Cheremisin_-_Pazyryk.pdf

Copyright © 2009, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Archaeology & Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.aeae.2009.05.010

ARCHAEOLOGY,ETHNOLOGY& ANTHROPOLOGYOF EURASIA

Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 37/1 (2009) 85–94E-mail: [email protected] 85

DISCUSSION

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF PREHISTORIC ART

D.V. CheremisinInstitute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences,

Akademika Lavrentieva 17, Novosibirsk, 630090, RussiaE-mail: [email protected]

Introduction

Images of real and mythical birds are typical of ancient mythologies of the Old and New Worlds (“the bird creating the world,” the mythic Anzud Eagle in Sumer, Garuda in India, Senmurw/Simurg in Iran, the phoenix in China, and others). These images are re ected in art and in mythology, examples of which are the “Raven cycles” of the Paleo-Asiatic peoples or the “Eagle cycles” of the Indo-Europeans studied by C. Lévy-Strauss, E.I. Meletinsky, V.V. Ivanov, and V.N. Toporov.

ON THE SEMANTICS OF ANIMAL STYLE ORNITHOMORPHIC IMAGES

IN PAZYRYK RITUAL ARTIFACTS*

The paper focuses on animal style images and compositions in Pazyryk art. An attempt is made to reconstruct the semantics of certain images, proceeding from the assumption that art is a special language used to express perceptions of the Universe. The mythical grif n is the most popular gure in Pazyryk art, suggesting that the Pazyryk people may be identi ed with the “grif ns guarding gold,” mentioned by Aristeas and Herodotus. The grif n image is interpreted in the context of Pazyryk ritual grave goods and speci cally in griffon – horse predatory scenes represented in the attire of the sacri cial horses that accompanied the deceased to their tombs. The same mythical predation scene, believed to bring good luck, is mentioned in the descriptions of Scythia given by Classical historians and geographers. The realistic image of a bird (probably the demoiselle – Anthropoides virgo – inhabiting the alpine steppes of the Altai) decorated the tops of Pazyryk ceremonial headwear. This image also appears in mythological belief. Its interpretation is suggested, relating the meaning of the bird image and the symbolism of Pazyryk headwear to Indo-European and Uralic mythology.

Key words: Animal style, grif n, crane, ritual objects, semantics of scenes and images.

The mythological ideas of the Pazyryk people are embodied in zoomorphic images executed in the animal style. In order for an interpretation to be reliable a significant series of reiterating images must be available. The Pazyryk grif n which represents the most popular image executed in the animal style is currently experiencing renewal, included by the Altai Republic in its State Emblem. However, the semantics of this gure, being capable of doing good or causing harm to man (both in the past and in the present) continues to be a topic for discussion. In this article, the author offers an interpretation of the iconography and semantics of grif n imaginary within the context of broad comparisons (ranging from wall paintings at atal-Hüyük to the mythology of the

*Research supported by the Russian Foundation for the Humanities (Projects 08-01-00281 and NS-1648.2008.6).

86 D.V. Cheremisin / Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 37/1 (2009) 85–94

Turkic-speaking peoples of Eurasia). The realistic image of a demoiselle is another very popular ornithomorphic gure in Pazyryk mythology. This image is represented

in funerary headwear and the wooden tops worn by the Pazyryk people of the Southern Altai. Representations of the crane are present exclusively on these headdresses and a number of other attributes of the funeral rite. A semantic reconstruction based on this and linguistic data concerning words denoting the crane in ancient languages may be relevant in modeling historical and ethno-cultural processes related to the Pazyryk culture.

Tops of Pazyryk headwear

Intact pieces of headwear belonging to Pazyryk “middle rank” nobility and commoners were rst discovered by N.V. Polosmak and V.I. Molodin on the Ukok Plateau.

Organic materials, of which caps were made, were preserved in the ice lenses which formed inside the burial chambers. Pazyryk burial complexes excavated by V.D. Kubarev in the upper reaches of the Chuya River contain fragments of a headdress; however, artifacts associated with these nds form a statistically representative series (Kubarev, 1981, 1987b, 1991, 1992). The function of the objects forming this sophisticated headdress indispensable for the funeral attire of the Pazyryk people of various social ranks (tops, diadems, aigrettes, and wooden gurines plated with gold foil) seems clear in light of the Ukok discoveries.

The representational aspect of Pazyryk headwear is strictly structured. Wooden gurines plaited with gold foil serve as tops. Zoomorphic images such as realistically rendered representations of birds of prey – “eagles” (Kubarev, Cheremisin, 1984), imaginary ungulates – “horses” with antlers (Kubarev, 1987a: 101, g. 39; 1981; Fenomen…, 2000: 106, g. 127), and an ox (Polosmak, 1999: 149, pl. 1, 2) were used as top decorations.

Grave goods from intact burial sites on the Ukok Plateau have shown that the shape of the cap also resembles the image of a bird. A completely preserved felt cap toped with a wooden gurine of a stylized bird’s head was found in situ in the male burial at Ak-Alakha I. The female burial discovered in the same burial mound contained fragments of headwear that had not been preserved, probably, due to the particular composition of the individual’s hair arrangement (wig ?). However, the wooden bird-shaped top and wooden open-work decorations are almost exactly the same as those found in the male set (Polosmak, 1994: 29, g. 19; p. 40–43, g. 34–38). Another bird-shaped top of a cap identical

to those from the Ukok Plateau was recovered from the male burial at Olon Kurin-Gol in the Mongolian Altai (Molodin, 2007: 48–49, g. 9).

Two male burials from the Verkh-Kaldzhin II burial ground on the Ukok yielded felt cap-helmets demonstrating close similarity to the headwear from Ak-Alakha I (Molodin, 2000: 104–105, g. 125). Both the wooden tops from Ak-Alakha I and the felt helmets from Verkh-Kaldzhin II are shaped in the form of a bird’s head and beak. The shapes of all known Pazyryk caps found in the Southeastern Altai resemble the bird image to varying degrees (Polosmak, 1999: 150; 2001: 306, pl. XIX, a– ).The wooden tops of male caps from low-status burials at Yustyd and Ulandryk in the upper Chuya (Kubarev, 1987a: pl. LVIII, 14; 1991: pl. XXV, 5; pl. XXVII, 37)are similar to the Ukok examples.

