CC BY
222
YflK 94(357)
A. L. Kubik
ABOUT ONE GROUP OF IRANIAN MACES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW FIND FROM SIVAS, TURKEY: AN ANALYSIS FROM THE SASANIAN TO THE SAFAVID PERIOD1
A recent find of a lion headed mace from a monastery complex in Sivas, Turkey, sheds new light on the development and chronology of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic maces from Kushan and Sasanian times until the early modern era. The mace from Sivas features a lion-shaped head with facial features and an interesting curvature. The mace has been dated to the XIV-XV centuries.
The analysis and chronology of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic maces is detailed. Common features of such maces include a Heracles' knot, a fist or hand at the pommel, and a shaped anthropomorphic or zoomorphic head. Some maces contain a number of human or animal faces. Such maces started appearing in the Arsacid era, but became more prominent under the Kushans (where bird headed maces and large clubs were also symbols of power) and late Sasanians. They also became popular in Central Asia. Maces are not present in the majority of Sasanian iconography, which may be due to their insignificance in the early Sasanian era when the iconographical or artistic canon was being developed.
Changes in the shaft shape and curvature and the stylisation of the head occurred in the course of time. Post-Sasanian maces likely continued from Sasanian forms, but a new form was introduced with the Seljuks. Sel-juk maces were all lion headed and human headed and bull headed maces disappeared. The shafts are classed as «r-shaped» due to their single curvature. In the post-Mongol era, shafts took on a double-curvature shape and are classed as «s-shaped» Bull headed maces became prominent once again in the Safavi and Qajar periods.
Further finds of maces with dating will provide further information on the chronology of such maces and may allow us to track the development and forms of such maces with even more precision.
Key words: zoomorphic mace heads, maces, clubs, sceptres, arms, Shah-nameh, Kushan, Sasanid, Islamic, Ghaznavid, Seljuk, Mongol, Timurid, Iran, India.
A mace with a zoomorphic, lion-shaped head can be found in a collection of an old monastery complex, called
1 Transl. from Polish into English by P. N. Skupniewicz, S. N. Ahmad.
154
Tekke2 in Turkish and located in Sivas (ancient Sebasteia in modern central Turkey)3. The architectural sites of the above type were the centers of culture and art in addition to their religious function4. The same goes for the old, most likely 16th century, Tekke in Sivas, which, except for a prayer site, was employed as a military and cultural center. Due to heavy usage of the site a large collection of arms and armour naturally accumulated there. Among the artifacts held there one may find the mace mentioned above, named as one of the oldest there. This artifact is interesting enough that it sheds new light on the evolution of zoomorphic maces in Iran from the Islamic conquest until the Safavid period.
The Susami§lar Konagi mace is constructed with a shapeless head placed on the metal socket. It features pronounced bumps and a distinct handle. The zoomorphic head has almond-shaped eyes and ears, well-marked nostrils and a wide open mouth. Inside the mouth one can find seven uneven teeth (three in the upper and four in the lower jaw). On the edges of the mouth there are four hemispherical bumps. The animal head finishes in a pronounced collar and after that transforms into S-shaped shaft. The back extends well beyond the axis made by the handle. The handle itself has a round cross-section and finishes in a polygonal handle. The hilt/handle had been marked with two bumps, the lower one was made in the shape of a six-petaled rosette. The dimensions of the artifact: total length 65 cm, head 13 cm, the shaft 35 cm, handle 17 cm. The cross-section by the ears of the beast — 3,6 cm, width of the upper bump 3,6 cm, the lower one — 3,5 cm,
2 We can also use pers. chanaka term.
3 The Author wants to thank Hilmi Arigi for the access to Susami§lar Konagi collection. The Author knows that the shape of the lion is hypothetical.
4 Starodub T. H. Srednevekovya arhitektura, svyazannaya s sufizmom: hanaka, zaviya, takiya / / Sufizm v kontekste musul'manskoy kulturi / Pod red. N. I. Prigarinoy. Moskva, 1989. S. 268-280.
width of the finial — 3 cm, the width of the shaft varies between 1,0-1,1 cm.
Origins of zoomorphic maces
Maces are one of the oldest weapons known in Mesopotamia, Bactria, Asia Minor and ancient Egypt5. It is of the utmost importance that the hieroglyph in the shape of mace had the meaning of fight in early dynastic script6. The mace appears to be one of the most popular weapons of Indo-European deities. In III Millennium BC Mesopotamian maces appeared as a form of regalia and religious / magical tool. This can be evidenced by the lack of normal humans being depicted fighting with this kind of weapon7.
Maces are placed in a unique place in the imagery, religion and tradition of Iran88. It should be pointed out however that the research of the subject, especially concerning the period from late antiquity until the Safavids is less than modest. An attempt of classification of this sort of weapons was made by M. M. Khorasani who divided the maces into three basic groups. The first one consisted of regular and pear-shaped heads and clubs/cudgels. The second group was formed by the weapons with the bulbs, the feathers, pikes and flanged
5 Zygulski Z., jun. Geneza i typologia bulaw hetmanskich // Muzealnictwo Wojskowe. T. 2. Warsawa, 1964. P. 240-241; Michalak A. Glowica bulawy z Trzciela, pow. Migdzyrzecz. Uwagi w kwestii wystgpowania bulaw na ziemiach polskich w sredniowieczu, na tle znalezisk europejskich // ASN. 2005. Vol. 4. P. 186.
6 Izmajlov I. L. Vooruzhenie i voennoe delo naseleniya Volzhskoy Bulgarii X - nachala XIII vv. Kazan; Magadan, 1997. P. 96; Gorelik M. V. Oruzhie Drevnego Vostoka. IV tisyacheletiye — IV vek do n. e. Moskva, 1993. S. 57.
7 Ibid. S. 57-58.
8 Harper P. O. The Ox-headed Mace in Pre-Islamic Iran / / Papers in Honour of Mary Boyce. Acta Iranica. 1985. Vol. 24. P. 246, Doostkhah J. Gorz // Encyclopedia Iranica. Vol. 11. Fasc. 2.
URL: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/gorz (oryginally published: December 15, 2002), Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armour from Iran. The Bronze Age to the End of Qajar Period. Tübingen, 2006. P. 251.
maces. The third group consisted of the weapons with human and animal style heads9. The publications of Khorasani's third group, located within the core interest of the current paper, are devoted to preserved finds10, and the alleged Sasanian origin of the type which is founded mainly in the records provided by Shah-nameh11.
