 372; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 68-69. 248 al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar, vol 9, p. 361; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 68. 249 Atwood, Encyclopedia, p. 265. 250 Matanya Gill, “A Cultural Biography of Pearls in the Ilkhanate (1260-1335),” International Journal of Business and Globalization, forthcoming: 2.

60

ʿArāʾis al-jawahir wa al-nafāʾis al-aṭayib, as well as in several peculiar stories about various rulers and the pearls in their possession; however, he did not mention specific stories about the Ilkhans or any other Mongol ruler.251

More importantly, pearls were received from ortaq merchants, who cooperated with the Mongol rulers and managed the pearl trade with other lands.252 The Ilkhanate was an important center of the pearl trade, as the Ilkhans and their merchants and governors had access to the pearls of the

Persian Gulf, considered the best in the world due to their larger size and white color.253 Pearls were an important commodity in the Ilkhanate, and the ortaqs, who served as local tax farmers in

Kirman and Fars, delivered such to Ilkhans’ as their share in the profit and taxation.254

The pearl trade predated the Mongol conquest and flourished during the Ilkhanid period, with several cities in the Ilkhanate having been important centers of pearl trade. For example, pearls were sold in Tabriz and from there were distributed to the rest of the world. Venetian merchant

Pietro Veglione bought pearls in Tabriz and brought them to Europe, while Bagdad was the center of pearl piercing and processing.255 Pearls from the Ilkhanate reached Europe and Southern and

Eastern Asia. European merchants reached Persia, while Ilkhanid merchants traveled to India, from where the pearls were sent to China.256

On several occasions pearls were used as gifts by Ilkhanid diplomatic delegations. On at least one occasion during the reign of Abū Saʿīd a delegation carried and brought pearls from the

251 Abū al-Qasīm Qāshānī, ʿArāʾis al-jawahir wa al-nafāʾis al-aṭayib (Tehran: Anjiman-i Athār-i Mīllī, 1345/1966), pp. 124-130. 252 Atwood, Encyclopedia, pp. 429, 253. 253 Qāshānī, ʿArāʾis al-jawahir, pp. 84-89; Gill, “Pearls,” 3. 254 Lambton, “Mongol Fiscal Administration in Persia (Part II),” 103, 108, 110. 255 Morris Rossabi, “Tabriz and Yuan China,” in Aspects of the Maritime Silk Road: From the Persian Gulf to the East China Sea, ed. Ralph Kauz (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010), 99. 256 Gill, “Pearls,” 4-5.

61

Ilkhanate to the Yuan dynasty.257 On one occasion in 1320 an Ilkhanid delegation to the Mamluk

Sultanate in the early diplomatic encounters brought a few pearls as a gift.258

Thus it seems likely that Persian pearls, a rarity elsewhere, were bought in the Ilkhanate, most possibly in Tabriz, and then sent elsewhere where they were most surely sold for large profit as exotic items of luxury. However, it appears that while the commercial activity flourished, the

Ilkhans themselves rarely used pearls in diplomatic delegations. It appears that in the Ilkhanate pearls were seen similarly to horses: the Ilkhans had access to the best horses and pearls in Eurasia, located in the Persian Gulf, and distributed them mostly by means of trade, not through diplomatic delegations. Perhaps merchants were able to maximize the profit from such products, and therefore trade was preferred to diplomatic exchange.

Exotic Animals in the Mongol Empire

In addition to livestock and hunting animals that were available in the Eurasian steppe, already during the conquests of Chinggis Khan the Mongols encountered exotic animals that were not native to their lands. The Mongols’ treatment of such animals, since their rise to power and during the establishment of the empire, might indicate their importance or the lack of it to the Mongol elite of the Ilkhanate as well.

For example, elephants were among the early exotic animals encountered by the Mongols. One famous encounter took place in Central Asia during the Mongol assault on the city of Samarqand in 1220. The protectors of the city, an army of Turks and , possessed twenty elephants that were supposed to serve as a line of defense for the city’s soldiers.259 When the Mongol forces reached the city gates, the defenders unleashed the elephants that only caused minor damage to the

257 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, p. 44. 258 Mufaḍḍal, Ägypten und Syrien, p. 15; Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 66-67; Little, “Diplomatic Missions and Gifts,” 40. 259Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 196-198; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 115-117.

62

Mongol forces, as they were able to defeat the charging elephants by using special arrows. The wounded elephants retreated, causing many losses to the defenders of , with more damage than benefit to their owners.260

Following the capture of the city the elephant handlers brought the pachyderms to Chinggis Khan and requested fodder to feed them. The Khan asked them how the elephants were fed before the city was captured, and the handlers explained that the elephants fed on the grass of the nearby plains. Chinggis Khan then ordered to release the elephants, so that they would be able to forage for themselves; the elephants perished from hunger shortly afterwards.261

That is an interesting example, because the fact that the Khan had to inquire about the proper way to handle the elephants of their professional handlers shows his attitude toward the newly encountered animals: not only did the Khan not capture the elephants, it seems that he was indifferent to their fate and condition. Furthermore, it appears that the Mongols in general were not familiar with elephants, and did not possess the much-needed knowledge that would allow them to maintain the pachyderms’ health.

While these elephants were not presented to the Khan as a gift, he did not choose to capture them by force following his victory, but rather allowed them to perish. It is possible that the Khan did not believe the elephants could have any use for him or for his armies, possibly deeming their upkeep expensive. In addition, they probably were slower in pace than the rest of the animals in the Mongol ordos, much slower than the mounted Mongolian armies. We do not know what happened to the elephant handlers: the Mongols usually captured and spared the lives of animal handlers, relocating them throughout the empire.262 While the Khan probably spared the lives of

260Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp.198-199; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 118-119; Kistler, War Elephants, p. 197 261Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, pp. 199-200; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 120. 262Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 188; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 92; Allsen, Cultrue and Conquest, p.

63 the elephant handlers, as they were able to petition him on behalf of the animals they treated, they must have been rendered useless with the death of the elephants. Thus upon an encounter with the exotic animals the Khan was not impressed and did not capture the elephants, possibly deeming them as mounts inferior to horses.

Another interesting encounter by the Mongols with an exotic animal took place on the border with the Indian Subcontinent. As Chinggis Khan was traveling back to Mongolia from his western campaign, scouts spotted a unique animal and reported to the Khan. A Kitan advisor to the Khan identified the animal as a mythological creature, which was sent from Heaven to warn the Khan against advancing further into India. The route was changed, and eventually the Mongols did not conquer India. 263 That creature most likely was an Indian rhinoceros,264 although it is possible that it was not an earthly animal, but a star constellation.265 Interestingly, Marco Polo also noticed the possible connection between rhinoceros and mythological creatures, in his case the unicorn of the

European tradition, and explained that the rhinoceros “are not as here [i.e. in Europe] we say and describe, who say that it lets itself be caught in the lap by a virgin girl”.266

This example shows another facet of the Mongols’ attitude towards the animal world: the Kitan advisor identified an exotic animal with a mythological creature, and the Mongols did not attempt to capture it. Of course, other reasons might have motivated the Mongols to change their route, such as the condition of the weather and the quality of water in India.

47. 263 Igor De Rachewiltz, “Yeh-lü Ch’u-ts’ai (1189-1243). Yeh-lü Chu (1221-1285),” in In the Service of the Khan – Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yüan Period, ed. I. De Rachewiltz, Hok-am Chan, Hsiao Ch’i-ching and P. W. Geier (Wiesbaden: Harrasowutz Verlag, 1993), 142. 264 Carboni, The Wonders of Creation, pp. 83-84. 265 Brian Baumann, “By the Power of the Eternal Heaven: The Meaning of Tenggeri to the Government of the Pre- Buddhist Mongols,” Extrême-Orient Extrême-Occident 35 (2013): 257-58. 266 Polo, The Description of the World, vol. 1, p. 372.

64

Ibn Baṭṭuṭā, who traveled in India in the 14th century, also heard of and encountered rhinoceros, witnessing the killing of some on several occasions during his stay there. Ibn Baṭṭuṭā witnessed first-hand how Indian hunters mounted on elephants chased and killed rhinoceros (karkadan), implying that such beasts were hunted when they assaulted humans or their horses.267 The Mongols however did not approach the animal and did not attempt to hunt or capture it, while they managed to combine hunting and warfare in other regions, such as Central Asia.268

During the reign of Ӧgodei (r. 1229-41), Chinggis Khan’s successor, elephants were used as pack animals. According to Juwaynī’s description of Ӧgodei’s palace, elephants and their handlers were kept along with horses and camels, and were used especially for moving heavy loads of different beverages during public feasts. These elephants were most certainly an Asian species, but their origin cannot be determined.269 Elephants were not mentioned by later visitors to the

Mongol Empire, such as John of Plano Carpini and William of Rubruck, and so it is possible that they perished and were not replaced.

In the South East Asian frontier the armies of Qubilai Qa’an encountered war elephants during the 1277 campaign against the Pagan Empire, located in modern day Burma. The war elephants surprised the Mongol soldiers; however, after retreating to the forests they dismounted and tied their horses to the trees. The Mongol warriors then waited for the elephants to come closer and concentrated their assault on them, pelting them with a barrage of missiles. The elephants retreated and stampeded the Burmese soldiers during their retreat, paving the way for the Mongol victory.

On that occasion the Mongols captured many elephants.270

267 Ibn Baṭṭuṭah, Riḥlat Ibn Baṭṭuṭah, p. 415; Ibn Baṭṭuṭah, The travels of Ibn Battutah, vol. 3, pp. 596; Allsen, The Royal Hunt, p. 5. 268 Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 215; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, pp. 139-140. 269 Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 295; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 237. 270 Kistler, War Elephants, pp. 199-200.

65

As mentioned previously in the second chapter, Qubilai Qa’an used elephants as mounts, for example when he embarked on a hunting expedition and was followed by his falconers.271 It is possible that the Mongol appreciation of exotic animals was shaped and changed over time: while in the early periods the Mongols did not appreciate such animals, they gradually came to cherish them. For example, in the Yuan dynasty such animals (e.g. elephants) were received from tributaries.272

Thus it appears that during the reign of Chinggis Khan and his successors the Mongol rulers did not appreciate exotic animals or were interested in their capture, upkeep, and presentation, while the more familiar livestock and hunting animals were sought after by the Mongol elite.

Nevertheless, the Mongols encountered and received exotic animals, mostly from conquered enemies, tributary rulers, and allies.

Conclusions

Out of 15 diplomatic delegations involving exotic animals, 6 were initiated within the Ilkhanate, while the other 9 were received there. However, the number of species of the exchanged animals was limited. The Ilkhans mostly sent felines to the Yuan Qa’an, while they themselves received 5 embassies with exotic animals from China, India, and Egypt, and three additional delegations from their subordinates within the Ilkhanate. The variety of accepted animals was limited, for example, only one zebra was received from the Mamluk Sultanate. While two delegations were received from the Sultanate of Delhi, only one arrived with a variety of rare animals, such as elephants, rhinoceros, a civet, and a parrot.