The shape of the Pazyryk caps discussed here resembles features of a bird which currently inhabits the Southern Altai and the Ukok Plateau in particular. It is the author’s opinion that both the wooden tops of the male and female caps from burial mound 1 at Ak-Alakha I and the male felt helmets from burial mounds 1

Fig. 1. Pazyryk headdresses (1–3, 5, 6) and representations of demoiselle (4).

1–3 – Ak-Alakha I, burial mound 1 (after (Polosmak, 1994)); 5 – Verkh-Kaldzhin II, burial mound 3 (after (Molodin, 2000)); 6 – Verkh-Kaldzhin II, burial mound 1 (after (Molodin, 2000;

Polosmak, 1994)).

1 2 34 5 6

D.V. Cheremisin / Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 37/1 (2009) 85–94 87

and 3 from Verkh-Kaldzhin II demonstrate features most typical of the demoiselle (Anthropoides virgo) (Fig. 1). The bird-shaped cap, bird gurines on the tops of caps, plates bearing bird images that were sewn onto the cap and a diadem showing images of waterfowl (Kubarev, Cheremisin, 1984) re ect the association drawn between the bird image as a symbol of the upper realm and air with the “top” or upper part of the attire.

The bird image is a universal marker of the upper part of the world (Ivanov, Toporov, 1988b). In Scythian ritual practice, bird images decorated the tops of ritual poles (Perevodchikova, Raevsky, 1981). The mythological sphere of the eagle in the Indo-European tradition is linked with the top of the World Tree and represents the most important bird in cult practice (Gamkrelidze, Ivanov, 1984: 538; Sternberg, 1925; and others). The eagle image served as the most typical image in dynasty emblems, for example, the “eagle” crowns of the Sogdian and Khwarezmian dynasties are well-known. The eagle served as an imperial symbol in many cultures and states (see (Ivanov, Toporov, 1988a; Kuzmina, Sarianidi, 1982; Akishev, 1984; and others)).

Words denoting the crane in various languages are relevant to this study. According to convincing reconstructions, the common Indo-European word for crane is possibly onomatopoeic, like other words derived from the stem *k’er- (Gamkrelidze, Ivanov, 1984: 540). The same is observed in certain Siberian languages, speci cally in ethnonyms derived from words for crane (e.g., the Selkup ethnonym Kara/Karra means ‘crane people’, see (Pelikh, 1980, 1981)). The Selkup used the word ‘karra’ to designate cranes and also bird images in shaman practices.

Features pertaining to crane images such as their monogamy, impressive breeding dances, conditions of habitation in the Altai high elevated steppe must have been re ected in the Pazyryk mythology. It should be noted that no other evidence aside from wooden cap tops for the use of the crane image in wood carving and other branches of Pazyryk art and ideology has been recorded. As far as linguistic and material parallels are concerned, the Kazakh word ‘karkara’ can mean demoiselle, heron, plume made of long feathers, and saukele with such a plume, as well as the top of this headdress, and also the male headdress with a plume. Incidentally, the French word ‘aigrette’, like the English word ‘egret’, refers both to plume and to heron, whereas the word ‘aigrette’ in English only means plume.

The word ‘karkara’ in the modern Kazakh language means heron. In Kazakh dialects and folklore this word also means plume (Karmysheva, 1989: 32). B.H. Karmysheva believes that the tradition of naming details of a cap according to the name of a bird originated in the ancient Sakian cultures. Karmysheva’s idea on the ancient origin of this tradition is supported by

recent discoveries on the Ukok Plateau. The semantic connection between words denoting the top of headwear and the heron appears relevant in reconstructing the meaning of Pazyryk headwear. It also implies a possible explanation as to why only the tops of the Pazyryk headwear were decorated with crane head figurines. No other stylized and realistic crane images have been noted in the Pazyryk animal repertoire. The materials under discussion are of particular interest with regard to V.I. Molodin’s concept of the two major components forming the Pazyryrk culture, one of which is thought to be the Samodian culture (Molodin, 2003).

One may suppose that demoiselle skulls (probably originally heads) from Okunevo burials probably served as the tops of funeral caps or masks (Chernovaya VIII, Treti Log, Lebiazhie, and other burial sites) (Pyatkin, 1997; Vadetskaya, 1983, 1993). Interestingly, the most popular epithet for a crane in the Russian language is “crowned.” This feature is reflected in ornithological classi cation. In the context of the hypothesis on the cultural links connecting Okunevo art and the animal style of the early nomads of Eurasia (Pyatkin, 1987; Sher, 1987, 1989, 1992, 1998), the interpretations given above can be used in further ethno-cultural and historical reconstruction. The fact that the crane image is absent in Pazyryk wooden carving may be explained by the semantics of the headwear and its top, since both seem to have alluded to the Pazyryk ethnonym. The shape of the headwear in the form of a bird’s head is suf cient to identify the crane image as a totemic symbol peculiar to a tribe or clan. The question arises as to whether the Pazyryk people or the Pazyryk population of the Southern Altai were called the “crane’s people.” The answer to this question will no doubt be provided by further research, new excavations and studies of the migration routes of these wonderful birds together with comparative linguistic and ethnological data.

Horses and grif ns from the Ukok Pazyryk burial mounds

It would seem appropriate to use the term ‘concept’ with regard to ancient art, since in cognitive linguistics, lexical concepts refer to representations. In ancient art images are evidently based on interpretation rather than copying (Sher, 1980: 41–42). For example, the most typical pose in Pazyryk animal images is that in which the rear part of the body is inverted and the hind legs are lifted high up over the back. This pose can be interpreted as “the pose in which animals such as goat and sheep use to scratch their heads with the hind leg uplifted” (Rudenko, 1953: 190, pl. L, 4; LI, 3). On the other hand, the “convulsive inversion of the victim’s body can be considered a symbol of defeat or sign of the dying


animal’s agony” (Rudenko, 1952: 174–175). The latter meaning probably relates to ungulate images (imaginary ungulates with a beak-shaped muzzle are shown only in this pose) in Pazyryk tattoos. A certain correlation has been established between poses in male and female Pazyryk headwear and the types used on caps. This can be regarded as additional evidence of the semantic signi cance of the animal pose in animal style art.