Due to its later date, it may be inappropriate to use the Shah-nameh as the main source for studying Sasanian arms, armour, and regalia. The Shah-nameh or The Book of Kings, a profound work of Abol Ghasem Ferdowsi was written down at the break of 10th and 11th centuries. It was most likely based on Sasanian Xwaday-namag being a book of royal deeds gathered down and written during the reign of Xusro I Anushir-van12. These stories were transmitted orally by the court min-
9 Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armour from Iran. P. 251-261. We need to agree with E. V. Perevodchikova's arguments (see: Perevodchikova E. V. Yazyk zverinyh obrazov. Ocherki iskusstva evraziyskih stepey skifskoy epohi. Moskva, 1994). In some specific situations we can talk about the style even if the human or animal shape isn't a style itself.
10 Muscarella O. W. Bronze and Iron. Ancient Near Estern Artifacts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. N. Y., 1988. P. 293-296; Overlaet B. Regalia of the Ruling Classes in late Sasanian times. The Riggisberg strap mountings, swords and archer's fingercaps // Entlag der Seidenstraße. Frühmittelalterliche Kunst zwischen Persien und China in der Abegg-Stiftung / Hrsg. K. Otavsky. Riggisberg, 1998. P. 267-298; Nicolle D. Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era. 1050-1350. Islam, Eastern Europe and Asia. L., 1999. P. 207268; Al-Sarraf S. Close Combat Weapons in the Abbasid Period. Maces, Axes and Swords // Companion to Medieval Arms and Armour / Ed. by D. Nicolle. Oxford, 2002. P. 203-206, and others.
11 Harper P. O. The Ox-headed Mace in Pre-Islamic Iran. P. 247-259; Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armour from Iran. P. 258-261 ; idem. Arms and Armor of Achamenians and Sassanians // Fezana Journal. 2006. Summer Issue. P. 89; idem. La Masse d'Arme à Tête de Taureau: Une Combinaison de Puissance et de Prestige // La Revue de Téhéran. Mensuel Culturel Iranien en Langue Française. 2010. No. 53. P. 56-61.
12 Shahbazi A. Sh. On the Xwadäy-namäg // Iranica Varia: Papers in Honour of Professor Ehsan Yarshater. Leiden, 1990. P. 223; Daryaee T. Käve the Black-
strels called gosan/huniyagar. It also included the poetry of local singers named naggale-xan, who survived well into later Middle Ages under the names of naggale-xan i Sahname-xan and were renowned for their memory and voice in Timurid courts13. Even during the Sasanian times a part of the poem existed only in the oral versions and depending on its audience they could have been modified according to the demand. It is difficult to assess the extent of modification applied to Shah-nameh14. The earliest known copy of Shah-nameh comes from 13th century15. The original text of Ferdousi could have been modified afterwards, especially in regard to a particular satirical part about Mahmoud of Ghazni16. The above mentioned facts make it clear that Ferdowsi's masterpiece should be analyzed with the utmost cautiousness and can be treated only as a marginal source for the researchers of the Sasanian arms and armor. As a result, the current Author has also analyzed the maces of the pre- and early Islamic maces in order to allow a wider view and insights into the development of the weapon.
All studies of Iranian weaponry from Late Antiquity should start with an analysis of the iconography17. It might be found far too commonly, to state that the weapons, being also a piece of regalia used by the individuals of high status, should be reflected by the depictions of the period. A short analysis of a representative number of artworks has been
smith: An Indo-Iranian Fashioner? // Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Reinbeck, 1999. P. 11.
13 Daryaee T. Op. cit. P. 11-12.
14 Ibid. P. 12.
15 Adamowa A. T., Gyuzalian L. T. Miniatyuri rukopisi poemi Shahname 1333 goda. Leningrad, 1985. S. 9.
16 Shahbazi A. Sh. Ferdousi: A Critical Biography. Cambridge, 1991. P. 101; Dabiri G. The Shahnama: Between the Samanids and the Ghaznavids // IS. 2010. Vol. 43. № 1. P. 14.
17 Skupniewicz P. Sasanian Plate Armour // FAH. 2006. Fasc. 19. P. 19.
made in order to set a canon for Iranian royal regalia and armament in Late Antiquity18. Basing on the works of
A. D. H. Bivar19, R. N. Frye20, P. O. Harper21, L. V. Berghe22,
B. Marschak23, K. V. Trever and V. G. Lukonin24, H. von Gall25, D. Nicolle26, R. Gyselen27, J. C. Y. Watt28, P. N. Skupniewicz29, Ch. Miks30, one can conclude that the canonical weapons of the
18 About 150 illustrations of kings, noblemen and warriors, including single figures and groups of men-at-arms were included in the survey.
19 Bivar A. D. H. A Parthian Amulet. In Memory of Professor W. B. Henning / / BSOAS. 1967. Vol. 30. Issue 03. P. 524-525.
20 Frye R. N. Sasanian Remains from Qasr-i Abu Nasr. Seals, Sealings, and Coins. Cambridge, 1973. P. 22, 26-148.
21 Harper P. O. The Royal Hunter. Art of the Sassanian Empire. N. Y., 1978. P. 15, 33, 39, 42-43, 88-89, 113, 143, 147; idem. Silver Vessels of the Sassanian Period. Vol. 1. Royal Imagery. N. Y., 1981. P. 96, 209-239.
22 Berghe L. V. Reliefs rupestres de l'Irän ancient. Brussels, 1984. P. 50-84; idem. Barm-e Delak // Encyclopedia Iranica. Vol. 3. Fasc. 8. URL: http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/barm-e-delak (originally published: December 15, 1988).
23 Marschak B. Silberschätze des Orients. Metallkunst des 3.-13. Jahrhunderts und ihre Kontinuität. Leipzig, 1986. S. 121-125, 127, 370-373.
24 Trever K. V., Lukonin V. G. Sasanidskoe serebro. Sobranie Gosudarstven-nogo Ermitazha. Hudozhestvennaya kul'tura Irana III-VIII vekov. Moskva, 1987. S. 54-63, 72-74. Tab. 1-5, 6-12, 14-17, 75-78.