The Ilkhanate’s successful exchange of exotic animals was limited to the exchange of felines with the Yuan dynasty, from which the Ilkhans received a couple of embassies, and to which 5

271 Polo, The Description of the World, pp. 196-197, 229-234. 272 Ibid, pp. 196-197.

66 embassies with exotic animals were sent. Such animals, however, were close in their attributes to the cheetahs, which were hunting partners of the Ilkhans. The Yuan dynasty sent tigers to the

Ilkhanate, and several Ilkhans sent felines to the Qa’an, possibly local species such as the caracal.

While it is not clear if the Ilkhans indeed used such animals in their hunting expeditions, the similarity may explain the Ilkhans’ interest in them. In addition to the felines, the Ilkhans sent mostly pearls, and on one occasion a golden bird of an unknown species, while they received a small variety of exotic animals such as elephants, rhinoceros, a civet, a parrot, and zebras.

The absence of such exchange may be explained by the geo-political situation of the Ilkhanate.

Unlike the Yuan dynasty, the Ilkhans lacked tributary polities rich in exotic animals, as potential sources of annual tribute of of such – that, while the Ilkhans themselves served as the Yuan dynasty’s sources of such animals, sending to the Qa’an 5 delegations carrying them. Additionally, the Ilkhanate’s neighbor that had access to exotic animals from Africa, the Mamluk Sultanate, was mostly hostile to the Ilkhanate throughout most of its existence. Only when the two polities began exchanging delegations and only on one occasion did the Mamluk Sultan send an exotic animal (a zebra) to the Ilkhanate.273

While the Delhi Sultans were on better terms with the Ilkhanate during the reigns of Hülegü and

Abaqa, with both sides attempting to ensure peace, it appears that no gifts were exchanged between the two polities.274 During the reign of Öljeitü the diplomatic relations between the two polities did not result in more exchange of diplomatic gifts. The only connection between Öljeitü’s envoys to animals was when the members of the delegation were trampled by elephants, after they demanded the surrender of Sultan ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn (r. 1296-1316) to the Ilkhan and his daughter's

273 Polo, The Description of the World, pp. 66-70. 274 Arom, “Beyond Bow Range,” 129-32.

67 hand. 275 Under such conditions there were no opportunities for gifts of exotic Indian animals, and so such animals were sent from India only on two occasions, including the most lavish delegation of 1327.

The limited Ilkhanid record stood in contrast with the frequent use of exotic animals by the

Mamluk Sultanate and its allies in Asia and Africa. The Mamluks of Egypt received a variety of exotic animals from Africa, as well as from western and southern Asia, and sent these animals to

Europe and, more importantly, to their Mongol allies of the Golden Horde.276 Indian delegations reached China and Egypt, mainly by sea.277 The Mamluks begun their exchange of animals before their exchange with the Ilkhanate, which lasted only during the reign of the last Ilkhan. During this period, however, the Mamluks sent only one delegation, which included animals, which included zebra and livestock animals such camels and horses. It is possible that these animals were chosen due the knowledge of the Mongol preferences, and thus the exotic animal that was sent was the one most similar to the Mongols’ livestock animals.

Another possible reason for the limited number of exchanged animal species could be the

Ilkhans’ preferences. Animals that were not appreciated by the Ilkhans, for example due to lack of practical use, possibly were not sent as gifts to the Ilkhans by their allies. Rather, livestock and hunting animals were chosen instead.278

275 Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 225. 276 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 61-65; Jackson, The Delhi Sultanate, pp. 37-38, 296. 277Juwaynī, Tārīkh-i jahāngushay, vol. 1, p. 274; Juwaynī, Genghis Khan, p. 214; William of Rubruck, The Mission, p. 247. 278 Nossov and Dennis, War Elephants, pp. 20-22, 35; T. Daryaee, Sasanian Persia: the Rise and the Fall of an Empire (London: I. B. Tauris; in association with the Iran Heritage Foundation, 2009), p. 46; L. Brubaker, "The Elephant and the Ark: Cultural and Material Interchange across the Mediterranean in the Eighth and Ninth centuries," Dumbarton Oaks Papers 54 (2004): 176; S. J. Raza, "Indian Elephant Corps under the Ghaznavids," Proceeding of the Indian History Congress 73rd Session (2013): 218.

68

Finally, the disaster of the elephant that was sent to Mecca is an example of Ilkhanid misunderstanding of the use of exotic animals. Abū Saʿīd could have sent the elephants to the

Mamluk court in Egypt, as the Indian delegations eventually did, where it probably would have been appreciated. Instead Abū Saʿīd chose to send the animal to Mecca where is caused great distress. Perhaps the Ilkhans lacked knowledge about exotic animals, or did not appreciate the benefits of such animals in diplomacy, preferring animals that had practical use.

69

Conclusions

Of the total 120 diplomatic delegations during the Ilkhanid period, only the descriptions of 60 delegations included a record of the provided gifts. Animal gifts were mentioned on 42 occasions, more than two thirds of the total embassies with record of gifts. Descriptions of additional 60 delegations did not mention gifts or mentioned only general terms (i.e. hadāyā, tuḥaf). Thus it is impossible to determine which items these delegations presented or whether animals accompanied them. However, it appears that some of these embassies could include animals, for example when various Mongol commanders and emirs performed the Mongolian ceremony of takshīmīshī.279 On the one hand, this indicates the importance of the use of animals as diplomatic gifts, but on the other hand, it suggests that diplomatic exchange was conducted with additional items, and that the absence of animal gifts did no prevent diplomatic exchange between polities in the Mongol period, even when a Mongol polity was a participant in the exchange. Among the embassies that included animals, at least 18 carried in addition other gifts such as slaves, jewels, vessels, clothing, weapons, carpets, tents, pavilions, and rarities. Thus animals were only one kind of diplomatic gifts, thoug a relatively popular one.

In comparison with early exchanges between Iran, the Middle East and China, for example, the

Ilkhanid exchange of animals was voluminous. Thus, in the Ilkhanid-Yuan exchange that lasted about 75 years (1260-1335) animals were included in 10 out of the 13-recorded embassies. In comparison, in the ca. 550 years that preceded the Mongol Empire (651-1207 CE), 70 missions arrived from the Muslim rulers of the Middle East and Central Asia (Dashi) to China, but animals and animal products are mentioned only in 13 of them.280 Between 530-824 CE, 41 embassies

279 Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 1072; Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 523; Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 73. 280 Bielenstein, Diplomacy and Trade, pp. 356-364.

70 arrived to China from Persia (Bosi), but animals or animal products are mentioned only in 6 of them.281 Thus the rate of animals' exchange between eastern and western Asia was much lower in the pre-Mongol period, thereby indicating that the Ilkhans indeed contributed to the exchange of animals across Asia.

Moreover, the considerable exchange of animals in the diplomatic embassies between the four

Mongol polities, the Chaghadaid Khanate,282 the Golden Horde, the Yuan dynasty, and the

Ilkhanate suggests that the Mongol rulers exchanged animals more than their sedentary contemporaries. Most importantly, the Mongols emphasized the exchange of hunting and livestock animals, which were incorporated for generations in their nomadic way of life.

Among the Mongol polities, Ilkhanid exchange of animals was practiced not only with the allied

Toluid Yuan dynasty. Even more interesting was the exchange with the Golden Horde: although it was more limited in scope, the fact that animal gifts were exchanged between the two hostile polities suggests that the Mongols adhered to gift-exchange practices even when dealing with enemies. As noted by William of Rubruck and Giovanni of Plano Carpini, the norms of gift exchange were practiced almost on every level of Mongol society, and possibly were respected even when dealing with enemies of similar origin and culture.

At the same time, the Ilkhans exchanged gifts with non-Mongol European allies, as well as eventually with former hostile polities, such as the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt. In the exchange between the Ilkhanid dynasty and the Mamluk Sultanate, only 6 out of 44 embassies (including the embassies of the Ilkhan Abū Saʿīd and his subordinates) carried animals to Egypt. Five of these delegations were initiated in the Ilkhanate, while only one was sent from Egypt to the last Ilkhan.

As already mentioned, the Ilkhanid embassies included livestock, as well as hunting and exotic

281 Bielenstein, Diplomacy and Trade, pp. 353-356. 282 Biran, “Diplomacy and Chancellery,” 382.

71 animals, while the Mamluk embassy of 1320 included horses, camels, and a zebra. While the

Mamluks’ other Mongol allies, the Golden Horde, sent to the Mamluks mostly furs, hunting falcons and additional birds, thus the Ilkhans were able to send a greater variety of animals to the

Mamluks.283

While the Mamluks, respecting the Ilkhanid taste, sent to the Ilkhanate mostly livestock animals

(the only exotic animals to be sent was a zebra). It appears that the Mamluks sent fewer animals to the Ilkhanate than to their allied of the Golden Horde. For example, when following an alliance between the Mamluk Sultanate and the Golden Horde, the Mamluk delegation to the Golden Horde included Arabian racehorses, Nubian camels, swift beasts of burden, a giraffe, zebras and monkeys.284

The exchange between the Mamluks and the Ilkhanid dynasty was different from the Mamluk delegations to the sedentary polities, to whom the Mamluk Sultans mostly granted exotic animals such as giraffes, elephants, and zebras.285 Just as in the Fatimid period in Egypt (909-1171), when livestock, hunting and exotic animals for used for gifts internaly in Egypt,286 the Mamluks had access to all these kinds of animals. More importantly, due to their access to tributaries that could send exotic animals and their diplomatic exchange with European rulers, the Mamluks had an increased use of exotic animals. Not only that the Mamluks used more exotic animals in diplomacy that their predecessors in Egypt (i.e the Fatimids), but more than other additional previous Islamic dynasties (i. e. Abbasids, Ghaznavids).287

283 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 66. 284 Ibid, pp. 64-65. 285 Ibid, pp. 140-145. 286 Ghāda al-Hijjāwī al-Qaddūmī, trans., Book of Gifts and Rarities: Kitāb al-Hadāyā wa al-Tuḥaf (Cambridge, Mass.: Distributed for the Center for Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard University by Harvard University Press, 1996), pp. 103-109. Unfortunately we do not have similar information re the Ayyubid period which preceded the Mamluks. 287 Kistler, War Elephants, pp. 187-190; C. E. Bosworth, "Ghaznevid Military Organization," Der Islam 36 (1961): 62.

72

Thus the 1320 Mamluk embassy to the Ilkhanate is unique, as it included livestock, and did not include any of Mamluks’ more famous exotic animals. That exchange demonstrates how the

Mamluk Sultan possibly took into consideration the unique Ilkhanid preferences, and instead of sending a giraffe or an elephant, sent livestock animals. The zebra, which was probably previously accepted at a gift from Yemen,288 was the exotic animal most similar to the other quadrupeds in the embassy, a possible attempt to send the most suitable exotic animal to match the Ilkhanid preference towards livestock. Abū Saʿīd’s gifts, however, were more standard and in many ways similar to the embassies of the Mamluks’ other allies, which included hunting, livestock and exotic animals.289

While the exchange of animals between the Ilkhans and their European allies was modest and limited to the exchange with Edward I, medieval European rulers, such as Henry III (r. 1207-1272) of England or Frederick II of the Holy (r. 1194-1250), exchanged exotic animals with their European contemporaries and even established menageries. For example, the menagerie at the Tower of London, which was probably founded in 1204, included animals such as lions, leopards, camels, and lynxes.290 Frederick II was an expert on falconry and collected a variety of raptors.291 In addition to the inter-European exchange, European embassies to the Mamluks and to the Yuan Qa’an included hunting raptors and other animals. Thus the falcons received in the

Ilkhanate from Edward I were not exceptional in the context of contemporary exchange, as falcons

288 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, pp. 37-44. 289 Ibid, pp. 37-59, 61-65, 95-96, 110, 113. 290 Caroline Grigson, Menagerie: The History of Exotic Animals in England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), p. 1. 291 Vernon N. Kisling Jr., ed., ZOO and Aquarium History: Ancient Animal Collection to Zoological Gardens (Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press LLC, 2000), p. 22.