The established composition of assemblages used in Pazyryk ritual practice is also signi cant (Cheremisin, 2006). There also appears to be a connection between the grif n images, or, as S.I. Rudenko referred to them, “Altai vultures” (the most popular being the image of the head of an imaginary bird depicted with ears) and the Pazyryk funeral horse harness. The at wooden grif n figurines with removable three-dimensional heads, all plated with gold foil, that were used as forehead decorations or were hung to the harness strapping found in the Kuturguntas burial mound, serve as one example (Polosmak, 1994: 51, g. 54–66, p. 81, g. 108; 2001: 105, g. 81, 82). Six horses were recovered from burial mound 1 of the Ak-Alakha III burial ground, ve of which wore bridles decorated with grif n images. Horse 2 has bridle straps and cheek pieces decorated with grif n images (Polosmak, 2001: 78, g. 54). Other horses from this mound also bear representations of grif ns either on the forehead strap, or as a plate with a three-dimensional head on the nose strap, or as pendants on the cheek pieces (Ibid.: 80–84, g. 55–61; Fenomen…, 2000: 62–63, fig. 38, 39, 41–45). Only one cheek piece has been preserved on the horse that was placed last in the tomb. Thus we can assume that the grif n image decorated all the horse harness sets from this burial mound. Horse bridles from other elite burial assemblages attributed to the Pazyryk culture, like Pazyryk I, horses 1 and 9 (Griaznov, 1950: 24, 37, g. 6, 15), show decorations of the same kind. Cheek pieces of horse harness with grif n images have also been reported from the Berel cemetery (Samashev et al., 2000: 43 – 44) and from Pazyryk low-status burials at Yustyd, Ulandruk, Tashanta, etc. (Kubarev, 1987a, 1991, 1992) (Fig. 2).

Archaeological materials recovered from low-status burials in the upper reaches of the Chuya and the Ukok Plateau illustrate the same tradition (Kubarev, 1987a: 31–38; 1991: 43, fig. 8, 6; pl. LI, 2; 1992: 31–32, g. 9, 3, 4). The representation of an imaginary grif n

and wild boar tusks are the two most popular zoomorphic motifs in horse harness decorations, located mostly on the bridle and chest strapping found in low-status Pazyryk burials (Cheremisin, 2007: 84–85). The decorative set of a horse harness from the Ak-Alakha burial includes large pendants attached to the saddle decorated by grif n and sh images (Polosmak, 1992; 1994: 46, g. 43, 45).

Referring to the tradition of decorating horse harnesses with grif n images, one should note that the decorative

set of horse harnesses from Pazyryk low-status burials demonstrate the same idea of opposition between predator and ungulate as is shown by sets from Great Pazyryk and middle-sized Ak-Alakha burial mounds. For example, the grif n image decorates all the sets of horse bridle and head trappings from Ak-Alakha burials (Polosmak, 1994: 50–54). Wooden plates showing animal images with the bodies carved flat and three-dimensional heads from burial mound 11 at Berel (Samashev, Mylnikov, 2004: 156–160, g. 259–271) display considerable similarity to the artifacts originating in Pazyryk and Ak-Alakha tombs. For example, compositions such as a deer head placed in a grif n’s beak or a ram’s head placed in the jaws of a horned wolf from Pazyryk (Rudenko, 1953: pl. XXXVII, LXXXIII) both display semantic and compositional features in common with the image of a deer head placed in the grif n’s beak found at Berel (Samashev et al., 2000: 34, 38, 44).

Apart from artistic context and iconography, the author’s interpretation of the meaning of the Pazyryk grif n proceeds from the reliably established connection between this image and harness decorations. F.R. Balonov (1991: 114) notes that the grif n image in the Pazyryk culture was both related and opposed to the horse image. The griffin is perceived not only as a “heavenly bird clawing a horse,” but also as a heavenly horse-bird. In the author’s opinion this combination is re ected in the expression that goes back to antiquity “to interbreed a griffon-vulture with a horse,” which literally means “a vague relation between griffon-vultures and horses[italics by the present author – D.C.]. It is not clear why griffons lure horses to them and what causes these animals to be at odds with one another.” Quite a number of ancient descriptions exist of the relationship between horses and griffons and most of them point to hostility existing between these two animals: “Grif ns represent a speci c type of animal. They inhabited the Hyperborean Mountains. They look like lions, but they have wings and the head resembles that of an eagle. These animals are extremely hostile to horses <…>, these animals have the body of a lion, their face and wings resemble those of an eagle; they are extremely hostile to horses; on seeing a man, they may tear him into pieces” (Tigritsa…, 2002: 63).

One of the clues to the meaning of the scene in which a horse is being clawed by a grif n may lie in the way that grif ns and horses are “hybridized” in Pazyryk burials, in accordance with descriptions given by classical writers. The predation theme is modeled by ritual elements of the harness. The presence of actual sacrificial horses fully coincides with the context of the funerary rite, the scenario of which was based on the idea of death vs. rebirth and included the sacri ce of horses (Cheremisin, 2005). The predominance of the image of an imaginary bird depicted with ears (griffin) in the festive, ritual


trappings of the horses that accompanied the deceased to the tomb (sets of decorations bearing grif n images on bridle trappings and cheek pieces from the Pazyryk, Ak-Alakha, Ust-Kaldzhin, Kuturguntas, Ulandryk, and other sites of the Pazyryk culture) should be regarded as a representation of the same mythological idea expressed by many antique historians and geographers such as Herodotus, Ktesias, Aeliaus, Solius, Pomponius Mela, and others, who described these terrible grif ns tearing “everybody in their sight” to pieces; these creatures were “especially hostile to horses.”