25 Gall H., von. Das reiterkampfbild in der iranischen und iranisch beeinflußten Kunst partischer und sasanidischer zeit. B., 1990. S. 20-37, 43. Tab. 1-19.
26 Nicolle D. Sasanian Armies. The Iranian Empire early 3rd to mid-7th centuries AD. Stockport, 1996. P. 11-13, 16, 18, 22, 26, 30.
27 Gyselen R. L'Aet sigillaire Sassanide dans les collections De Leyde. Leiden, 1997. P. 48, 50. Tab. 1-35.
28 Watt J. C. Y. China: Down of a Goldan Age, 200-750 A. D. N. Y., 2004. P. 52, 152.
29 Skupniewicz P. N. Sasanian Plate Armour // FAH. 2006. Fasc. 19. P. 23, 27, 29; idem. Helm wojownika przedstawionego na kapitelu w Tak e Bostan // AMM. 2007. Vol. 3. P. 14; idem. Shafted Weapons of Sasanian Hunting Iconography // FAH. 2009. Fasc. 22. The Hunt and Hunting Weapons in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. P. 51-53, 55, 57, 59-62; idem. Composition Designs in Animal Combat Scenes in Sasanian Art. Gdansk, 2013. Slides 3-23.
30 Miks Ch. Relikte eines frühmittelalterlichen Oberschichtgrabes? Überlegungen zu einem Konvolut bemerkens-werter Objekte aus dem Kunsthan-
Sasanians consisted of swords, spears/lances and javelins, and archery equipment. Other forms of weaponry do not appear as commonly in Sasanian art31.
Maces were depicted five times in the analyzed mate-rial32. This includes: a silver-gilt plate with the scene of the Triumph of Dionysus from the State Historical Museum in Moscow; and four amulet-seals with the mythical combat of a hero and an animal hybrid33. These mentioned seals constitute the continuity with the Iranian seals known from Parthian and Indo-Parthian collections of the British Museum. It should be stated clearly that in all mentioned instances a mace was depicted as an attribute used to illustrate a mythical scene known to an artisan from the stories told. Among the examples listed above a depiction of an ox-headed mace requires special attention. The amulet depicts most likely the scene of killing Zahhak by Faridun34. P. O. Harper dated the gem not earlier than 4th century but she did not provide terminus past quem for this item. She stated that the obverse indicates the Sa-sanian origin but the reverse does not remind of the style of the Parthian or Sasanian pieces. Harper had observed Kushan, Hunnic and Avar influence in the pieces35. One further significant depiction of the mace in the said era is the maces de-
del // Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz. 2009. Bd. 56. S. 428, 476, 485.
31 Daggers, lariats, and axes are also seen in Sasanian artwork.
32 To be more precise 6 times. In one of the illustrations (Bivar A. D. H. Op. cit. P. 518) we cannot see the mace clearly but basing on the other gems analysis we can say that the 5th Bivar gem also shows a mace.
33 It is interesting to note a similarity between the analysis of these illustrations and Greek mythology, where at the beginning a mace/club is shown as weapon used against animal beasts, never as a weapon used on the battlefields or human-human duels (Cohen B. From Bowman to Clubman. Heracles in Olympia // The Art Bulletin. 1994. Vol. 76. № 4. P. 698).
34 Bivar A. D. H. Op. cit. P. 524; Harper P. O. The Ox-headed Mace in Pre-Islamic Iran. P. 257.
35 Harper P. O. The Ox-headed Mace in Pre-Islamic Iran. P. 257.
scribed by Sir A. Stein on the wall paintings from Kuh-e Khwaja. On the western facade of the Eastern gate there are three anthropomorphic individuals with three heads, accompanied by a seated individual holding an ox-headed mace. The depiction recalls certain examples of Central Asian Buddhist art. The dating of the murals from Kuh-e Khwaja is problematic. The standing personages can be related not only to Sa-sanian or Parthian art, but also to Kushan art of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Diversified styles (including Hellenistic modeling, Buddhist shapes, and flat forms known from Sasanian art) prove that the decorations of the Kuh-e Khwaja walls were an effect of a complex process that involved several cultural artistic styles that may have lasted several centuries36.
The Middle-Persian term for a mace was wazr/vazr37. Until the times of Tabari, Dinawari, Bal'ami and Ferdowsi no name of explicit shape was known. The phrase gurza-ye gavsar (bull headed mace) that appears in Szah-nameh, cannot be found in written Middle Persian sources from the Sasanian era38. Nowadays all Iranian maces, irrespective of the type, are described as gorz39.
In the light of the above facts the question about the provenance of the maces from the beginning of the Sasanian period until the rise of Islam that should be asked. Analysis of Kushan material is an important aspect. Maces or clubs were weapons of utmost importance for the Kushans. It was de-
36 Kawami T. S. Kuh-e Khwaja, Iran, and Its Wall Paintings: The Records of Ernst Herzfeld // MMJ. 1987. Vol. 22. P. 26.
37 Tafazzoli A. A List of Terms for Weapons Armour in Western Middle Iranian. Dedicated to Professor A. D. H. Bivar // Silk Road Art and Archeology. 1993/94. Vol. 3. P. 194; Khorasani M. M. Lexicon of Arms and Armor from Iran. A Study of Symbols and Terminology. Tübingen, 2010. P. 436.
38 Tafazzoli A. Op. cit. P. 194.
39 Kobylanski L. Orgz Perski i Indoperski XVI-XIX wieku ze zbiorow polskich: katalog wystawy. Malbork, 2000. P. 66.
picted both as a weapon and as a designation of royal power40. The latter ones appear in the shape of unnaturally large clubs41 known from the famous Kanishka statue from Mathura Museum and the scepters on the Kushan coinage42. M. M. Spag-noli associates this weapon with the solar deities which, both in India and in Iran, were wielding these against the forces of evil43. The depictions of maces with numerous knobs are an exceptionally interesting aspect. The Author identifies them as the heads in the shape of numerous faces and observes some similarity of these to Guptic column capitals. There may also be some parallels with some Indian columns including the famous Ashoka pillar. The maces' origins in pre-Kushan, Meso-potamian cosmological beliefs are also explored44.