73 were previously sent from Europe to the Mamluk Sultanate.292 The cheetah chosen as a gift to

Edward I fits the desire of the European rulers to collect exotic (and hunting) animals.293

All three kinds of animals (livestock, hunting and exotic) were used in the Ilkhanid diplomatic exchange. The majority of animals used as diplomatic gifts were livestock, mentioned in 22 out of

42 total embassies, more than half of the total mentions of animals. The most popular gifts were horses, mentioned 20 times. Camels were mentioned 8 times, usually (in 7 out of the 8 embassies in which they were included) alongside horses and other valuables. Other pack animals were much rarer, for example, mules were mentioned only once. It appears that the Ilkhans did not choose cattle and sheep as gifts, and even though they were so used in the early days of the Mongols’ rise to power, such a gift was probably considered less prestigious.

While the inclusion of animals in gift embassies was a common practice, there were different reasons for choosing specific animals. Livestock animals had a practical use and economic and military importance, and so sending horses and camels could be strategic help to an ally. Horses and camels were used for riding, for carrying loads, and for warfare, and as such served as a much- needed resource to any of the rulers with whom the Ilkhans exchanged diplomatic missions.

However, on most occasions, only limited numbers of such animals were sent, and they most probably did not increase the military might of the gift receiver, but rather manifested the power of the sender when the gifts were presented.

Since the elites across Eurasia – Mongols and others – practiced the chase of wild animals, hunting partners were a popular and prestigious gift. Among the hunting partners, both raptors and felines were sent to and by the Ilkhans. The raptors arrived from Europe and from a variety of locations in Asia, such as China, Central Asia, and the Indian subcontinent. More importantly, due

292 Behrens-Abouseif, Practicing Diplomacy, p. 95. 293 Kisling, ZOO and Aquarium History, pp. 21-24.

74 to the Ilkhans' hold of Persia where cheetahs abounded, they became an important supplier of the felines, sending cheetahs as unique and lavish gifts to allied rulers in Africa, Asia, and Europe.

Cheetahs were mentioned on 6 occasions; the Ilkhans received cheetahs twice, once from Syria and once from the Indian subcontinent; they granted cheetahs four times: one cheetah to Edward

I, two were delivered to Damascus, and three were given to the Mamluk Sultan al-Naṣir

Muḥammad (on 2 occasions, in 1328-1329 and 1332). The fact that a single cheetah was given to an important ally such as Edward, and a single cheetah was carried by the lavish delegation from the Delhi Sultan Muḥammad ibn Tughluq, indicates that the delegation to Egypt carrying three cheetahs was out of the ordinary.

Raptors were even more popular than cheetahs, having been carried by 10 embassies. Since the number of raptor breeds increased during the Ilkhanid period (i.e. later embassies carried a wider variety of raptors), it is possible to suggest that the Ilkhans increased their variety of hunting birds, with a potential peak during the reign of Öljeitü. Finally, hunting hounds were the least popular of the Ilkhanid hunting partners, mentioned only once or twice as royal gifts. Since the majority of the Ilkhanid allies possessed hunting hounds that they could have sent to the Ilkhans, their relative absence from the diplomatic record may indicate the Ilkhans’ lack of interest in such animals.

The majority of exotic animals exchanged by the Ilkhans were felines. From the total of 15 embassies that carried exotic animals, tigers were the most popular, having been mentioned 8 times: they were both received at the Ilkhanate from China, and sent to China from the Ilkhanate.

Other felines, such as lions and caracals, were also mentioned as having been sent with the embassies to the Qa’an. These animals perhaps serve as the most clear examples of the Ilkhanid use of exotic animals in diplomacy. The fact that some of them were used as hunting partners in

China (and possibly in Iran) may explain their popularity among the Mongol rulers.

75

Other exotic animals were mentioned only rarely. For example, the Ilkhans received zebras only from the Mamluk and Delhi Sultanates. The majority of the other exotic animals arrived in a single delegation from the Delhi Sultanate: one rhinoceros, one civet, and one parrot. Elephants were mentioned a couple of times, while the Ilkhans rarely included other exotic animals in their delegations. On one occasion Abū Saʿīd also sent a golden bird to Egypt, an animal that might have been exotic, and on another occasion he sent an elephant to the Hijaz, which perished in the course of the embassy.

A total of 10 delegations carried more than one kind of animals. On 5 occasions, in addition to horses and camels, either hunting or exotic animals were mentioned, 4 and 2 times respectively, while combinations of hunting and exotic animals were mentioned 4 times. A delegation from the

Delhi Sultanate included all three kinds of animals: horses, hunting animals (raptors and felines), and a variety of exotic animals.

Another change that occurred over time was the increase in the number of diplomatic embassies in later periods, most importantly during the reign of Abū Saʿīd. That was possibly due to the peace that was achieved between the Ilkhan and the Mamluks, and at the same time the Ilkhanid-Yuan alliance with the Chaghadaids (since 1323), which in general intensified the continental exchange.

In addition, not only that the embassies increased during the reign of Abū Saʿīd, he also included new and exotic animals in his embassies, such as the elephant that was sent to Mecca, and an unknown breed of golden birds.

In most cases the identity of the individuals who chose the particular animals remains unknown, but a few examples do provide the identities of advisors who proposed specific animals. On one occasion the Ilkhan Arghun specifically asked his European ally Edward I for European hunting birds that were not available locally. That example indicates that the Ilkhans themselves could

76 request specific animals, and that their own desires shaped the exchange. Foreign rulers and diplomats probably knew which animals to choose in order to impress their hosts based on their preferences. For example, Öljeitü’s allies of the Yuan dynasty, who indeed sent him hunting animals, possibly knew about his affection for hunting partners.

On two occasions the gifts were proposed by Mongol princes, who without doubt were familiar with Mongol culture and knew what gifts might impress the Mongol Khans. On both occasions these two princes were described as advisors, who proposed to their superior rulers which animals to send with the hope of influencing the gifts' receivers. On the one occasion Dorji was probably familiar with the preferences of his father, Qubilai, as the gift receiver. On the second occasion

Tamtaī, the son of the Golden Horde Khan Toqta, probably used his knowledge of the Mongol society, when he advised to his father to send Ghazan the hunting falcons, which were eventually delivered to the Ilkhan.

Even when the identity of an advisor is unknown, we can assume that some individual of high rank determined which animals to send and to whom. Surely, Mongol princes were involved in the exchange, advising rulers which animals to choose. Due to the constant movement of people across Eurasia during the Mongol period, it is possible that the Ilkhans’ preferences were widely known to the contemporary rulers with whom they interacted. It is important to mention that choosing the right animals was an important task, as choosing the wrong animal (e.g. in thed delegation to Mecca) could result in failure of the diplomatic mission and waste of resources.

On at least three occasions we can see that gifts were used to manipulate the emotions of the gift receiver: Ariq Böke attempted showing his loyalty to Qubilai by sending him hunting animals; the Golden Horde Khan Toqta, following Tamtaī's advice, sent Ghazan hunting falcons to calm his anger, following an encounter with a delegation that declared his illegitimacy; the Delhi Sultan

77

Muḥammad bin Tughluq attempted to persuade Abū Saʿīd to join forces by sending him a vast variety of exotic and hunting animals.

Thus, animals were chosen not only because the diplomatic norms required gifts and rarities, but also as an attempt to affect the gifts' receiver, and in such cases they were possibly chosen to impress their receivers. In the attempts to influence Qubilai and Ghazan hunting raptors were chosen as the preferable gift, as they would possibly be appreciated and enjoyed by both rulers. In another instance Abū Saʿīd received a lavish delegation from the Delhi Sultanate, that brought with it livestock, as well as hunting and exotic animals, at a time when the Delhi Sultan proposed a military alliance. More importantly, we know that when Abū Saʿīd attempted to impress the people of Mecca, he chose to send an animal with his delegation. Thus, while animals were only one possibility among other gifts, they were preferred to other items when attempting to impress a ruler.

The ability to initiate diplomatic embassies and send gifts to foreign rulers was not limited to the rulers, yet it indicated political power. For example, when Ilkhanid commanders were powerful enough to engage in diplomatic exchange with a foreign ruler independently of the head of the dynasty, they threatened the rule of the Ilkhan, and so eventually had to be eliminated as in the cases of Amir Chupan and Sheikh Ḥassan. Conversely, in the Ilkhanid case the use of diplomatic delegations was at its peak during the reign of the last Ilkhan, showing that diplomatic relations were not necessarily an indicator of political strength of a dynasty and its internal stability. The fact that the last Ilkhan initiated numerous diplomatic delegations supports Morgan’s argument that the Ilkhanate collapsed without undergoing a process of decline.294

294 David Morgan, “The Decline and Fall of the Mongol Empire,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19, 4 (Oct., 2009): 433.

78

Although the Mongols and the Ilkhans were certainly not the first rulers to exchange animals in Eurasia, the scope of their exchange – in terms of distance, volume, and the number of participants – was impressive. The Mongol elite in the Ilkhanate as well as in other Mongol polities shaped the exchange of animals throughout Eurasia, as it shaped the exchanges in other fields.295

Livestock, hunting, and exotic animals were moved across Eurasia, accompanying diplomatic maneuvers and military moves of the Ilkhans and their allies, and at times the Mongol Khans and princes personally chose the animals that should be sent with the diplomatic delegations.

One of the most impressive feats of Ilkhanid diplomatic exchange is its geographical scope. It appears that the Ilkhans, located in the Iranian region at the heart of Asia, connected the remote corners of Eurasia by practicing diplomacy with as well as with Eastern Asia, exchanging gifts with the Yuan dynasty of China and with . Although the

Ilkhanid dynasty was established following a military conquest and was initially largely surrounded by enemies, throughout its existence the Ilkhans eventually interacted with almost all major neighboring and remote polities, including the Islamic Sultanates of Egypt and Delhi, and the neighboring Mongol states of the Chaghdaids and the Golden Horde.

With the post-1260 establishment of the four Mongol polities in different regions with different available animals, the use of animals among the Mongol rulers varied. For example, the Ilkhans were limited in their access to some exotic animals; however, they could collect hunting animals locally and send them to their allies, as was the case with the cheetahs, possibly with other felines sent to the Yuan dynasty and the different breeds of western horses, the best of which were located in the Persian Gulf. Additionally, the most significant aspect of these embassies was the Ilkhans’ access to more than one animal species: they sent Tartar, western, and pack horses, as well as both

295 Allsen, Culture and Conquest, pp. 83-185.

79 single-humped and Bactrian camels, to their allies in the East and in the West, thereby disseminating various species across Eurasia.