The role of the griffin as an ungulate “torturer” shown in the scene of a grif n torturing a deer depicted on the Chertomlyk vase or on the pectoral from the Tolstoya Mogila (Kuzmina, 1976; Raevsky, 1978), is also represented in Ancient Greek-Scythian art: the grif ns were regarded as guardians of gold belonging to the

chthonic heroes. In some records of the antic traditions, grif ns are described as monsters “that are furious and easily enraged…, these creatures tear to pieces anyone they see” (cited as in (Bongard-Levin, Grantovsky, 1983: 49)). In the author’s opinion, the fact that the image of a fantastic bird, a grif n plays a key role in the decoration of the harness is associated with the predation theme, which is embodied in horse masks from Pazyryk elite burials. The structure of representations on the sacri cial horses’ harness encodes the carnivore vs. ungulate opposition on various levels (Cheremisin, 2005).

According to the author’s interpretation, the scene may refer to the opposition between the grif n, which was the key gure in harness decoration and the actual sacri cial horse. The same opposition (carnivore vs. ungulate) appears encoded in the structure and other figurative elements of the horse which can be interpreted as an

Fig. 2. Representations of grif ns decorating a Pazyryk horse harness.1, 2, 4, 5, 7–9, 13, 15, 16, 18 – Ak-Alakha I, burial mound 1 (after (Polosmak, 1994)); 3, 6, 10–12 – Bertel, burial mound 11

(after (Samashev et al., 2000)); 14 – Kuturguntas (after (Polosmak, 1994)); 17 – Tuekta I (after (Rudenko, 1960)).

1 2 3 45 6 7 8 9 101112 13 1415 16 17 18


expression of the predation theme (cf. representations on ceremonial horse masks, saddle covers, and large saddle pendants). It would also appear natural that the key themes of cosmogonic myth should be represented in the burial rite.

The speci c role of scavenging birds (grif ns) in ancient Iranian eschatological ideas and closely related Zoroastrian funeral rituals is crucial for the proposed reconstruction of the semantics of the grif n image. The Avesta prescribed exposing bodies of the dead to scavenging dogs and griffons-vultures. This ritual practice was also recorded by the ancient historians Herodotus, Strabo, and Ktesias (see (Rapoport, 1971)). The ritual of exposing dead bodies for special scavenging animals and birds was also practiced by many sedentary Iranian tribes, such as the Sogdians, Bactrians, Caspians, and Hyrcanians, i.e. tribes close to the Saka and Massagets, in whose environment researchers believe that the Zoroastrian funeral rituals were formed (Ibid.: 23–27, 122). The images of large griffons tearing decapitated human bodies from the walls of sanctuaries in atal-Hüyük (horizons VII-2, VII-21, VII-8) (Mellaart, 1971: 93–96, g. 45–47) appear to be the oldest illustration of this ritual practice. According to D. Melaart, inhabitants of atal-Hüyük interred their dead upon detaching soft tissues from the bones; the esh was “pecked by griffons” (1982: 87, 92).

In Central Asia, a rite similar to that practiced by the Eastern Iranian tribes probably appeared and spread under the in uence of Lamaism. For example, the Tuvans believed that the griffon (tas bird, lit., ‘bald’) came down from the sky to peck the bodies of the dead, which was considered a worthy fate for the dead (Potapov, 1969: 330). “In Tibet, the body of a dead person was divided into pieces. The esh was fed to griffons that stood nearby” (Zhukovskaya, 1977: 123). A semantic series uniting real carnivore animals (wolves and dogs) and scavenging birds typical of the steppe zone, is re ected in the eschatological ideas and mythology of the peoples of Central Asia.

The grif n image decorating one of the ends of a torque from burial mound 19 at Yustyd XII shows a combination of features of a wolf and an imaginary carnivore bird in a single syncretic image (Kubarev, 1979: 81, g. 27; 1991, pl. XLV, 20). The deeper reasons for this combination of features in the iconography of fantastical images and the reasons why zoomorphic images were merged and associated with the same categories of artifacts may be related to the steppe environment. The steppe played a key role in the origins of early nomadic cultures whose way of life was based on nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralism and served as an object of metaphysical interpretation in mythological consciousness.

According to biological data, a pack of wolves, the cattle herder’s main enemy, is usually accompanied in the steppe and desert by special scavenger birds. These are particularly numerous in mountains of the arid zone.

In the southern part of the wolf habitat, many species of carnivore birds live on the remains of the wolves’ prey such as golden eagles, tawny eagles, imperial eagles, white-tailed eagles, and various species of gyp vulture. Given the de cit of other food sources the remains provide the birds with a source of nutrition (Volk…, 1985: 371). Specialized necrophags such as griffon vulture, Egyptian vulture, bearded vulture, and black kite normally feed on the remains of wolf prey. Interestingly, both wolves and scavenging birds are included in groups that follow migrating herds of saigaks. The population of these birds depends on the number of corpse available. More than any other commensal it is the large scavenging birds (vultures) that force the wolves to hunt most actively. Wolves hunt ungulates 2 to 3 times more than they require themselves (Ibid.: 371–372). In other words, the number of birds was closely linked to the carnivorous activities of wolves. The coexistence and close trophical connection between wolves and vultures “de ned their mutual dependence and mutual adaptations in behavior” (Ibid.: 372–373).

Features of real prototypes of the Pazyryk images (including large vultures) probably served as the basis for the formation of mythological ideas in which predators such as wolves and felines were perceived as being identical to an imaginary bird (the grif n). These ideas were expressed in syncretic images as well as in the tradition of decorating certain classes of artifacts with these images. The formation of the Pazyryk grif n image was probably in uenced by pieces of Western Asian art, in particular by grif ns of the Achaemenid type found in Pazyryk burial mounds.