Short scepters in a simple form of short staff, most often with a zoomorphic head, were present in Kushan art in the depictions of the goddess Nana (a goddess with Mesopota-mian origins)45. Especially interesting are the bird headed scepters/maces, often depicted in the hands of King Hu-vishka46. The bird headed maces are also present on one of nine golden, Kushan discs collected on the territory of Pakistan by Professor Samuel Eilenberg in 1970 (now belonging to a private collection) which most likely came from a burial and
40 Spagnoli M. M. The Symbolic Meaning of the Club in the Iconography of the KuSäna Kings // EW. 1967. Vol. 17. № 3/4. P. 248.
41 The unnatural size of Kushan clubs could appear as a way of showing the importance of this symbol of dignity.
42 Spagnoli M. M. Op. cit. Fig. 1-fig. 12.
43 Spagnoli M. M. Some Further Observations on the Symbolic Meaning of the Club in the Statue of KaniSka // EW. 1970. Vol. 20. № 4. P. 461.
44 Ibid. P. 461-464.
45 Sinisi F. Tyche in Parthia: The Image of the Godness on Arcasid Tetrad-rachms // Numismatishe Zeitschrift. 2008. Bd. 116/117. P. 244.
46 Bracey R. Bird Symbolism on the Coinage of the Kushana Kings // JNSI. 2009. Vol. 71. P. 33-40; idem. The Royal Image on Indian Coins // CCNB Newslater. 2008. № 44. P. 1-2.
made up decorative parts of a belt47. The bird headed scepter survived in Sogdiana unchanged into Islamic times and such an item was shown on terracotta ossuary from Kaska Darya (Uzbekistan), dated VI-VII centuries. This clearly proves that the function of the Kushan scepter/mace as insignia was not abandoned with the change of the layout of the Kushan coins nor after the Sasanian conquest. It might have survived locally and re-appeared in the Sogdian art, vaguely inspired by Buddhism48, shortly after the fall of the Sasanians and the abandonment of the strict Sasanian canon.
A further interesting discovery was made during the excavation of common Czech-Uzbek expedition in the region 7 of the site Jandavlattepa-I. In the layer dated to the Kushan era (II-IV century), several bone maces in a fragmentary condition were found. One of them had a butt shaped in the form of a small open hand49.
Typology and dating of maces
Currently we know over thirty maces dated between the Sasanian and the Safavid periods (a broad time frame) which M. M. Khorasani has placed within the third group of his typology (anthropomorphic and zoomorphic maces)50. In order to provide a more detailed dating of the objects, one should ascribe them to the separate types and define the common elements. This analysis will start from the elements that are
47 Linenthal P. A. Nine Gold Kushan Discs // ONS Journal of the Numismatic Society. 2006. № 188. P. 15-18.
48 Compareti M. The Indian Iconography of the Sogdian Divinities and the Role of Buddhism and Hinduism in its Transmission / / AION. 2009. Vol. 69. P. 175-203.
49 Stanco L. Soucasna Archeologie Severni Baktrie / / AVRIGA. Zpravy klasickych filologu. Praga, 2005. P. 54-64; idem. Arheologicheskie raskopki na Dzhandavlattepa v 2002-2006 gg. // Arheologicheskoe issledovanie Dzhandavlattepa i Sherabadskogo rayona. Praga, 2013. S. 20-25.
50 Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armour from Iran. P. 251-261.
shared by all the artifacts independent of the type or shape of the mace head.
1) A particular knot called the knot of luck or the knot of Hercules (Heraclean knot) which became popular in Iran during Hellenistic period and survived in the same form until the Early Islamic era51.
2) The motif of a hand at the butt of the mace. This motif is known in two forms: a fist and a hand holding a ball. P. O. Harper finds the ball a result of Roman or Byzantine influences where the emperors were depicted holding an orb or sphere. This motif is depicted on Roman coins of the 1st century A. D. and the hand holding the orb with a cross appeared in V century while in Syria similar depictions are known from the VI-VII centuries52. In Sasanian art, shafts finished with fists is known from a certain silver, gilded plate now located in The Metropolitan Museum of Art showing Yazdagird I killing a deer. A similar motif appears as a pommel on a dagger from a hunter from Panjikent, VII — early VIII centuries. Five maces with hand-shaped pommels are known, four of which are holding a sphere. Three of them constitute a common stylistic group: a mace with a female head from Parke-Bernet catalogue, a goat headed mace from the Iran Bastan Museum in Teheran and Indian mace from The Metropolitan Museum of Art. They depict the hands in a very detailed manner with clearly separated fingers, visible finger nails, and in one example a gesture can be observed. The Indian mace can be firmly dated to the VII century because of its characteristic style. The fourth one, also in the collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art has the head in the form of the Heraclean knot crowned with small bull's head crafted in a schematic way. The fingers are presented as straight scratched lines while the ball is depicted as a flattened hemisphere by
51 It was described in details by P. O. Harper (Harper P. O. Op. cit. P. 251-252).
52 Harper P. O. Op. cit. P. 253-254.
the fingers. A clear simplification of the form of the item may indicate a later dating of this piece.
3) The small bull's head listed above can be defined as another common element. It appears on three different mace heads — the mace mentioned above that also features a Heraclean knot; a mace with the three bulls heads from the British Museum53; and a Ghaznavid mace from the Furusiyya Art Foundation, dated to X-XII centuries with the head shaped in the lion's head and long shaft with small bull's head attached54. There are several further bull-headed or zoomorphic maces which are beyond the scope of this study55.
The employment of bull-headed maces can be supported by the report of Fakht al-Din Mubarrak Sah regarding the mace with two horns belonging of Sultan Mas'ud of Ghazna (1030-1040 A. D.)56. The described decoration may suggest that this weapon was used between the late Sasanian period and the Ghaznavid era.
On top of common elements among the parts of maces, the most obvious element that allows constitution of different types is the form of the head. All the pieces known to the current Author can be divided twofold: the maces with the single animal head and the examples with multiple animal and human heads. Further one can set the division for human (male and female) and animal (bull, goat, lion, bird) heads. In order to tighten the dating we may assume that close relations between the head forms suggest a similar date. This is particularly visible in case of the maces with the bearded human
53 Similar illustrations of animal heads connected by Heraclean knot are known from late Sasanian seals from the British Muzeum.