Lastly, in a recent article about “Beastly Diplomay” by Halvard and Neuman, the researchers concluded: “Finally, animals are a part of diplomats’ everyday life. Maybe they are even more important in diplomats’ families than in other families, as they create stability and safety for children and others who have a tendency to change residence ever so often. Since we should be interested in understanding the everyday practice in international relations, the life of diplomats and diplomacy as a social form, we should stop ignoring the role of animals and rev up for more beastly research”.296 This contemporary description is surprisingly relevant also to the Mongol and

Ilkhanid cases, as the majority of chosen animals (mostly livestock and hunting animals) were in constant use by the ruling elites that engaged in diplomacy with the rulers of contemporary dynasties.

Such "more beastly research" in the Ilkhanid context should also include other patterns of animal movements, through trade, nomadic migrations, and raids. This refers mainly to livestock animals, though trade also included animal products (e.g. pearls) and the occasional hunting partners or exotic animals. Most of the Ilkhanid trade in horses and pearls, especially in the Prsian gulf region, was managed by ortaqs (who could at times serve as diplomatic messengers, but mostly fulfilled economic functions). Anyhow, these topics should also be examined in order to display the full array of animal movement during the Mongol period. Certainly a comprehensive study of the

Mongols gift exchange and Mongol diplomacy is also desirable. However this thesis contributed to these three fields by highlighting the role of animals in Ilkhanid diplomatic exchange.

296 Leira Halvard and Iver B. Neumann, “Beastly Diplomacy,” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, 1 (2017): 23.

80

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Abū al-Fidāʾ, al–Malik al-Muʾayyad ʿImād al-Dīn Ismāʿil Ibn ʿAlī. Kitāb al-mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al-bashar. Vol. 4. Egypt: al-Maṭba’ah al-Ḥusayniyah, 1960.

Ābrū, Hāfiẓ. Dhayl jāmiʿ al-tavārīkh-i rashīdī. Edited by Khānbābā Bayānī. Tehran: Anjiman-i Athār-i Mīllī, 1350/1970. al-Anṭakī, Dāwūd ibn ʿUmar. Tadhkirat ūlī ʾl-albāb wa ʾl-jamiʿ li ʾl-ʿajab al-ʿujjāb. Cairo: Muṣṭafā al-Bābī al-Ḥalbiy, 1952.

Arrian. Anabasis Alexandri: History of Alexander and Indica. Translated by E. Iliff Robson. Vol. 1. London: W. Heinemann, 1966.

Āyati, ʿAbd al-Muḥammad. Taḥrir-i ta'rīkh-i Waṣṣāf. Tehran: Pazhūhishgāh-i ʿUlūm-i Insānī wa Muṭaliʿāt-i Farhangī, 1995.

Gardīzī, ʿAbd al-Ḥayy ibn Ḍaḥḥāk. The Ornament of Histories: A History of the Eastern Islamic Lands AD 650- 1041, the Original Text of Abū Saʿīd Abd al-Hayy Gardizi. Translated and edited by Edmund Bosworth. London: I.B. Tauris, 2011.

Giovanni di Plano Carpini. The Story of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars: Friar Giovanni di Plano Carpini’s Account of His Embassy to the Court of the Mongol Khan. Translated by Erik Hildinger. Boston: Branden Pub. Co., 1996.

Ibn ʿAbd al-Ẓāhir, Muḥyī al-Dīn. al-Rawd al-zahir fi sirāt al-Malik al-Ẓahir. Edted by ʿAbd al- ʿAzīz al-Khwaitir. Riyad: Muʾassasat Fuʾād, 1976.

Ibn Abī al-Faḍā'il, Mufaḍḍal. Ägypten und Syrien zwischen 1317 und 1341 in der Chronik des Mufaḍḍal b. Abī l-Faḍā'il. Freiburg im Breisgau: K. Schwarz, 1973.

81

Ibn Baṭṭuṭah. Riḥlat Ibn Baṭṭuṭah: tuḥfat al-nuẓār fī gharāiʾb al-amṣār va ʿajāiʾb al-asfār. Edited by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Munʿan al-ʿAryān and Muṣṭafā al-Qaṣṣāṣ. Beirut: Dār Akhyāʾ al-ʿUlūm, 1417/1996.

Ibn Baṭṭuṭah. The travels of Ibn Battutah, A.D. 1325-1354. Translated by H. A. R. Gibb and C. F. Beckingham. Edited by C. Defremery and B. E. Sanguinetti. 5 vols. Cambridge: Published for the Hakluyt Society at the University Press, 1958-2000.

Ibn al-Dawādārī, Ibn Aybak. Kanz al-durar wa jāmiʿ al-ghurar. Edited by H. R. Romer. Vol. 9. Cairo: al-Maʿhad al-Ālmānī Lil-Athār, Qism al-Dirāsāt al-Islāmiya, 1960.

Ibn Iyās. Badāʾiʿ al-zuhūr fī waqāʾiʿ al-duhūr. Edted M. Muṣṭafā. Vol. 4. Cairo: al-Hayʾah al- Miṣriyyah al-ʿĀmmah Lil-kitāb, 1984.

Ibn al-Jazarī. Tārīkh ḥawādīth al-zamān wa-anbāʾihi wa-wafayāt al-akābir wa-l-aʿyān min abnāʾihi. EditedʿUmarʿAbd al-Salām Tadmūrī. Vol. 2. Beirut: al-Maktabah al-‘Aṣriyah, 1998.

Ibn Manklī. Kitāb uns al-malā bi-waḥsh al-falā. Beirut: Muʾasasat al-Risālah, 1994.

Ibn Munqidh, Usāmah Ibn Murshid al-Kinānī al-Shayzarī Muʾayyad al-Dawlah Abū Muẓaffar. Usāmah's Memoirs: Entitled Kitāb al-iʻtibār. Edited Phillip K. Hitti. Princeton: Princeton university press, 1930.

Ibn Munqidh, Usāmah Ibn Murshid al-Kinānī al-Shayzarī Muʾayyad al-Dawlah Abū Muẓaffar. The Book of Contemplation: Islam and the Crusades. Penguin Classics. Translated by Paul M. Cobb. London: Penguin 2008.

Juwaynī, ʿAlā’-al-Dīn ʿAṭā-Malik. Tārīkh-i jahāngushay. Edited by Muḥammad Qazwīnī. 3 vols. Tehran: Hermes, 1387.

Juvaini (Juwaynī), ʿAla-ad-Din ʿAta-Malik. Genghis Khan: The history of the World Conqueror. Translated by John Andrew Boyle. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997.

82 al-Nuwayrī, Shihāb al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Wahāb Aḥmad. Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab. Vol. 30, Edited by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Hārā Shaʿīra; Vol. 32, Edited Fahīm Muḥammad ʿAlawī Shaltūt; Vol. 33, Edited M. Ḥijāzī and M. M. Ziyādah, Cairo: Vizārat al-Thaqāfa val-Irshād al-qūmī. Al-

Muʾasasa al-Miṣriya al-ʿAma Lil-Tālīf Val-Tarjama Val-Ṭibāʿa Val-Nashr, 1997-1998. al-Qaddūmī, Ghāda al-Hijjāwīб trans. Book of Gifts and Rarities: Kitāb al-Hadāyā wa al-Tuḥaf. Cambridge, Mass.: Distributed for the Center for Middle Eastern Studies of Harvard University by Harvard University Press, 1996.

Qāshānī, Abū al-Qasīm. Tārīkh-i Uljāytū: tārikh-i pādishāh saʿīd ghiyāth al-dunyā wa al-dīn Uljāytū Muḥammad sulṭān ṭayab allah marqadih. Edited by M. Hambly. Tehran: B.T.N.K, 1969.

Qāshānī, Abū al-Qasīm. ʿArāʾis al-jawahir wa al-nafāʾis al-aṭayib. Tehran: Anjiman-i Athār-i Mīllī, 1345/1966.

Qazwīnī, Ḥamd-Allāh Mustawfī. The Zoological Section of the Nuzhatu-l Qulūb of Ḥamdullāh al-Mustaufī al-Qazwīnī. Edited and translated by Lieut.-Colonel J. Stephenson. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1928. al-Qazwīnī, Zakaryā b. Muḥammad b. Maḥmūd. Kosmographie: Kitāb ʿajāyib al-makhlūqāt. Edited Ferdinand Wüstenfeld. Vol. 1. Göttingen: Dieterichsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1849.

Polo, Marco. Marco Polo: The Description of the Worldb. Translated by A. C. Moule and Paul Pelliot. Vol. 1. London: Routladge and sons, 1938.

De Rachewiltz, Igor, trans. The Secret History of the Mongols: A Mongolian Epic Chronicle of the Thirteenth Century. 3 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2013.

Rashīd al-Dīn. Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh. Edited by Muḥammad Rawshan and Muṣṭafā Mūsawī. 4 vols. Tehran: Nashir al-Burz, 1373/1994.

Rashīd al-Dīn. Rashiduddin Fazlullah's Jami'u't-tawarikh: a History of the Mongols. Translated by W. M. Thackston. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Dept. of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, 1998-1999.

83

Rashīd al-Dīn. Sbornik Letopisei. Translated by A. K. Arends. Edited by. A. A. Romaskevich, E. Ė. Bertelʹs and A. Iu. Iakubovski. Vol. 3. Moscow: Nauka, 1946.

Rashīd al-Dīn. Sbornik Letopisei. Translated by Iu. P. Verkhovski. Edited by I. P. Petrushevski. Vol. 2. Mocow; Leningrad: Akdemia Nauk SSSR 1960.

Rashīd al-Dīn. The Successors of Genghis Khan. Translated by John A. Boyle. New York: Columbia University Press, 1971.

Shabānkārahī, Muḥammad bin ʿAlī bin Muḥammad. Majmaʿ al-ansāb. Edited by Mīr Hāshim Muhaddith. Tehran: Muʾasisih Intishārāt-i Amir Kabir, 1376/1997.

Rūdakī. “Būy-i jūy-i Mulian āyad hamī.” Retrieved on 08 September 2018. https://ganjoor.net/roodaki/baghimande/sh121/

Tikhomrov, M. N., ed. Polnoe Sobranie Russkikh Letopisei. Vol. 26. Moscow, Leningrad: Izdatelʹstvo Akedemii Nauk SSSR 1959.

William of Rubruck. The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Mongke, 1253-1255. Translated by Peter Jacksom. Edited by David Morgan. London: Hakluyt Society, 1990.

Zettersteen, K. V. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane in den jahren 690-741 der Hiǵra nach arabischen Handschriften. Leiden: Brill, 1919

Secondary Sources

Abida Ahmed, Roohi. “Foreign Relations of Delhi Sultanate.” PhD. Dissertation. Aligarh Muslim University, 1991.

Alkhateeb Shehada, Housni. Mamluks and Animals: Veterinary Medicine in Medieval Islam. Boston: Brill, 2013.

84

Allsen, Thomas T. Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Allsen, Thomas T. “The Circulation of Hunting Leopards in Eurasia, Seventh-Seventeenth Century.” In Contact and Exchange in the Ancient World, edited by Victor H. Mair, 116-35. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press; London: Eurospan distributor, 2005.

Allsen, Thomas T. The Royal Hunt in Eurasian History. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, c2006.