The image of Kumai, a fantastic winged dog often occurs in the mythology of many Turkic peoples. No animal from either of the elements could outrun Kumai who was the master of predatory birds. The origin of the name Kumai can be traced back to the Ancient Iranian and Middle Persian hum /hum i. This name was used to designate scavenging birds, i.e. various types of vultures and gyps. In the bird’s description it is stressed that Kumai feeds on bones (Shapka, 1972: 212; Henning, 1947: 42). It is also interesting that the word ‘Kumai’ as the name of a type of vulture exists in the modern ornithological classification thereby preserving the ancient mythological taxonomy (Kumai = snow vulture = = Gyphs fulvus Himalayensis Hume) (Ptitsy SSSR, 1968: 254). The consumption of bones is a characteristic feature of this species.

In the Kyrgyzian language, the word ‘kumai’ means both a species of bird (snow vulture) and also a winged dog born of a vulture (Yudakhin, 1965: 444). ‘Snow vulture’ is the formal name for the bird whereas kumai, or gummai is the Kyrgyzian name of this bird used in Turkestan, China, Tibet, and the Himalayas. The bird is extremely voracious. In Tibet, a number of griffons can consume a human corpse within half an hour and the


corpse of a yak within two hours (Ptitsy SSSR, 1968: 254–255). Clearly, the particular feeding aspect of this bird species served as the basis for a semantic series that was extended to other scavenging carnivores and birds. Composite images of these creatures are known in mythology and graphic art. Biologists have observed cases in which snow leopards have raised their young on cliffs in nests abandoned by vultures. This fact could have engendered the metonymic link between birds and carnivores giving rise to composite mythical images such as dog birds Kumai, Khubay-Khus, It-ala-kaz, and Samyr (Divayev, 1908; Cheremisin, 1997).

In Kyrgyzian folklore, a mythic bird occurs “with the head of a golden eagle and the body of a lion” (description ts the art history de nition of a grif n perfectly). This

bird gives birth to Kumaiyk, master of dogs (Yudakhin, 1965: 444). The legend has it that a man must nd and raise the helpless pup. If the pup is not found within three days it grows to be a bird: “a bald griffon or a bearded eagle” (Moldobaev, 1989: 41). In the Iranian eschatological concept, these birds are of special signi cance. This is apparently the reason why the word hum in Iranian languages refers both to Khomai, mythical phoenix, bird of good omen, whose shadow, having fallen on man, promises luck, royal dignity, prosperity, and wealth, and to specialized necrophags (vultures); the sources speci cally note that this bird consumes bones.

The ancient art of Western Central Asia contains the popular image of a grif n with “a dog’s body.” Images of “dog-headed grif ns” and winged dogs have also been recorded (Pugachenkova, 1959). K.V. Trever (1937: 34) writes that the prototype of Senmurv, the mythical dog bird, whose image is found in both graphic art and mythological descriptions of the Universe (Bundahishn, Menog-i khrat, Zatspram, etc.), is to be found in the “cosmic being with three natures.” Trever believes that its Scythian representations are the earliest (see also (Smidt, 1980/1981)). S.S. Bezsonova makes the point that Scythian art re ects the essence of the dog-bird as an evil, chthonian monster combining the features of a dragon and a dog (1977). In Pazyryk art, these ideas forming the semantic series “wolf – griffon” are embodied in the imaginary or Altaian griffon (the ears from the images of the Pazyryk grif ns are mostly the same shape as those in wolf images; there are images of grif ns with a wolf body, etc.) (Kubarev, Cheremisin, 1987).

Placing representations of the grif n or the head of a fantastical bird with ears on horse harnesses, encoded the predation theme into the decoration of horses sacri ced and placed in their master’s burial. Another typical image of the griffin in combination with weapons – daggers (the so-called grif n daggers) and quiver hooks can be explained in the same mythological complex. Evidently, the food code, which was highly signi cant

to the mythological mind, played a major role in beliefs re ected in mythology and art. During the pagan period in Scandinavia, killing during battle was perceived as the dedication of the fallen to Odin and his sacred animals, wolves and ravens. M.I. Steblin-Kamensky believes that numerous Skaldic legends in which the victor “fed wolves and ravens” with the esh of his slain enemies initially represented the description of ritual. However, later these rituals ceased to be practiced and the image of legend gradually became poetic symbol (1979: 113–114).

The semantics of the grif n image are best illustrated in predation scenes. In accordance with the archaic concept of death, the griffon was included in various interpretations of the predation scene in the art of the Iranian population of Eurasia in the 1st millennium BC (Kuzmina, 1976; Raevsky, 1978, 1985: 152–155; Polidovich, 2006). For example, the predation scene of a grif n and a waterfowl is shown on a Khwarezmian ritual vessel from Koi-Krylgan-kaly (4th cent. BC). This composition has been interpreted as the re ection of a cosmogonic myth. Although no such myth has been found in written records, it can be reconstructed on the basis of a similar composition on a silver cup from Bartym (Western Siberia) that was probably manufactured in Western Central Asia or Iran in the 3rd–4th cent. AD. According to the interpretation proposed by Y.A. Rapoport (1977), the meeting of the “great birds” from Heaven and Earth (Simurg-griffin and Karshiptar-bird) illustrates the “cruel act of creation,” in which the primordial creature represented by the waterfowl that carries the essence of the creation is bisected by its own creation, the re-grif n. It is the author’s opinion that this mythologeme can be correlated with the scene depicted on a golden plate from Semibratny kurgan IV dating from the middle of the 5th cent. BC (see (Scythian art, 1986: pl. 107; Cheremisin, 1997: 42, g. 1).

Compositions of the Scytho-Siberian animal style (including predation scenes of grif ns, deer, horses and other ungulates, association of the grif n image with the horse, the predator image occurring on weaponry) have served as the basis for interpreting the semantics of these imaginary predators as the heroes of the other, “lower” realm linked with death. Iranian written sources, meanwhile, unambiguously refer to the beneficent, miraculous, regal nature of the fantastic bird-like character, which was semantically and possibly genetically linked to the Scythian grif n. The Avesta names symbolizing happiness and royal majesty derive from the Ancient Iranian humai/homai (e.g., Humayun meaning ‘happy and august’) (Justi, 1895: 131–132; Bartholomae, 1904: 1833; Sa’di…, 1959: 79; and others). “Homai is the name of a well-known bird famous for its ability to consume bones. <…> Some believe that it is a black kite, a scavenger. This species is numerous. These birds are known to forecast happiness” (Khedayat Sadek, 1958: 308).