54 Mohamed B. The Art of Muslim Knight: The Furusiyya Art Foundation. Milano, 2008. P. 244.
55 Muscarella O. W. Op. cit. P. 293-295.
56 Bosworth C. E. Ghaznavids, Their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran. Edinburgh, 1963. P. 120; Nicolle D. Early Medieval Islamic Arms and Armour. Madrid, 1976, P. 134; Khorasani M. M. Op. cit. P. 251-261.
heads, they are represented by four founds: a mace from Rig-gisberg, Abegg Foundation, a mace from Oxford, the Ash-molean Museum, a mace from a private collection published by B. Overlaet, and a mace from the excavations of the Sog-dian temple Jartepa-II firmly dated to the VII-VIII centuries57. The former three may be formally dated to the late Sasanian period. They present similarities to late Sasanian bronze figurines. The form of the beard and unnaturally large eyes correspond to the Umayyad stucco statue of Caliph Hisham (724743 A. D.) from Khirbat-al-Mafjar. The Jartepa-II find varies clearly from the other three maces mentioned above. The face is more schematic, and the headgear (which had an utmost importance for the Sasanians58) was limited to a small round circle at the top of the head. This mace reminds of the maces with bearded heads from the Panjikent wall paintings and the depiction of a Ghaznavid ruler from a silver plate in the Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg.
The intensive migration of Turkic peoples and mercenary soldiers during the reign of Ghaznavids and Seljukids was of particular importance for the development of scepters/maces. A special taste for animal-shaped decorative forms in arms and armor, typical for Turkic tribes59, influenced the ease with which such motifs were transmitted from Iranian culture.
57 Berdimuradov A. E., Cambaev M. K. Rezul'taty raskopok hrama na Dzhartepa II // IMKU. 1992. Vipusk 26. S. 77-92; Berdimuradov A. E, Cambaev M. K. The Temple of Jartepa-II (the Problem of Cultural Life of Sogdiana in the 4th-8th c. A. D.). Tashkent, 1999. P. 7-63.
58 Skupniewicz P. Helm wojownika przedstawionego na kapitelu w Tak e Bostan. P. 9.
59 Esin E. L'arme zoomorphe dans l'Asie antique // Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur der altaischen Völker / Hrsg. von G. Hazai und P. Zieme. B., 1974. S. 193-217. Author wants to thank you D. Nicolle for access to this source.
During the Ghaznavid rule we may speak about the continuation of ideas originating from Sasanian art60, however, in the Seljukid era we are facing a completely new period in the art of Islam61. The maces of this period show very analogous features. They are of a single type: the head of feline predator with the parallel disappearance of other types. There are seven known maces of the said type dated between the fall of the Ghaznavids and the end of Timurids. Three are held in the Fu-rusiyya Art Foundation, the fourth is in Weill Collection62, the fifth in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the sixth was sold at the Sotheby's auction while the seventh is in private collection in Susami§lar Konagi in Sivas. Probably the first known depiction of the maces of this type is the XI century wall painting from the Ghaznavid palace at Lashkari Bazar in Afganistan63.
The long shaft is reminiscent of the three maces ascribed to Ghaznavid. In the Seljuk period the shaft was shortened. The animal head in the pre-Mongol maces is bent in an arch towards front, the shaft is straight and on the whole it can be named «r» shaped. In the post-Mongol times the depictions show elongated «s» shaped shafts that bend outside the axis of the shaft. This is clearly visible in Shah-nameh illustrations made after 1333. An even more simplified shape appears after the XV century, for example in Tag ed-Din Ahmed ibn Ibrahim el-Ahmedi's Iskender-nameh which most likely are copies of the earlier, probably XIII century, manuscripts64. It should be noted that in the later versions of Timurid Shah-nameh,
60 Ettinghausen R., Grabar O., Jenkins-Madina M. Sztuka i Architektura Islamu 650-1250. Warsaw, 2007. P. 123.
61 Ettinghausen R., Grabar O., Jenkins-Madina M. Sztuka i Architektura Islamu 650-1250. P. 133-135.
62 At the beginning it was interpreted as a chair finial, after B. Mohamed (Mohamed B. Op. cit. P. 244).
63 Al-Sarraf S. Op. cit. P. 203.
64 Tag ed-Din Ahmed ibn Ibrahim el-Ahmedi. Iskender-nameh. Bibliothèque nationale de France. Département des manuscrits. Turc 309. Folio 337.
maces with bull horns appear. They are however a rarity and are hardly different from the maces with no horns. This suggests a painter's intention to fit the depiction to the text. «S» shaped maces with a bull's head appear in the later part of the XV century. From the second quarter of XVI century, at the height of the Safavid's power, the lion headed maces practically disappear, being fully replaced by the bull's headed maces. This happened most likely under the influence of Shah-nameh descriptions. Additionally, the «s» shape of the heads disappeared and was replaced with larger and more anatomically correct forms of the heads.
Conclusions
The examples detailed above demonstrate an exceptional diversification of the development of maces in the late Sasanian period, and a subsequent, slow degeneration of Sa-sanian forms and development of new forms after the Islamic conquest. It is worth asking why maces do not appear in Sa-sanian art. As it was discussed above, this mace type developed in the Kushan sphere and could have been unknown, or disregarded as unimportant, to Persians when the Sasanian canon was being forged. The Sasanian canon may have been formed during the early Sasanian period, and so may not have been taken into account any later developments in armament and regalia (the same may also be said regarding swords, quivers, and stirrups). A gradual loss of control over the eastern areas to the Hephtalites in 5th century could have affected the absorption of art forms from these areas in a negative way. After the re-conquest of the Hephtalite Empire in alliance with the Turkic Kaganate in the second half of the VI century during the reign of Xusro I Anushirwan and setting the border on Amu-Darya, the art forms and objects from the new eastern provinces may have been absorbed into the heartlands and main territories of the Sasanian dynasty. This applies to the forms of mace heads and subsequent development of new
mace head forms in the late Sasanian period. New forms of maces may only have appeared in post-Sasanian art due to abandonment of the strict Sasanian canon that was in use during the Sasanian era but not in the post-Sasanian era.
The maces from Jartepa-II and Susami§lar Konagi are very important in the study of West Asian maces. Such maces reveal local art styles and craftsmanship traditions. In the light of the above described depictions and defined processes it is possible to date the zoomorphic mace from Susami§lar Konagi in Sivas to the XIV-XV century.