Amitai, Reuven. Holy War and Rapprochement: Studies in the Relations between the Mamluk Sultanate and the Mongol Ilkhanate (1260-1335). Turnhout, Be.: Brepols Publishers, 2013.

Amitai, Reuven. “Whither the Ilkhanid Army? Ghazan’s First Campaign into Syria (1299-1300),” In Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800), ed. Nicola DiCosmo, 221-64. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Amitai-Preiss, Reuven. Mongols and Mamluks: the Mamluk-Ilkhanid War, 1260-1281. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Arom, Na’ama O. “Beyond Bow Range: The Formation of Mongol Foreign Relations in the Middle East 1253-1282.” PhD dissertation, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2016.

Atwood, Christopher P. Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire. New York, NY: Facts on File, 2004.

Bahrani Pour, Ali. “The Trade in Horses between Khorasan and India in the 13th – 17th Centuries.” The Silk Road 11 (2013): 123-38.

Baumann, Brian. “By the Power of the Eternal Heaven: The Meaning of Tenggeri to the Government of the Pre-Buddhist Mongols.” Extrême-Orient Extrême-Occident 35 (2013): 233-84.

85

Behrens-Abouseif, Doris. Practicing Diplomacy in the Mamluk Sultanate: Gifts and Material Culture in the Medieval Islamic World. London: I.B. Tauris, 2014.

Bielenstein, Hans. Diplomacy and Trade in the Chinese world, 589-1276. Leiden: Brill, 2005.

Biran, Michal. “Diplomacy and Chancellery Practice in the Chagataid Khanate: Some Preliminary Remarks.” Oriente Moderno 88, 2 (2008): 369-93.

Biran, Michal. “The Battle of Herat (1270) – a Case of inter-Mongol Warfare.” In Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800), edited by Nicola DiCosmo, 175-219. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Bosworth, C. E. "Ghaznevid Military Organization." Der Islam 36 (1961): 37-77.

Bosworth, C. E. The Ghaznavids: Their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran, 994-1040. Edinburgh: University Press, 1963.

Boyle, John Andrew. “A Eurasian Hunting Ritual.” Folklore 80, 1 (1969): 12-6.

Broadbridge, Anne F. Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Brubaker, L. "The Elephant and the Ark: Cultural and Material Interchange across the Mediterranean in the Eighth and Ninth centuries." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 54 (2004): 175-95.

Capel, Chloé. “La Question des Parcs de Chasse à l’époque Abbasside: le Cas Emblématique de Sâmarrâ’.” Remmm, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 130 (2012): 153-80.

Carboni, Stefano. The’'Wonders of Creation’: A Study of Ilkhanid ‘London Qazwini’. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015.

Chakravarti, Ranabir. “Equestrian Demand and Dealers: The Early Indian Scenario (up to c. 1300).” In Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, edited by Bert G. Fragner and

86

Velizar Sadovski, 145-160. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009.

Chawla, Joginder K. India's Overland Trade with Central Asia and Persia during the Thirteenth and Fourteenth centuries. New Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 2006.

Charles, M. B. "Alexander, Elephants and Gaugamela.” Mouseion: Journal of the Classical Association of Canada 8 (2008): 9-23.

Davies, Wendy and Paul Fouracre, The Languages of Gift in the Early Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, c2010.

Daryaee, T. Sasanian Persia: the Rise and the Fall of an Empire. London: I. B. Tauris; in association with the Iran Heritage Foundation, 2009.

Digby, Simon. War-Horse and Elephant in the Delhi Sultanate: a Study of Military Supplies. Oxford: Orient Monographs, 1971.

Doerfer, Gerhard. Türkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen: unter besonderer Berücksichtigung Älterer Neupersischer Geschichtsquellen, vor allem der Mongolen- und Timuridenzeit. Vol. 2. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, 1965.

Earthy, E. Dora. “The Religion of Genghis Khan (A.D. 1162-1227),” Numen 2, 3 (1955): 228- 32.

Gill, Matanya. “A Cultural Biography of Pearls in the Ilkhanate (1260-1335),” International Journal of Business and Globalization, forthcoming.

Grigson, Caroline. Menagerie: The History of Exotic Animals in England. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Halvard, Leira and Iver B. Neumann. “Beastly Diplomacy.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13, 1 (2017): 1-23.

87

Humphrey, Caroline, and Stephen Hugh-Jone. Barter, Exchange, and Value: An Anthropological Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Jackson, Peter. The Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Jackson, Peter. The Mongols and the West. Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2005.

Jackson, Peter. The Mongols in the Islamic Lands: From Conquest to Conversion. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2017.

Jagchid, S., and C. R. Bawden. "Notes on the Hunting of Some Nomadic Peoples of Central Asia." In Die Jagd bei den Altaischen Völkern, Asiatische Forschungen 26, 90-118. Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1968.

Jowkar, H., L. Hunter, H. Ziaie, L. Marker, C. Breitenmoser-Wursten and S. Durant. “Acinonyx jubatus ssp. venaticus.” The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008. Retrieved on 08 September 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T220A13035342.en

Kaushik, Roy. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

Kauz, Ralph. “Horse Export from the Persian Gulf until the Arrival of the Portuguese.” In Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, edited by Bert G. Fragner and Velizar Sadovski, 129- 136. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009.

Khazanov, Anatoly M. Nomads and the Outside World. Translated by Julia Crookenden. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, c1994.

Kisling, Vernon N. Jr., ed. ZOO and Aquarium History: Ancient Animal Collection to Zoological Gardens. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press LLC, 2000.

88

Kistler, J. M. War Elephants. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2006.

Kler, Joseph. “Hunting Customs of the Ordos Mongols.” Primitive Man 14, 3 (1941): 38-48.

Komaroff, Linda. Gift of the Sultan: the Art of Giving at the Islamic Courts. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 2011.

Komaroff, Linda, and Stefano Carboni, eds. The Legacy of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western Asia, 1256-1353. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2002.

Kradin, Nikolay. “Structure of Power in Nomadic Empires of Inner Asia: Anthropological Approach.” In Hierarchy and Power in the History of Civilizations, edited by Leonid E. Grinin, Dmitri D. Beliaev and An-drey V. Korotayev, 98-125. Moscow: URSS, 2007.

Lambton, A. K. S. “Mongol Fiscal Administration in Persia (Part II)” Studia Islamica 64 (1986): 79-99.

Little, Donald P. “Diplomatic Missions and Gifts Exchanged by Mamluks and Ilkhans.” In Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan, edited by Linda Komaroff, 30-42. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

Liu Yingsheng, “War and Peace between the Yuan Dynasty and the Chaghadaid Khanate (1312- 1323).” In Mongols, Turks and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, ed. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran, 339-358. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2005.

Lockhart, L. “The Relations between Edward I and Edward II of England and the Mongol Īl-Khāns of Persia.” Iran 6 (1968): 23-31.

Martin, H. Desmond. “The Mongol Army.” The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1 (1943): 46-85.

89

Martin, Janet. Treasure of the Land of Darkness: the Fur Trade and its Significance for Medieval . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Mauss, Marcel. The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Translated by W.D. Halls. New York: W.W. Norton, 1990.

May, Timothy. The Mongol Art of War: Chinggis Khan and the Mongol Military System. Yardley, Penn.: Westholme, 2007.

May, Timothy. “The Training of an Inner Asian Nomad Army in the Pre-Modern Period.” The Journal of Military History 70, 3 (2006): 617-35.

Melville, Charles. “The Keshig in Iran: The Survival of the Royal Mongol Household.” In Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan, edited by Linda Komaroff, 135-164. Leiden: Brill, 2006.

Mellvile, Charles. “’The Year of the Elephant’ Mamluk-Mongol Rivalry in the Hejaz in the Reign of Abu Saʿid (1317-1335).” Studia Iranica 21, 2 (1992): 197-214.

Morgan, David. O. “The Decline and Fall of the Mongol Empire.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19, 4 (Oct., 2009): 427-37.

Northrup, Linda S. From Slave to Sultan: the Career of Al-Mansur Qalawun and the Consolidation of Mamluk Rule in Egypt and Syria (678-689 A.H./1279-1290 A.D.). Stuttgart: F. Stiner, 1998.

Nossov, Konstantin, and Peter Dennis. War Elephants. Oxford: Osprey, 2008.

Poppe, Nicholas. “On Some Military Terms in the Yüan-ch'ao Pi-Shih.” Monumenta Serica 26 (1967): 506-17.

90

De Rachewiltz, Igor. “Yeh-lü Ch’u-ts’ai (1189-1243). Yeh-lü Chu (1221-1285).” In In the Service of the Khan – Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yüan Period, edited by I. De Rachewiltz, Hok-am Chan, Hsiao Ch’i-ching and P. W. Geier, 136-75. Wiesbaden: Harrasowutz Verlag, 1993.

Ranking, John. Historical Researches on the Wars and Sports of the Mongols and Romans: In Which Elephants and Wild Beasts Were Employed or Slain. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, 1826.

Raza, S. J. "Hindus under the Ghaznavids." Proceeding of the Indian History Congress 71st Session (2010-2011): 213-25.

Raza, S. J. "Indian Elephant Corps under the Ghaznavids." Proceeding of the Indian History Congress 73rd Session (2013): 212-22.

Renou, L. The Civilization of Ancient India. Calcutta: Susil Gupta, India, 1959.

Rossabi, Morris. “Tabriz and Yuan China.” In Aspects of the Maritime Silk Road: From the Persian Gulf to the East China Sea, edited by Ralph Kauz, 97-106. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2010.

Schafer, E. H. "War Elephants in Ancient and Medieval China." Oriens 10, 2 (1957): 289-91.

Singh, S. D. Ancient Indian Warfare with Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965.

Sinor, Denis. “The Inner Asian Warriors.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 101, 2 (1981): 133-44.

Smith, John Masson Jr. “Ayn Jālūt: Mamlūk Success or Mongol Failure?.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 44, 2 (1984): 307-45.

91

Spinei, Victor. “Hunting in the Mongol Society during the Great Expansion Age in Eurasia.” Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 21 (2014-2015): 215-76.

Wink, Andre. Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World. Vol. 2. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1997.

Yokkaichi, Yasuhiro. “Horses in the East-West Trade between China and Iran under Mongol Rule.” In Pferde in Asien: Geschichte, Handel und Kultur, Veröffemtlichungen zur Iranistik, edited by Bert G. Fragner and Velizar Sadovski, 87-98. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2009.

Zakirov, Salikh. Diplomaticheskie Otnoshenie Zolotoi Ordy s Egiptom (XII-XIV vv.). Moscow: Nauka, 1966.

Data Archives

Mobility Database – JPP-Spring, data base of the project “Mobility, Empire and Cross-Culture Contacts in Mongol Eurasia”, led by Michal Biran – the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

92

Appendix I – List of Delegations and Gifts

Gift Giver Gift Receiver Gift Year Occasion Source Chinggis , Ong A coat made of Allience. De Rachewiltz, Khan Khan black sable fur. The Secret History, vol. 1, pp. 29-30, 34-35. Chinggis Kishlik and Slaves, soldiers, 1203 Reward for De Rachewiltz, Khan Bada, servants horses and cattle allegiance. The Secret History, vol. 1, of Ong Khan (chahārpay wa pp. 108-109. aulāq). Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan gushāay, vol. 1, pp. 137-138.

Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. 37-38. Barchuq, Alt- Chinggis Sent three 1209 Alliance. Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan , leader Khan messengers, gushāay, vol. 1, p. 142. of the Uighur announcing his rebellion against Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. the Qara-Khitai. 45-46. Chinggis Khan requested him to arrive in person. No gift was mentioned. Chinggis Barchuq, Alt- After meeting the 1209 Reward for Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khan Tegin, leader Qa’an, the allegiance. gushāay, vol. 1, p. 142. of the Uighur Barchuq returned loaded with Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. honors 45-46. (syūrghāmīshī). Chinggis Barchuq, Alt- Extraordinary 1209 Reward for a Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khan Tegin, leader attention and successful gushāay, vol. 1, p. 143. of the Uighur favors (ʿaṭifat wa military farṭ), proposed campaign. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. marriage to a 47. daughter of Chinggis Khan.

Chinggis Ozar, a local Thousand head of 1211 Alliance. Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khan leader sheep (hazār sar gushāay, vol. 1, pp. 164-165. gūsfand). Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. 75-76.

93

Chief men of Chinggis Presents (nuzlhā). 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan the town of Khan city’s gushāay, vol. 1, p. 186. Zarnūq surrender. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 99. The people Chinggis Initially proposed 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan from the Khan to present an city’s gushāay, vol. 1, p. 185. town of Nūr offering of food surrender. (nuzlī), eventually Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. presented suitable 101-102. offerings of food (targhū wa nuzl). People of Chinggis Provisions and 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Balkh Khan presents (targhū city’s gushāay, vol. 1, pp. 204-205. wa pīshkish). surrender. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 130. Jochi Chinggis 20,000 Grey 1220 Gift to the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khan horses (asb-i Qa’an. gushāay, vol. 1, p. 215. khing). Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. 139-140. People of Yeme and Provisions 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Balkh Sūbetei, (targhūyī wa arrival to the gushāay, vol. 1, p. 217. Mongol nuzlī). city. Commander Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 144. Leaders of Yeme and Provisions and 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Sūbetei, presents (nuzl was arrival to the gushāay, vol. 1, pp .217-218. Mongol pīshkish). city. Commanders Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 145. ʿAlā' al- Yeme, Presents of 1220 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Dawla, Mongol mounts (markūb) city’s gushāay, vol. 1, p. 219. leader of Commander and clothing; surrender. Hamadan offering of food, Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. victims and drink. 147. Mujīr al- Tolui Horses, camels 1221 After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Mulk, leader and mules (khuyūl city’s gushāay, vol. 1, p. 229. of . wa jimāl wa surrender. bighāl). Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 161.

94

Ögödei Notables Gifts and presents 1229 After his Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan present in his from the treasury coronation. gushāay, vol. 1, p. 251. coronations (mūdaʿāt-i khazāyinī or Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. amwāl wa 189. khazāiyin). Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 1, p. 636.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 312.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, p. 35. Ögödei and Chinggis Forty maidens and 1229 Chinggis Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan other Khan burial choice horses Khan’s burial gushāay, vol. 1, p. 252. notables ceremony (asbān-i gūzīdah). ceremony Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 189. Ögödei Mongol Presents (amwālī) 1234-35 During the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan notables second gushāay, vol. 1, p. 259. quriltay, celebrating Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. the recent 198. campaign in China. Unnamed Ögödei Gifts (tuḥaf) and a During his After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Persian ruler ruby with an reign. ruler’s gushāay, pp. 266-267. inscription of surrender. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. ’s 207-208. name. Indian Ögödei Tusks of ivory During his Presenting a Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan merchants (dandān-i fīl). reign. gift to the gushāay, p. 274. Qa’an. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 214. An unnamed Ögödei Hundred bone During his Presenting a Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan man arrowheads. reign. gift to the gushāay, vol. 1, p. 276. Qa’an. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 216. Ögödei People in his Robe and horse During his An example Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan presence and (asb) to every reign. of the Qa’an gushāay, vol. 1, p. 277. Minister person in his generosity. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. Yalavach presence. 218.

95

Unnamed Ögödei A cup made out of During his Presenting a Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan person a horn of a reign. gift to the gushāay, vol. 1, pp. 281-282. mountain goat. Qa’an. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 223. Ögödei Kinswoman Many pearls During his A gift from Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan (marwārīd). reign. the Qa’an. gushāay, vol. 1, p. 283.

Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 224. Abū Bakr b. Ögödei Two carboys Presumabl After the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Sa'd b. Zangi, filled with pearls y annually city’s gushāay, vol. 1, p. 292. the atabeg of (marwārīd) during his surrender, Shiraz reign, sent as the Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 1229- kharāj tax. 234. 1241. Möge Mongol Gifts and presents 1241 Following Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khatun notables (hadāyā wa the death of gushāay, p. 298. tuḥaf). Ögödei Khan, sent in Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. order to 240. secure influence. Güyük Mongol Jewels, money 1246 Following his Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan notables and clothing coronation. gushāay, p. 310. (jawāhir wa nuqūd wa athwāb) Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. or money (mālī 254. bisyār). Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 806.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 392-393.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, pp. 118-119. Güyük Mongol Wares of During his Presenting Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan notables and merchants and reign. gifts to the gushāay, p. 315. subjects well as those Qa’an. received from Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. faraway lands. 260. Sorqaghtani Oghul Clothing (jāmih) 1248 Sent Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, Beki Qaimish, and according to vol. 2, p. 810. Güyük’s wife tradition,

96

headgear following the Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, (buqtāq). death of vol. 2, p. 395. Güyük Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, pp. 121-122. Batu Oghul Clothing (jāmih) 1248 Sent Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, Qaimish, and according to p. 810. Güyük’s wife headgear tradition, (buqtāq). following the Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, death of vol. 2, p. 395. Güyük Rashīd al-Dīn/Verkhovski, vol. 2, pp. 120-121. Möngke Berke and Favors and gifts 1252 After arriving Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Qa’an Togha-Tëmur from every kinds at the Qa’ans gushāay, vol. 3, pp. 690-691. and all manner of service. gratification. In Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. addition to gifts 594. (hadāyā wa tuḥaf) for Baraq. Möngke Wagon loads of 1252 ‘Id al-Fitr Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Qa’an gold and silver celebration. gushāay, vol. 3, pp. 698-699. balish, costly clothing. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. 600-601.

Möngke Tegmish, a Tokens of favors 1252-53 For Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Qa’an servant of the and benevolence. preventing a gushāay, vol. 1, pp. 148-154. Bilge Quti, massacre of Uyghur Muslims. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, pp. notable. 48-53. Envoys from Möngke Numberless gifts During the Envoys to the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan the land of Qa’an and presents of Qa’an’s Qa’an. gushāay, vol. 3, p. 700. the Franks heavily laden reign. and Syria, horses. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. Iraq 602. Möngke Hülegü, his Choice mounts 1253 Preparation Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Qa’an wives and and beasts of for Hülegü’s gushāay, vol. 3, p. 711. children burden (marākib campaign. wa ḥamūlāt guzīn Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. or chahārpay). 611. Additional presents were Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, given to various vol. 2, p. 977. commanders

97

(emirs and Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, ). vol. 2, p. 479.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 24.

Mongol Hülegü Offerings of food 1253 Before the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan princess (nuzlhā). departure to gushāay, vol.3, p. 711. the west Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 611 Hülegü Mongol Gifts and presents 1253 Before the Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan princess (mubarrāt wa departure to gushāay, vol. 3, p. 711. ṣalāt) in the west accordance with Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. rank. 611 Orghina Hülegü Gifts (pīshkīshhay 1253 When Juvainī, Tarikh-i jahan Khatun lāyiq mabdhūl). Hülegü was gushāay, vol. 3, p. 712. advancing to the Levant. Juvainī, Genghis Khan, p. 611.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. 2, p. 978.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 480.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 25. Ilkhanid Period Ariq Böke Qubilai Qa’an Five Falcons 1256 An attempt to Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, (sanqūr) show his vol. 2, p. 873. loyalty. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 426.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 2, p. 159. Local rulers Hülegü Gifts (pīshkīshhay 1256 During the Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. such ʿIzz al- lāyiq) campaing in 2, p. 979. Dīn and Persia Rukn al-Dīn from Rūm, Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, Saʿd b. vol. 2, p. 480. Muẓafar al-

98

Dīn from Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. Fars, and 3, p. 25. additional rulers. Nāṣir al-Dīn Hülegü Gifts ( hadāyā) 1256 During the Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Muḥtashim, campaign in 2, p. 983. commander Quhistan. of a fortress Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 482.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 27. Hülegü Princes and Robes and other 1257 Cellebrating Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. amirs gifs. the new year. 2, p. 990.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, p. 485.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 31. Hülegü Al-Mustʿaṣim A messenger sent 1257 During Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. to request the Hülegü’s 2, p. 999. Caliph’s support. campaign in the levant. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 488-489.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 34-35. Al- Hülegü The Caliph sent a 1257 During Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Mustʿaṣim response to Hülegü’s 2, p. 999. Hülegü. The campaign in messengers the levant. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, delivered gifts vol. 2, pp. 488-489. (tuḥaf wa hadāyā) Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 34-35. Qubilai and Balishs of gold 1259 After his Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Qa’an Amirs and silver and coronation. Waṣṣāf, p. 15. various brocade robes that were captured in other lands. People of Kitbuga Gifts (hadāyā wa 1260 After the Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Damascus tuḥaf) city’s Waṣṣāf, p. 34. surrender.

99

Sultan Malik Hülegü Gifts (hadāyā wa During After the Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Sayid, ruler tuḥaf) Hülegü’s city’s Waṣṣāf, p. 35. of campaing surrender. in the Levant. Abaqa Wives, sons Gifts (jawāhir 1265 After his Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. and emirs wa jāmihhāī coronation. 2, p. 1060. girānmāyih). Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 517.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 67. Abaqa Baybars Gifts (hadāyā) 1265 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and relations. Ideology, p. 33. Baraq Neguder Gifts that included 1267-68 During a war Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Oghul who a ṭughānih - between 2, p. 1070. was with arrow, in which a Baraq and Abaqa letter from Baraq Abaqa. was hidden. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 522.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 72. Abaqa Baybars No gift was 1268-69 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and mentioned. relations. Ideology, p. 33. Baybars Abaqa No gift was 1268-69 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and mentioned. relations. Ideology, p. 33. Sächäktü Qipchaq Choice Arabic 1269-70 Following his Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. horses (asbān-i defection to 2, pp. 1072-1073. guzīdahʾ tāzī), Qipchaq’s probably Arabian. camp. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 523-525.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 73-75. Qipchaq Baraq Choice horses 1269-70 Following Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, (asbān-i guzīdah Sächäktü gift vol. 2, pp. 1072-1073. guzīdahʾ tāzī), to Qipchaq. probably Arabian Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 523-525.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 73-75.

100

Qubilai Abaqa Yarliq, crown and 1270 Afirming Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Qa’an gifts (tashrīf). Abaqa’s 2, pp. 1096-1097. coronation. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 535.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86. Möngke Abaqa Gyrfalcom 1270 Following Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Temür (sanqūr), falcon the defeat of 2, p. 1097. (bāz) and royal Baraq in the falcon (shāhīn). battle of Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, Herat. vol. 3, p. 535.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86. Abaqa Möngke Regal belägs 1270 Gifts given to Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Temür (gifts). the 2, p. 1097. delegation when it Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, returned vol. 3, p. 535. home. Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 86.