There is reason therefore, to believe that the grif n as represented in Eurasian art of the Scythian period was not only an infernal but also a bene cent image. This is especially evident in Greek and Indian mythology (cf. Flavius Philostratus’ mention of the griffin in relation to the Sun), as well as in Zoroastrianism and late Lamaism. The negative and malifecent role of the grif n in antiquity, in the modern culture of the Altai, as postulated by L.S. Marsadolov (1996, 2003) and by opponents of the idea of representing the grif n in the Altai Republic’s emblem is less evident. In the state emblem of the Altai Republic the grif n is identi ed by experts in heraldry as the “griffin Kan-Kerede” (Postanovlenie…, 1994; Samushkina, 2006). This image combines features from the image originating from the Second Pazyryk Kurgan saddle blanket (Rudenko, 1948: 15, pl. CV, 1) and features of the Altai epic hero. Debates concerning the “good” or “evil” nature of this image continue in the Altai. Despite the comical aspect of the situation inevitable in the adaptation of symbols and images from alien cultures, the ongoing debates illustrate the contemporary necessity of studies into the semantics of the Pazyryk animal style.

It is the author’s view that ideas related to the grif n are linked with the archaic concept of death and the role of scavenging animals as ‘burying animals’. The grif n plays exactly the same role in predation scenes. Written records, images of imaginary beaked heroes in Pazyryk tattoos and the noted association of the imaginary of the eared predatory bird-grif n with pieces of horse harness re ect various aspects of this mythological complex. The image showing a deer head held in a grif n’s beak located at the top of headwear from the Second Pazyryk Kurgan (Rudenko, 1953: pl. LXXXIII; Kubarev, 1987b) represents a vivid representation of the predation mythologeme. The predominance of representations of the fantastical bird (the grif n or “vulture”) in Pazyryk art, which prompted S.I. Rudenko, N.V. Polosmak, Z.S. Samashev et al. to identify the Pazyryk people with the “grif ns guarding gold” mentioned by Aristeas and Herodotus, is another argument in favor of this interpretation..

Conclusion

An assortment of ritual objects, found intact in unlooted Pazyryk permafrost burials displays the so-called animal style. As a gurative language the animal style clearly encodes the “principal myth” of the Scythian culture which is most vividly expressed in predation scenes involving horses, deer, and fantastical griffins. The tops of headwear executed in the form of a crane head may have represented an ethnic symbol or clan emblem for the Pazyryk people of the Southern Altai. From ancient times both real and fantastic birds have gured

as essential elements of various Eurasian mythologies. It is quite evident that bird-like images played no less signi cant a role in the art and mythology of the Pazyryk people of the Altai.

References

Akishev A.K. 1984Iskusstvo i mifologiya sakov. Alma-Ata: Nauka.Balonov F.R. 1991Vorsovy pazyrykski kover: Semantika kompozitsii i mesto

v rituale (opyt predvaritelnoi interpretatsii). In Problemy interpretatsii pamyatnikov kultury Vostoka. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 88–122.

Bartholomae Chr. 1904Altiranische Wörterbuch. Strassburg: Verlag von Karl

J. Trübner.Bezsonova S.S. 1977Obraz sobako-ptakhu u mistetstvi Pivnichnogo Pri-

chornomoriya skifskoi epokhi. Arkheologiya, No. 23: 10–24.

Bongard-Levin G.M., Grantovsky E.A. 1983Ot Ski i do Indii. Drevnie arii: Mify i istoriya. Moscow:

Mysl.Cheremisin D.V. 1997K irano-tyurkskim svyazyam v oblasti mifologii. Boginya

Umai i mi cheskaya ptitsa. In Narody Sibiri. Istoriya i kultura.Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN, pp. 31–43.

Cheremisin D.V. 2005On the semantics of masked, horned horses from Pazyryk

mounds. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia.No. 2: 129–140.

Cheremisin D.V. 2006O yazyke iskusstva zverinogo stilya v pazyrykskikh

kompleksakh. In Strukturno-semioticheskie issledovaniya v arkheologii: Arkheologiya i semiotika, vol. 3. Donetsk: Donetski Natsionalny Univ., pp. 330–355.

Cheremisin D.V. 2007Ansambli artefaktov iz ryadovykh merzlotnykh pazyrykskikh

zakhoronenii Yugo-Vostochnogo Altaya i semantika iskusstva zverinogo stilya. In Pogrebalnye kompleksy s merzlotoi v gorakh Altaya: Strategii i perspektivy: Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii UNESCO. Gorno-Altaisk: Redaktsionno-izdatelski otdel Gorno-Altai. Gos. Univ., pp. 83–90.

Divaev A.A. 1908It-Ala-Kaz (Poverie). In Etnogra cheskoe obozrenie, No. 1

(reprint).Fenomen altaiskikh mumi. 2000Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN.Gamkrelidze T.V., Ivanov V.V. 1984Indoevropeiski yazyk i indoevropeitsy: Rekonstruktsiya i

istoriko-tipologicheski analiz prayazyka i prakultury. Tbilisi: Izd. Tbilis. Gos. Univ.

Griaznov M.P. 1950Pervy Pazyrykski kurgan. Leningrad: Izd. Gos. Ermitazha.Henning W.B. 1947Two Manichean magical texts with an excursus on the

Parthian ending-endeh. BSOAS, vol. 12, pt. 1, (London, Paris): pp. 39–66.