The findings of bone maces in Uzbekistan clearly prove their exclusively ceremonial character as the fragile material did not allow their employment in combat. The fact that maces of this type were shown in combat only in mythological or religious scenes and the complete lack of combat damage on the preserved objects that would be inevitable in such a soft material as bronze proves that such maces with human or zoom-orphic heads had liturgical or ritual function, rather than any battlefield function.
Further finds of maces may allow us to chart the development of such maces and date such pieces with even more precision.
Primary sources
Tag ed-Din Ahmed ibn Ibrahim el-Ahmedi. Iskender-nameh. Bibliothèque nationale de France. Département des manuscrits.
Secondary sources
Adamowa A. T., Gyuzalian L. T. Miniatyuri rukopisi poemi
Shahname 1333 goda. Leningrad, 1985. Al-Sarraf S. Close Combat Weapons in the Abbasid Period. Maces, Axes and Swords / / Companion to Medieval Arms and Armour / Ed. by D. Nicolle. Oxford, 2002. P. 149-178.
Berdimuradov A. E., Cambaev M. K. Rezul'tati raskopok hrama na Dzhartepa II // IMKU. 1992. S. 77-92.
Berdimuradov A. E., Cambaev M. K. The Temple of Jartepa-II (the Problem of Cultural Life of Sogdiana in the 4th-8th c. A. D.). Tashkent, 1999.
Berghe L. V. Reliefs rupestres de l'Irän ancient. Brussels, 1984.
Berghe L. V. Barm-e Delak // Encyclopedia Iranica. Vol. 3. Fasc. 8. P. 805-807. URL: http://www.iranicaonline.org/ articles/barm-e-delak (originally published: December 15, 1988).
Bivar A. D. H. A Parthian Amulet. In Memory of Professor W. B. Henning / / BSOAS. 1967. Vol. 30. Issue 03. P. 512-525.
Bosworth C. E. The Ghaznavids, their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran. Edinburgh, 1963.
Bracey R. The Royal Image on Indian Coins / / CCNB Newsletter. 2008. No. 44. P. 1-3.
Bracey R. Bird Symbolism on the Coinage of the Kushana Kings // JNSI. 2009. Vol. 71. P. 33-40.
Cohen B. From Bowman to Clubman. Heracles in Olympia / / The Art Bulletin. 1994. Vol. 76. № 4. P. 695-715.
Compareti M. The Indian Iconography of the Sogdian Divinities and the Role of Buddhism and Hinduism in its Transmission // AION. 2009. Vol. 69. P. 175-203.
Dabiri G. The Shahnama: Between the Samanids and the Ghaznavids // IS. 2010. Vol. 43. No. 1. P. 13-28.
Daryaee T. Kave the Black-smith: An Indo-Iranian Fashioner? / / Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik. Reinbeck, 1999. S. 9-21.
Doostkhah J. Gorz // Encyclopedia Iranica. Vol. 11. Fasc. 2.
URL: http://www.iranicaonline.org/ articles/gorz (oryginally published: December 15, 2002).
Esin E. L'arme zoomorphe dans l'Asie antique / / Sprache, Geschichte und Kultur der altaischen Völker / Hrsg. von G. Hazai und P. Zieme. B., 1974. S. 193-217.
Ettinghausen R., Grabar O., Jenkins-Madina O. Sztuka i Architektura Islamu. 650-1250. Warszawa, 2007.
Frye R. N. Sasanian Remains from Qasr-i Abu Nasr. Seals, Seal-ings, and Coins. Cambridge, 1973.
Gorelik M. V. Oruzhie Drevnego Vostoka. IV tisyacheletiye — IV vek do n. e. Moskva, 1993.
Gyselen R. L'Aet sigillaire Sassanide dans les collections De Leyde. Leiden, 1997.
Harper P. O. The Royal Hunter. Art of the Sassanian Empire. N. Y., 1978.
Harper P. O. Silver Vessels of the Sassanian Period. Vol. 1. Royal Imagery. N. Y., 1981.
Harper P. O. The Ox-headed Mace in Pre-Islamic Iran // Papers in Honour of Mary Boyce. Acta Iranica. 1985. Vol. 24. P. 246-259.
Hassan R. B. On some Sassanian and Arab-Sassanian seals and coins / / Mirror of Heritage. 2011. Fig. 87.
Izmailov I. L. Vooruzhenie i voennoe delo naseleniâ Volzhskoi Bulgarii X - nachala XIII vv. Kazan; Magadan, 1997.
Kawami T. S. Kuh-e Khwaja, Iran, and Its Wall Paintings: The Records of Ernst Herzfeld //MMJ. 1987. Vol. 22. P. 13-52.
Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armour from Iran. The Bronze Age to the End of Qajar Period. Tübingen, 2006.
Khorasani M. M. Arms and Armor of Achamenians and Sassanians // Fezana Journal. 2006. Summer Issue. P. 87-93.
Khorasani M. M. La Masse d'Arme à Tête de Taureau: Une Combinaison de Puissance et de Prestige // La Revue de Téhéran. Mensuel Culturel Iranien en Langue Française. 2010. № 53. P. 56-61.
Khorasani M. M. Lexicon of Arms and Armor from Iran. A Study of Symbols and Terminology. Tübingen, 2010.
Khorasani M. M., Shafeian H., Singh A. Tactics, Weapons and Techniques of Persian Warriors in the Book of Kings.
Pt. 2 // Katsujinken Magazine a Sword Art Journal. 2012. Vol. 3. № 3. P. 19-21, 62-63.
Kobylanski L. Orgz Perski i Indoperski XVI-XIX wieku ze zbiorow polskich: katalog wystawy. Malbork, 2000.
Linenthal P. A. Nine Gold Kushan Discs // ONS Journal of the Numismatic Society. 2006. № 188. P. 15-18.
Marschak B. Silberschätze des Orients. Metallkunst des 3.-13. Jahrhunderts und ihre Kontinuität. Leipzig, 1986.
Marshak B. I., Raspopova V. I. A Hunting Scene from Panjikent / / Bulletin of the Asia Institute. NS. 1990. Vol. 4. P. 77-94.