Baybars Abaqa Sword, Venetian 1270-71 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and shirt and relations. Ideology, pp. 33-34. helmet, a bow, quiver and nine arrows. Samghar, Baybars No gift was 1272 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and Mongol ruler mentioned. relations. Ideology, pp. 35-36. of Baybars Samghar, Single bow. 1272 Diplomatic Broadbridge, Kingship and Mongol ruler relations. Ideology, pp. 35-36. of Anatolia Sari Ramah, Qubilai Qa’an Gifts (hadāyā wa 1273 Submitting to Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i The Ruler of tuḥaf). the Qa’an. Waṣṣāf, p. 19. Java, and his son Unnamed, Qubilai Qa’an Tribute (bāj wa 1273 Submitting to Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i son of Sari ḥarāj) of gold and the Qa’an. Waṣṣāf, p. 19. Ramah pearls (marwārīd) Ṣahib ʿAlāʾ Abaqa Gold and a latter. 1281 Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i al-Dīn Waṣṣāf, p. 62.

101

Aḥmad Wives, sons, Treasures (120 1282 After his Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Tegüder emirs and the dinars) coronation. 2, p. 1126. needy

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 549.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 100. Aḥmad Arghun 20 balish. 1282 After his Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Tegüder coronation. 2, p. 1126.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 549.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 100. Arghun Amirs and Raided the 1284 During his Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. soldiers treasuries of war with 2, p. 1135. Nishapur, Tus and Aḥmad Esferian, and gave Tegüder. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, the spoils that vol. 3, p. 553. included coins, precious stones Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. and clothing to his 3, p. 104. men.

Arghun Nawrūz Arabian mare 1284 Following Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. (mādyānī ʿarbī). the victory 2, pp. 1136-1137. over Alinaq. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 553-554.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends , vol. 3, p. 105. Najīb al-Dīn Ghazan Incredible horses 1289 Arrived at Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Farash (basbān bighāyat Ghazan’s 2, p. 1221. nīkū). service. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, pp. 596-597.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 145.

102

Niẓām al-Dīn Ghazan Horses (aspān-i 1289 Arrived at Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Yaḥya qubchāq), gold Ghazan’s 2, p. 1222. and silver utensils, service. tents and Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, pavilions, carpets, vol. 3, p. 597. vessels, mules and camels (astarān Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. wa shuturān) 3, p. 146.

Geikhatu Ghazan Geikhatu sent 1291 Arrived at Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. messengers to Ghazan’s 2, p. 1232. Ghazan, who service. commited Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, takshīmīshī upon vol. 3, p. 603. arrival. Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 151-152. Edward I Arghun Falcons. 1291 Diplomatic Lockhart, “Edward I,” 26-7. relations. Geilkhātū Edward I Cheetah. 1292 Diplomatic Lockhart, “Edward I,” 26-7. relations A Delegation Ghazan Chinese and 1292 Diplomatic Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. of Arghun Cathian rarities delegation 2, pp. 1237-1238. which included tigers that returned returned (babar). to the Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, from China Ilkhanate. vol. 3, p. 606.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 154. Ghazan Gheikhatu A tiger (babar) 1292 A gift to the Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. that was brought Ilkhan. 2, p. 1238. from Yuan dynasty and Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, additional gifts. vol. 3, p. 606.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 154. Ghazan Nowrūz Horses (asbān), 1294 Following a Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i robes and battle with Waṣṣāf, p. 178. provision. Yasawur. A meesenger Ghazan Performed 1295 Attempted a Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. from Baidu takshīmīshī and peace talk. 2, pp. 1245-1246. was compensated in reurtn. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 614.

103

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 158-159. Malik al- Ghazan 1000 horses 1295 A visit of Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Islām Jamāl (akhta), pearls, Ghazan. Waṣṣāf, p. 187. al-Dīn cloth of gold, Ibrāhīm b. silks, jewels, gold Muḥammad and silver vessels, al-Ṭībī rarities from China and India. Ghazan Malik al- Hunting falcons 1295 Following an Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Islām Jamāl (bāzī shikārī), appointment. Waṣṣāf, p. 189. al-Dīn robe of honor, Ibrāhīm b. royal sword, an Muḥammad umbrella and a al-Ṭībī . Malik Yuan Qa’an Gifts (tuḥafhā). 1297 Diplomatic Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i Muʿaẓẓam relations. Waṣṣāf, pp. 261-262. Fakhar al- Dīn Yokkaichi, “Horse,” 90. Temür Qa’an Ghazan Gifts (hadāyā wa 1297 Diplomatic Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i tuḥaf farāwān). relations. Waṣṣāf, p. 262. People of Sayf al-Dīn Gift (hadiyah). 1300 Upon arrival Zettersteen, Beitrage zur Damasqus Qipchaq to the city. Geschichte der Mamlukensultane, p. 49. Toqta Khan Ghazan 21 Hunting 1301-1302 Diplomatic Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i falcons (bazān-i relations. Waṣṣāf, p. 222. shikārī) Emperor Ghazan Gifts and tribute 1302 Diplomatic Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Andronik II (tuḥaf wa relations. 2, pp. 1308-1309. hadāyā). Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 654.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, pp. 192-193. Bayan Khan Ghazan Falcons (sanqūr) 1302-1303 Diplomatic Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. and a letter. relations. 1, pp. 712-713.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 349-350.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 2, p. 68.

104

Ghazan Bayan and his Gold, clothing and 1302-1303 Diplomatic Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Wives letters (zar wa relations. 1, p. 714. jāmih wa bīlkhā).

Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 2, pp. 349-350.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 2, p. 68. Unknown Ghazan Elephants (pīlān). 1303 Unknown, Rashīd al-Dīn/Rawshan, vol. Indian Rulers possibly 2, pp. 1316-1317. diplomatic relations. Rashīd al-Dīn/Thackston, vol. 3, p. 658.

Rashīd al-Dīn/Arends, vol. 3, p. 197. Rukn al-Dīn Amir Chupan Tribute and 1304-05 After Amir Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- Aḥmad, local presents (sāwarī Chupan tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 70. ruler wa pīshkishī). arival at Aspihbad. Sharf al- Amir Chupan Gifts (khidmatī 1304-05 Arrived to Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- Dawlah bisyār). meet Amir tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 71. Shāh, Chupan. military commander. Temür Qa’an Öljeitü Gyrfalcon 1306 Diplomatic Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. (sanqūr) and relations 49. additional raprtor (jirih bāzd). Amir Iranjin Öljeitü Many gifts and 1306 Gift to the Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū p. from Rum Arabian horses or Ilkhan 52. hounds (tāzī sīr bād pāyān). Temür Aghul Öljeitü Takshīmīshī 1306 Arriving at Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū p. and Saraban, the Ilkhan’s 54. sons of Qaidu service Toqta Khan Öljeitü Paid homage 1309 Diplomatic Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū p. (auljāmīshī) and relations. 89. received favours in return. Amirs Öljeitü No gifts were 1312 Arrived to Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū p. mentioned. submit before 136. the Ilkhan. Öljeitü Amirs Robes of honor 1312 Gift. Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, and favours. pp. 136-137.

105

Qaḍī Najm Öljeitü Royal falcons 1312 After the Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. al-Dīn Sulkh (shāhīn-i shāhī), Ilkhand 143. , the castle of sea falcons submitted the Raḥba (sanqūr-i bahrī), castle of Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- land eagles Raḥba tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 105. (ʿuqāb-i barrī) and western horses (asbān-i ṭūpchāq). Messengers Öljeitü Paid homage 1312 Diplomatic Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, from Uzbek (auljāmīshī). relations. pp. 144-146. Khan. Tāj al-Dīn Öljeitü Hats ornamented 1312 Gift. Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i ʿAlīshāh, with jemstones, 9 Waṣṣāf, p. 279. vizier ghulams with belts and Arabian horses (asbān-i ʿarbī) with golden saddles. Tāj al-Dīn Öljeitü Nine horses (asb) 1312 Gift Ayati, Taḥrir-i Tārīkh-i ʿAlīshāh, with golden Waṣṣāf, p. 280. vizier saddles and one thousand geldings (akhta), in addition to bejeweled and golden pavilions and tents, robes embroidered with gold and one hundred thousand dinars. Messengers Öljeitü Gifts (tuḥaf wa 1313 After Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- from Miṣr hadāyāy-i bisyār). surrender to tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 105. and Shām. Öljeitü. Yasawur Abū Saʿīd Gifts (pīshkish wa 1314 After Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- hadāyā). Yasawur tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 112. defacted to the Ilkhanate. Yasawur Öljeitü Precious stones, 1314 After Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- pearls (lālī) and Yasawur tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 115. Turkish slaves. defacted to the Ilkhanate. Öljeitü Yasawur A horse (asb), 1314 After Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- royal robe, caftan, Yasawur tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 115.

106

hat, belt, military defacted to equipment, tent the Ilkhanate. and a tent maker, a musician and a drum. Abū Saʿīd Yasawur Arabian horses 1314 After Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- (asbān-i tāzī) with Yasawur tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 112. saddles, hat and defacted to belt, gold, and the Ilkhanate. additional presents and rarities (tuḥaf wa gharāyib). Yasawur Öljeitü Gifts (pīshkish wa 1314 Diplomatic Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- khidmatī bisyār). relations. tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 118. Öljeitü al-Naṣir No gifts were 1314 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations. Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, pp. 130- 131. Öljeitü Yasawur Gifts and rareties 1314 Diplomatic Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- (tuḥaf wa relations. tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 118. gharāyib-i bisyār). Buyantu Öljeitü Tiger (babar), 1316 Diplomatic Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. Qa’an saker (chergh( , relations 205. gyrfalcon (sanqūr) royal falcon (shāhīn) and other gifts. Öljeitü Buyantu Animals 1316 Diplomatic Qāshānī, Tarīkh-i Uljāytū, p. Qa’an (janūryan) such as relations 208. lions (shir) and caracals (yūz-i siah-gush). Yasawul Yasawur Arabian horses 1316 Marriege Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- (asbān-i tāzī), two alliance. tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 124. thousand sheep (gūsfand) gold and gemstones, bejeweled hats, golden pavilions and vessels, Turkish slaves, food and drink.

107

Naṣir al-Dīn, Yasawur Gifts and rareties 1318 Yasawur Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- ruler of (tuḥafhāy-i bisyār attempted to tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 138. . wa hadāyāy-i establish his bīshamār wa own power. gharāyib ān diyār). Badr al-Dīn, Sheikh Horses (asb), 1318 Assitance to Hāfiẓ Ābrū, Dhayl jāmiʿ al- naqib of Ḥassan weapons and gifts the tavārīkh-i Rashīdī, p. 153. Mashhad. (pīshkish). reprsaentitive of the Ilkhan. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Gifts (hadiyah) 1320 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad which included a relations. Geschichte der big decorated tent. Mamlūkensultane, p. 171.

al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- arab, vol. 33, p. 12. al-Naṣir Abū Saʿīd Responded with a 1320 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad worthy gift relations. arab, vol. 33, p. 12. (hadiyah). Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1320 Diplomatic Mufaḍḍal, Ägypten und Muḥammad mentioned. relations. Syrien, p. 11. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Qurān 1320 Diplomatic Mufaḍḍal, Ägypten und Muḥammad manuscripts, tent, relations. Syrien, p. 11-12. tuhaf, precious objects, Abū Saʿīd’s turban. al-Naṣir Abū Saʿīd Zebra (ḥimār 1320 Diplomatic Mufaḍḍal, Ägypten und Muḥammad waḥsh), 20 relations. Syrien, p. 15. priceless horses from the sultan’s personal stable (al-khayl min marākīb al- sulṭān) with their full trappings, Mamluk pages, 50 camels (jamal), bejeweled belts, 2 items of brocaded headgear and textiles brocaded with gold and silver. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1321 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations. Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 171.