Ivanov V.V., Toporov V.N. 1988aOrel. In Mify narodov mira, vol. 2. Moscow: Sovetskaya

entsiclopediya, pp. 258–260.Ivanov V.V., Toporov V.N. 1988bPtitsy. In Mify narodov mira, vol. 2. Moscow: Sovetskaya

Entsiclopedia, pp. 346–349.Justi F. 1895Iranisches Namenbuch. Marburg: N.G. Elwert’ sehe Verlags

Buchhandlung.Karmysheva B.K. 1989K voprosu ob ukrasheniyakh iz ptichikh periev u narodov

Srednei Azii i Kazakhstana. In Etnicheskaya istoriya i traditsionnye kulty narodov Srednei Azii i Kazakhstana. Nukus: Karapakalstan, pp. 27–40.

Khedayat Sadek. 1958Neirangistan, N.A. Kislyakov (ed., trans., comments).

In Peredneaziatsky sbornik. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 259–336.Kubarev V.D. 1979Drevnie izvayaniya Altaya. Olennye kamni. Novosibirsk:

Nauka.Kubarev V.D. 1981Kon v sakralnoi atributsii rannikh kochevnikov Gornogo

Altaya In Problemy zapadno-sibirskoi arkheologii. Epokha zheleza. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 84–94.

Kubarev V.D. 1987aKurgany Ulandryka. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Kubarev V.D. 1987bO naznachenii zoomorfnykh navershii iz kurganov Pazyryka

i Ulandryka. In Skifo-sibirski mir: Iskusstvo i ideologiya.Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 169–173.

Kubarev V.D. 1991Kurgany Yustyda. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Kubarev V.D. 1992Kurgany Sailyugema. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Kubarev V.D., Cheremisin D.V. 1984Obraz ptitsy v iskusstve rannikh kochevnikov Altaya.

In Arkheologiya yuga Sibiri i Dalnego Vostoka. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 87–99.

Kubarev V.D., Cheremisin D.V. 1987Volk v iskusstve i verovaniyakh kochevnikov Tsentralnoi

Azii. In Traditsionnye verovaniya i byt narodov Sibiri.Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 98–117.

Kuzmina E.E. 1976O semantike izobrazheni na chertomlytskoi vaze. Sovetskaya

arkheologiya, No. 3: 68–76.Kuzmina E.E., Sarianidi V.I. 1982Dva golovnykh ubora iz Tillya-Tepe i ikh semantika. KSIA,

iss. 170: 19–27.Marsadolov L.S. 1996Pazyrykski grifon i sovremennost. In Zhrechestvo i

shamanizm v skifskuyu epokhu: Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi konferents i i Proekt Ski fo-Sibir ika . St . Petersburg: pp. 137–139.

Marsadolov L.S. 2003Grifon – khranitel zolota Kapital-boga i ikh antinoosfernaya

suschnost. In Vernadskianskaya revolyutsiya v sisteme nauchnogo mirovozzreniya – poisk noosfernoi modeli buduschego chelovechestva v XXI veke. St. Petersburg: n.p., pp. 93–103.

Mellaart D. 1982Drevneishie tsivilizatsii Drevnego Vostoka. Moscow:

Vostochnaya literatura.

Mellaart D. 1971atal Hüyük. A Neolithic Town in Anatolia. London:

Thames and Hudson.Moldobaev I.B. 1989Epos Manas kak istochnik izucheniya dukhovnoi kultury

kirgizskogo naroda. Frunze: Ilim.Molodin V.I. 2000Kulturno-istoricheskaya kharakteristika pogrebalnogo

kompleksa 3 mogilnika Verkh-Kaldzhin II. In Fenomen al taiskikh mumi . Novosibirsk: Izd. IAE SO RAN, pp. 86–119.

Molodin V.I. 2003Etnogenez, etnicheskaya istoriya i istoricheskie sudby

nositelei pazyrykskoi kultury Gornogo Altaya. In Naselenie Gornogo Altaya v epokhu rannego zheleznogo veka kak etnokulturny fenomen: proiskhozhdenie, genezis, istoricheskie sudby (po dannym arkheologii, antropologii, genetiki).Novosibirsk: Izd. SO RAN, pp. 148–178.

Molodin V.I. 2007Issledovaniya Rossiisko-Germansko-Mongolskoi ekspeditsii

na severo-zapade Mongolii letom 2006 g. Rossiiskaya arkheologiya, No. 4: 42–50.

Pelikh G.I. 1980Materialy po selkupskomu shamanstvu. In Etnografiya

Severnoi Azii. Novosibirsk: Nauka, pp. 5–70.Pelikh G.I. 1981Selkupy XVII veka: Ocherki sotsialno-ekonomicheskoi

istorii. Novosibirsk: Nauka.Perevodchikova E.V., Raevsky D.S. 1981Esche raz o naznachenii skifskikh navershii. In Srednyaya

Aziya i ee sosedi v drevnosti i srednevekove. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 42–52.

Polidovich Y.B. 2006Khischnik i ego zhertva: Vyrazhenie krugovorota zhizni i

smerti sredstvami skifskogo zoomorfnogo koda. In Strukturno-semioticheskie issledovaniya v arkheologii: Arkheologiya i semiotika, vol. 3. Donetsk: Donetsky Natsionalny Univ., pp. 330–355.

Polosmak N.V. 1992Izobrazhenie ryby v pazyrykskom iskusstve. In Severnaya

Evraziya ot drevnosti do srednevekovya: Tezisy dokladov konferentsii k 90-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya M.P. Griaznova.St. Petersburg: IIMK RAN, pp. 134–138.

Polosmak N.V. 1994“Stereguschie zoloto grify” (Ak-Alakhinskie kurgany).

Novosibirsk: Nauka.Polosmak N.V. 1999Voinskie shlemy pazyryktsev. In Itogi izucheniya skifskoi

epokhi Altaya i sopredelnykh territorii: Sbornik nauchnykh statei. Barnaul: Izd. Altai. Gos. Univ., pp. 148–151.