Michalak A. Glowica bulawy z Trzciela, pow. Migdzyrzecz. Uwagi w kwestii wystgpowania bulaw na ziemiach polskich w sredniowieczu, na tle znalezisk europejskich / / Archeologia Srodkowego Nadodrza. 2005. Vol. 4. P. 183-220.
Miks Ch. Relikte eines frühmittelalterlichen Oberschichtgrabes? Überlegungen zu einem Konvolut bemerkenswerter Objekte aus dem Kunsthandel / / Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz. 2009. Bd. 56. S. 395-538.
Mode M. Sogdian Gods in Exile: Some Iconographic Evidence from Khotan in Light of Recently Excavated Material from Sogdiana / / Silk Road Art and Archeology. Vol. 2. Kamakura, 1991-1992. P. 179-214.
Mohamed B. The Art of Muslim Knight: The Furusiyya Art Foundation. Milano, 2008.
Muscarella O. W. Bronze and Iron. Ancient Near Estern Artifacts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. N. Y., 1988.
Nicolle D. Early Medieval Islamic Arms and Armour. Madrid, 1976.
Nicolle D. Sasanian Armies. The Iranian Empire early 3rd to mid-7th centuries AD. Stockport, 1996.
Nicolle D. Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era. 1050-1350. Islam, Eastern Europe and Asia. L., 1999. P. 207-268.
Overlaet B. Regalia of the Ruling Classes in Late Sasanian Times. The Riggisberg Strap Mountings, Swords and Ar-
cher's Fingercaps / / Entlag der Seidenstraße. Frühmittelalterliche Kunst zwischen Persien und China in der Abegg-Stiftung / Hrsg. K. Otavsky. Riggisberg, 1998. P. 267-298.
Perevodchikova E. V. Yazyk zverinyh obrazov. Ocherki iskusstva evraziyskih stepey skifskoy epohi. Moskva, 1994.
Shahbazi A. Sh. On the Xwadäy-namäg // Iranica Varia: Papers in Honour of Professor Ehsan Yarshater. Leiden, 1990. P. 208-229.
Shahbazi A. Sh. Ferdousi: A Critical Biography. Cambridge, 1991.
Sinisi F. Tyche in Parthia: The Image of the Godness on Ar-casid Tetradrachms / / Numismatische Zeitschrift. 2008. Bd. 116 /117. S. 231-248.
Skupniewicz P. N. Sasanian Plate Armour // FAH. 2006. Fasc. 19. P. 19-29.
Skupniewicz P. N. Helm wojownika przedstawionego na kapitelu w Tak e Bostan / / AMM. 2007. Vol. 3. P. 9-14.
Skupniewicz P. N. Shafted weapons of sasanian hunting iconography // FAH. 2009. Fasc. 22. The Hunt and Hunting Weapons in Antiquity and the Middle Ages. P. 51-63.
Skupniewicz P. N. Composition Designs in Animal Combat Scenes in Sasanian Art. Gdansk, 2013.
Spagnoli M. M. The Symbolic Meaning of the Club in the Iconography of the Kusana Kings // EW. 1967. Vol. 17. № 3/4. P. 248-267.
Spagnoli M. M. Some Further Observations on the Symbolic Meaning of the Club in the Statue of Kaniska // EW. 1970. Vol. 20. No. 4. P. 460-468.
Stanco L. Soucasna Archeologie Severni Baktrie //AVRIGA. Zpravy klasickych filologü. Prague, 2005. P. 54-64.
Stanco L. Arheologicheskie raskopki na Dzhandavlattepa v 20022006 gg. // Arheologicheskoe issledovanie Dzhandavlattepa i Sherabadskogo rayona. Praga, 2013. P. 19-40.
Starodub T. H. Srednevekovya arhitektura, sviazannaya s sufizmom: hanaka, zaviya, takiya / / Sufizm v kontekste
173
musul'manskoy kulturi / Pod red. N. I. Prigarinoy. Moskva, 1989. S. 268-280.
Tafazzoli A. A List of Terms for Weapons Armour in Western Middle Iranian. Dedicated to Professor A. D. H. Bivar / / Silk Road Art and Archeology. 1993/94. Vol. 3. P. 187-198.
Trever K. V, Lukonin V. G. Sasanidskoe serebro. Sobranie Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha. Hudozhestvennaya kul'tura Irana III-VIII vekov. Moskva, 1987.
Gall H., von. Das reiterkampfbild in der iranischen und iranisch beeinflußten Kunst partischer und sasanidischer zeit. B., 1990.
Watt J. C. Y. China: Down of a Goldan Age, 200-750 A. D. N. Y., 2004.
Zygulski Z., jun. Geneza i typologia bulaw hetmanskich / / Muzealnictwo Wojskowe. T. 2. Warsawa, 1964. P. 239-288.
PLATES
Plate 1. Mace from the private collection of Susamiflar Konagi in Sivas, Turkey.
Timurid period (mid XIV-XV century A. D.). Drawings by author. Photos by
Hilmi Arig.
h ^ w 11
Plate 2. Sasanian intaglios showing duels between heroes and demons.
From the left:
Fig. 1. Sasanian gem, British Museum. Drawing by author. Fig. 2. Sasanian(?) or late Sasanian(?) (after IV century A.D.) gem. British Museum. Drawing by author. Fig. 3. Sasanian gem. British Museum. Drawing by author. Fig. 4. Late Sasanian (V-VI century A. D.) gem. British Museum. Drawing by author.
Plate 3. Kushan bird maces.
From the left:
Fig. 1. Gold Kushan disc from private collection. After P. Linenthal, 2006, fig. 3.
Fig. 2. Kushan coin of Huvishka. After R. Bracey, 2009, fig. A 3. Fig. 3. Kushan coin of Huvishka, showing Mahasena. After R. Bracey, 2009, fig. from «the 'Other' Bird Standard» figures. Fig. 4. Sogdian terracotta ossuary from Kaska Darya (7th - 8th century A. D.). Uzbekistan. After M. Mode, 1991-92, fig. II.
Fig. 1. Late Sasanian seal impression from Qasr-I Abu Nasr. After R. N. Frye,
1973, Fig. D. 25.
Fig. 2. Late Sasanian mace head. British Museum. Drawing by author. Fig. 3. Post-Sasanian mace head. The Metropolitan Museum of Art Drawing by author. Fig. 4. Ghaznavid mace head. The Furasiyya Art Foundation. Drawing by author.