108

Muhannā b. Abū Saʿīd 700 camels 1321 Diplomatic ʿAlī Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al- ʿĪsa (baʿīr), 70 horses relations. mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al- (faras), several bashar, vol. 4, p. 90. cheetahs (fuhūd). Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1322 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned. relations arab, vol. 33, p. 41. Amir Chupan al-Naṣir No gifts were 1323-24 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 174. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Presents (al- 1323-24 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad taqāddum wa al- relations. arab, vol. 33, p. 72. hadāyā).

Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir 3 Tartar horses 1324 Diplomatic Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Muḥammad (ikdash) with relations Kanz al-Durar, vol. 9, p. golden saddles 351. studded with gemstones, 10 ʿAlī Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al- birds (ṭuyūr), 3 mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al- bejeweled golden bashar, vol. 4, p. 93. belts, a sword in a golden sheath studded with gemstones, gold embroidered brocades, 11 caparisoned Bactrian camels (bukhtiyyi) loaded with chests filled with 700 pieces of fabric of local production adorned with the sultan’s name. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Presents (al- 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad taqāddum). relations arab, vol. 33, p. 199. al-Naṣir Abū Saʿīd Presents (hadiyah 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad jalīlah). relations arab, vol. 33, p. 199. Amir Chupan al-Naṣir No gifts were 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned relations arab, vol. 33, p. 203. Amir Chupan al-Naṣir No gifts were 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 203-204. Amir Chupan al-Naṣir Sent merchants 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad with about relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 207-208. 300,000 dirham as

109

a donation for Mecca. Amir Chupan al-Naṣir No gifts were 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned. relations arab, vol. 33, p. 220. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Brougth a gift 1324-25 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad (hadiyah), and relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 231-232. recived gifts in return. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1325 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 175. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Pearls. 1326 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an relations Conquest, p. 44. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Western horses. 1326 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an relations Conquest, p. 44. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Camels and 1326 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an horses. relations Conquest, p. 44. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Precious stones 1326 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an and single relations Conquest, p. 44. humped camels. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1326 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur and Amir Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Chupan Mamlūkensultane, p. 177. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Tigers. 1326 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an, relations Conquest, p. 44. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1326 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 178. Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Tigers, western 1327 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an horses, daggers, relations Conquest, p. 44. pearls and other valuables Abū Saʿīd Yesün Temür, Lions and tigers. 1327 Diplomatic Allsen, Culture and Qa’an relations Conquest, p. 44. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1327 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 179.

Damardāsh al-Naṣir No gifts were 1327 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur bin Chupan. Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 179. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1327 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 179.

110

Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1327 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 179. Faḍl bin ʿIsa Abū Saʿīd and Arabian horses 1327 Diplomatic ʿAlī Abū al-Fidāʾ, Kitāb al- Amir Chupan (al-khuyūl al- relations mukhtaṣar fī akhbār al- ʿarbiyah). bashar, vol. 4, p. 83.

Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1327 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned. relations arab, vol. 33, p. 250. Muḥammad Abū Saʿīd Several elephants 1327 Diplomatic Shabānkārahī, Majmaʿ al- bin Tughluq (pīl), tiger relations Ansāb, p. 288. (babar), rhinoceros (kargadan), zebra (khar ʿatābī), parrot (ṭūṭī), civet (gurbih-yi zabād), cheetah (yūz), falcon (bāz) and bakhri horses. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1328 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 180. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1328 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 180. Mongol Officials at Pairs of falcons 1328 Unknown, al-Jazarī, Tārīkh ḥāwadīth Delegation Damascus (bāzīn), cheetahs possibly al-zamān, p. 256. (fahdīn) and dogs diplomatic (kalbin). relations. Sheikh al-Naṣir Two cheetahs 1328-1329 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Ḥassan Muḥammad (fahdīn) relations arab, vol. 33, p. 280. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir Cloth (simāṭ) 1329 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad filled with money relations, Geschichte der (māl) which was asking a Mamlūkensultane, pp.180- woth 60,000 wedding with 181 dirham or 12 the Sultan’s horses (akdishā), daughter. al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- 10 with trapping, arab, vol. 33, pp. 280-282. 2 without. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1329 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 182. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1329 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Muḥammad mentioned. relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 305-306.

111

Sheikh al-Naṣir No gifts were 1329 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- Ḥassan Muḥammad mentioned. relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 305-306. Abū Saʿīd Mecca Elephant (fīl). 1330 Diplomatic al-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al- relations arab, vol. 33, pp. 310-311. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir 8 qitars of 1331 Diplomatic Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Muḥammad Bactrian camels relations Kanz al-Durar, vol. 9, p. (bukhtiyyi), 10 361. horses (khuyūl), 10 mamluks, 2 singer slave girls, 4 maces, textiles and a golden bird. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1331 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 184. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1331 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 186. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir 6 Tartar horses 1332 Diplomatic Ibn Aybak al-Dawādārī, Muḥammad (akādīsh), 8 relations Kanz al-Durar, vol. 9, p. mamluks, 2 qitars 372. of Bactrian camels (bukhtiyyi), 3 cheetahs (fuhūd), arrows and local textiles. Abū Saʿīd al-Naṣir No gifts were 1335 Diplomatic Zettersteen, Beiträge zur Muḥammad mentioned. relations Geschichte der Mamlūkensultane, p. 190.

112

תקציר

כתוצאה מפלישתו של הולאגו ח'אן )1265-1256( למזרח התיכון הוקמה באזור האיראני השושלת האלח'אנית )1335-1256(. שושלת זו הייתה אחת השושלות המונגוליות אשר התפצלו מן האימפריה המונגולית, אותה הקים צ'ינגיס ח'אן )1227-1206(. במהלך שנות קיומה של השושלת האלח'אנית קיימו שליטיה מגעים דיפלומטיים עם מגוון שושלות וממלכות באסיה, באירופה ובאפריקה. כך למשל התקיימו יחסים דיפלומטיים עם השליט המונגולי של שושלת יואן שמרכזה היה בסין, וכן עם בני ברית אירופאים. בנוסף לכך נשלחו שליחים )אילצ'י( אל שושלות וממלכות עוינות איתן האלח'אנים אף היו מעורבים במלחמה, למשל אל הסולטנות הממלוכית שבמצרים )עימה נחתם הסכם שלום ב1323-(. הכיבושים המונגולים והקמתה של האימפריה המונגולית הביאו לתהליך של תנועת בני אדם, סחורות וידע ברחבי אירואסיה. בעוד חלק מהתחומים זכו להתייחסות מעמיקה במחקר, כמו למשל העברת ידע בתחומי ההיסטוריוגרפיה, האסטרונומיה, הגיאוגרפיה, הרפואה והחקלאות, ההשפעה של המונגולים בכלל והאלח'אנים בפרט על מעבר בעלי חיים באירואסיה זכתה עד עתה להתייחסות חלקית בלבד. מטרת תזה זו היא לבחון כיצד השפיעו הקמת השושלת האלח'אנית באזור האיראני והמגעים הדיפלומטיים של שושלת זו, על התנועה של בעלי חיים ברחבי אירואסיה. בנוסף התזה בוחנת אילו בעלי חיים הועברו על ידי האלח'אנים או התקבלו בחצרם, מי היו הגורמים אשר השפיעו על הליך בחירת בעלי החיים, מה היו הסיבות בגללן נבחרו בעלי החיים אשר הועברו במהלך המגעים הדיפלומטיים, מה היה תפקידם של בעלי החיים ביחס למתנות אחרות, ואילו שינויים התרחשו בחילופי בעלי החיים לאורך תקופת שלטונה של השושלת האילח'אנית. בחינה זו תאפשר לחשוף נדבך נוסף בהשפעתם של המונגולים על חילופי ידע והעברת סחורות ברחבי אירואסיה. העבודה מראה כי השושלת האילח'אנית תרמה למעבר בעלי חיים במרחב האירואסיאתי באמצעות חילופי בעלי חיים במסגרת משלחות דיפלומטיות. מתוך 120 משלחות שהחליפו האילח'אנים עם שושלות בנות זמנם, 42 נשאו עימן מתנות שכללו בעלי חיים. לאורך קיומה של השושלת הצליחו שליטיה לכונן יחסים דיפלומטיים עם שושלות במזרח ובמרכז אסיה, באפריקה ובאירופה, ועם כולן החליפו גם בעלי חיים. לסיכום, נראה כי שליטי השושלת האילח'אנית קיבלו לשטחם בעלי חיים מקצוות שונים של אירואסיה; בנוסף הם קישרו בין קצוות היבשת בכך ששיגרו משלחות משלהם לבעלי בריתם במזרח אסיה, באפריקה ובאירופה, שנשאו אתן בעלי חיים מאזורים שונים באסיה, לרבות מינים שונים של אותם בעלי החיים. מעבר לכך יש לציין כי למונגולים הייתה השפעה ישירה על מעבר בעלי חיים ביבשת. הרקע הנוודי שלהם השפיע על בחירת בעלי החיים איתם באו במגע ועל תחומי העניין שלהם, למשל העיסוק בציד. רקע זה בא לידי ביטוי בהשפעה הרבה שהייתה למונגולים בכלל ולאילח'אנים בפרט על מעבר חיות המשק והציד ברחבי היבשת. זאת, תוך העדפה ברורה לחיות מרעה וציד כגון סוסים, גמלים ומיני ציפורים טורפות על פני חיות אקזוטיות כגון פילים או ג'ירפות, אשר נחשבו למתנות פופולריות בקרב שכניהם של האילח'אנים, הממלוכים והשליטים האירופאים איתם קיימו יחסים דיפלומטים. בנוסף, בעקבות התפתחות הדיפלומטיה בין השושלות המונגוליות השונות, בינן לבין עצמן ובינן לבין שושלות נוספות באסיה, באירופה ובאפריקה, חברי האליטה המונגולית היו לעיתים מעורבים ישירות בבחירת בעלי החיים אותם רצו לקבל מבני בריתם.

האוניברסיטה העברית בירושלים The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

הפקולטה למדעי הרוח Faculty of Humanities

החוג ללימוד האסלאם והמזרח התיכון Department of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies

עבודה סמינריונית מחקרית בנושא:

Animals in the Gift Exchange Diplomacy of the Ilkhanate (1260-1335)

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the Degree of Master in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

May 2019

מוגש על ידי לאון וולפובסקי

Submitted by Leon Volfovsky

בהנחיית פרופסור מיכל בירן

Supervisor: Prof. Michal Biran