Polosmak N.V. 2001Vsadniki Ukoka. Novosibirsk: INFOLIO-press.Postanovlenie Verkhovnogo Soveta Respubliki Altai o Polozhenii “O Gosudarstvennom gerbe Respubliki Altai”. 1994Vedomosti Verkhovnogo Soveta Respubliki Altai, No. 5.Potapov L.P. 1969Ocherki narodnogo byta tuvintsev. Moscow: Nauka.Ptitsy SSSR. 1968Moscow: Mysl.


Pugachenkova G.A. 1959Grifon v antichnom i srednevekovom iskusstve Srednei Azii.

Sovetskaya arkheologiya, No. 2: 70–74.Pyatkin B.N. 1987Proiskhozhdenie okunevskoi kultury i istoki zverinogo

stilya rannikh kochevnikov. In Istoricheskie chteniya pamyati M.P. Griaznova: Tezisy dokladov. Omsk: pp. 79–83.

Pyatkin B.N. 1997Zamechaniya po povodu interpretatsii obraza fantasticheskogo

hischnika. In Okunevsky sbornik: Arkheologiya. Antropologiya. Iskusstvo. St. Petersburg: Petro-RIF, pp. 263–264.

Raevsky D.S. 1978Iz oblasti skifskoi kosmologii (opyt semanticheskoi

interpretatsii pektorali iz Tolstoi Mogily). Vestnik drevnei istorii,No. 3: 115–133.

Raevsky D.S. 1985Model mira skifskoi kultury: problemy mirovozzreniya

iranoyazychnykh narodov evraziskikh stepei I tysyacheletiya do nashei ery. Moscow: Nauka.

Rapoport Y.A. 1971Iz istorii religii Drevnego Khorezma (Ossuarii). Moscow:

Nauka.Rapoport Y.A. 1977Kosmogonichesky syuzhet na khorezmiskikh sosudakh.

In Srednyaya Aziya v drevnosti i srednevekove (istoriya i kultura). Moscow: Nauka, pp. 58–71.

Rudenko S.I. 1948Vtoroi Pazyryksky kurgan. Leningrad: Izd. Gos.

Ermitazha.Rudenko S.I. 1952Gornoaltaiskie nakhodki i skify. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd.

AN SSSR.Rudenko S.I. 1953Kultura naseleniya Gornogo Altaya skifskogo vremeni.

Moscow, Leningrad: Izd. AN SSSR.Rudenko S.I. 1960Kultura naseleniya Tsentralnogo Altaya skifskogo vremeni.

Moscow, Leningrad: Izd. AN SSSRSa’di. 1959Gulistan, R.M. Aliev (trans., introd., annot.). Moscow: Izd.

AN SSSR.Samashev Z.S., Bazarbaeva G., Zhumabekova I., Sungatai S. 2000Berel. Almaty: Obschestvenny fond “Berel”.Samashev Z.S., Mylnikov V.P. 2004Derevoobrabotka u drevnikh skotovodov Kazakhskogo

Altaya. Almaty: Obschestvenny fond “Berel”.Samushkina E.V. 2006Etnicheskie simvoly Respubliki Altai: Problemy mobilizatsii

etnichnosti (konets XX–XXI v.). In Altai – Rossiya: Cherez veka v buduscheye: Materialy Vserossiskoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii, vol. 2. Gorno-Altaisk: pp. 146–149.

Scythian Art. 1986B. Piotrovsky, N. Galanina, N. Grach. Leningrad: Aurora

Art Publishers.

Shapka U. 1972Die persischen Vogelnamen. Hanau.Sher Y.A. 1980Petroglify Srednei i Tsentralnoi Azii. Moscow: Nauka.Sher Y.A. 1987K voprosu o proiskhozhdenii kultur skifo-sibirskogo tipa.

In Istoricheskie chteniya pamyati M.P. Griaznova: Tezisy do-kladov. Omsk: pp. 166–169.

Sher Y.A. 1989Ob istokakh skifskogo zverinogo stilya. In Margulanovskie

chteniya: Sbornik materialov konferentsii. Alma-Ata: pp. 59–64.

Sher Y.A. 1992A propos des origins du “style animalier”. Arts Asiatiques,

vol. XLVII: 5–18.Sher Y.A. 1998O vozmozhnykh istokakh skifo-sibirskogo zverinogo stilya.

In Voprosy arkheologii Kazakhstana, iss. 2. Almaty, Moscow: pp. 218–230.

Smidt H.-P. 1980/1981The senmurw of birds and dogs and bats. Persica, vol. IX:

1–85.Steblin-Kamensky M.I. 1979Skaldicheskaya poeziya. In Poeziya skaldov. Leningrad:

Nauka, pp. 77–131.Sternberg L.Y. 1925Kult orla u sibirskikh narodov. Sbornik MAE, vol. 5, iss. 2:

111–126.Tigritsa i grifon. Sakralnye simvoly zhivotnogo mira. 2002A.G. Yurchenko (ed., trans., comments). St. Petersburg:

Peterburgskoye vostokovedenie; Azbuka-klassika.Trever K.V. 1937Senmurw-Paskudzh-sobaka-ptitsa. Moscow, Leningrad: Izd.

Gos. Ermitazha.Vadetskaya E.B. 1983Poiski “samodiitsev” na Yenisee. In Problemy etnogeneza

i etnicheskoi istorii samodiiskikh narodov: Sbornik dokladov nauchnoi konferentsii. Omsk: pp. 20–23.

Vadetskaya E.B. 1993Versii i gipotezy ob etnogeneze drevnikh minusintsev.

In Problemy etnicheskoi istorii samodiiskikh narodov: Sbornikdokladov nauchnoi konferentsii, bk. 1. Omsk: pp. 14–20.

Volk. Proiskhozhdenie, sistematika, morfologiya, ekologiya. 1985Moscow: Nauka.Yudakhin K.K. 1965Kirgizsko-russki slovar. Moscow: Sovetskaya entsyclo-

pediya.Zhukovskaya N.L. 1977Lamaizm i rannie formy religii. Moscow: Nauka.

Received March 20, 2008

Cheremisin_-_Pazyryk.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Cheremisin_-_Pazyryk.pdf