Plate 5. Additional motifs of the hand on maces.
From the left.
(Upper left) Fig. 1. Yazdagird I hunting a stag using a spear with the hand shaped pommel. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. After P. N. Skupniewicz, 2009, fig. 3. (Lower left) Fig. 2. Bone mace ending from Jandavlattepa-I. Uzbekistan, Ku-
shan period. Drawing by author. Fig. 3. Post-Sasanian mace. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Drawing by author. Fig. 4. Indian mace (7th century A. D.). The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Drawing by author. Fig. 5. Late Sasanian mace. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. After O. W. Muscarella, 1988, fig. 27.
Plate 6. Human headed maces, with beards.
From the upper left:
Fig. 1. Bronze figure of a late Sasanian noble man. Riggisberg Abegg Foundation.
Drawing by author.
Fig. 2. Umayyad stucco statue of Caliph Hisham (8th century A. D.). Khirbat-al-
Mafjar. Drawing by author. Fig. 3. Late Sasanian bronze mace head. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum. Drawing by author. Fig. 4 Late Sasanian bronze mace head. Riggisberg Abegg Foundation Drawing by author.
Fig. 5. Late Sasanian bronze mace head. Private collection After B. Overlaet, 1998, fig. 143. Fig. 6. Late Sasanian seal impression from Qasr-I Abu Nasr. After R N. Frye, 1973, fig. D. 113.
Fig. 7. Arab-Sasanian coin (early 8th century A D.). After R B. Hassan, 2011, fig. 87. Fig. 8. Ghaznavid ruler, shown on the throne (10th - early 11th century A D.). Detail of the silver plate, Saint Petersburg, Hermitage Museum. After B. Overlaet, 1998, fig. 146. Fig. 9. Sogdian bronze mace head (mid 7th - mid 8th century A D.). Jartepa-II. Drawing by the author.
Fig. 10. Sogdian wall painting of a seated king (8th century A. D.), Panjikent. After B. Marshak, V. I. Raspopova, 1990, fig. 33a.
Plate 7. Lion head maces.
From the upper left: Fig. 1. The damaged wall paintings from the Ghaznavid palace at Lashkari Bazar (11th century), showing perhaps an asymmetrical zoomorphic maces. After S. Al-Sarraf, 2002, fig. 56a, 56b.
Fig. 2. Ghaznavid bronze mace head. The Furusiyya Art Foundation. Drawing by author.
Fig. 3. The damaged wall painting from the Ghaznavid palace at Lashkari Bazar (11th century A.D.), showing an asymmetrical zoomorphic mace. After
S. Al-Sarraf, 2002, fig. 56c. Fig. 4. Seljuk bronze mace head (11th - 12th century A.D.). Khurasan, private
collection, sold on Sothebys auction. Drawing by author. Fig. 5. Seljuk bronze or brass mace head (12th - 13th century A.D.), probably Iranian. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. After S. Al-Sarraf, 2002, fig. 68. Fig. 6. Seljuk ceramic tile (12th century A. D.), showing perhaps an asymmetrical zoomorphic mace. Drawing by the author. Fig. 7. Seljuk lion-head mace (12th -13th century A.D.). The Furusiyya Art Foundation. Drawing by author. Fig. 8. Post-Seljuk minai-ware ceramic bowl (mid 13th century A. D.). Freer
Gallery of Art. Drawing by the author. Fig. 9. Ilkhanid Shah-nameh illustration (1333 A.D.). National Library of Russia, Saint Petersburg. Drawing by the author. Fig. 10. Post-Ilkhanid Shah-nameh illustration (mid 14th century A. D.). Shi-
raz, Iran, The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Drawing by the author. Fig. 11. Timurid Iskender-nameh illustration (early 15th century copy of a 13th century illustration). Bibliotheque Nationale de France. Drawing by author. Fig. 11. Ottoman Sulayman-nameh (15th century A. D.). Chester Beauty Library, Dublin. Drawing by the author. Fig. 12. Safavid Shah-nameh (1530-1535 A. D.). The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Drawing by the author.
Кубик А. Л.
Об одной группе иранских булав в контексте новой находки в турецкой провинции Сивас: от Сасанидов к Сефевидам
Недавняя находка булавы с навершием в форме головы льва из монастырского комплекса в турецкой провинции Сивас проливает новый свет на эволюцию и хронологию антропоморфных и зооморфных булав от кушанской и сасанидской эпох до начала Нового времени. Булава из Сиваса отличается львообразной головой с хорошо проработанными деталями и своеобразным изгибом. Находка датируется Х1У-ХУ вв.
В статье дан подробный анализ и хронология антропоморфных и зооморфных булав. К общим чертам таких булав, как правило, относятся узел Геракла, кулак или рука на рукояти и антропоморфное или зооморфное оголовье. Для некоторых
находок характерно изображение головы человека или животного. Такие булавы начали появляться в эпоху Аршакидов, но более распространёнными стали при Кушанах (где булавы с на-вершием в виде птицы и большие палицы являлись также символами власти). Они также получили широкое распространение в Средней Азии. Однако такие булавы отсутствуют на большинстве сасанидских изображений; это может быть связано с тем, что в начале сасанидской эпохи соответствующие художественные каноны лишь начали разрабатываться.
Постепенно происходило изменение формы древка и его изгиба, стиль исполнения навершия булав. Пост-сасанидские булавы, вероятно, продолжали сасанидские традиции, но при Сельджукидах появляется новый тип булав. Все сельджукские булавы имели навершие в виде головы льва, при этом данная деталь в форме человеческой или бычьей головы не встречается. Древки булав из-за особенностей своей формы (они имеют один изгиб) классифицируются как «Г-образные». В послемонголь-скую эпоху древки приобретают двойной изгиб и классифицируются как «Э-образные». Булавы с навершием в форме головы быка становятся вновь распространёнными при Сефевидах и Каджарах.
Новые находки булав дадут дополнительную информацию о хронологии данного предмета вооружения и позволят проследить развитие и формы таких булав с большей точностью.
Ключевые слова: булава, зооморфизм, палица, скипетр, вооружение, «Шах-наме», Кушаны, Сасаниды, ислам, Газневиды, Сельджукиды, монголы, Тимуриды, Иран, Индия.
