The article introduces the Saka time statue from Sary-Arka (Central Kazakhstan) into scientific circulation. Analogies between its attributes and weapons items are revealed in the materials of the Early Iron Age cultures of the Eurasian steppes. Specific features of the Sary-Arkin group sculptures and signs of their iconographic similarity with the East European Scythian sculpture are described.

Keywords: stone sculpture, dagger, coinage, Early Iron Age, Saka era, Sary Arch.

Introduction

Stone anthropomorphic sculpture is an informative and informative category of pictorial archaeological sites. Researchers can draw from this valuable source data for reconstructing not only the worldview and other aspects of ancient life, man's vision of himself, but also the processes of culturogeny. Therefore, the discovery of a new variety of such monuments is a significant event among other archaeological discoveries. In the second half of the last century, Scythian sculptures were discovered in the west of the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes [Gutsalov and Tairov, 2000], "Sarmatian" sculptures in the Aral-Caspian region [Olkhovsky, 2005, p. 131-151], Chemurchek sculptures in Xinjiang [Kovalev, 2007], and original sculptures near Hakkari in Asia Minor [Leus, 2007]. At the beginning of the XXI century, a small series of Saka-era sculptures was discovered in Sary-Arka (Kazakh melkosopochnik) [Ermolenko and Kurmankulov, 2011a, b]. In the summer of 2011, in the Sartogan tract (Terisakkan rural district in the Ulytau district of the Karaganda region), about 3 km north-northwest of the city. With the participation of M. Abdikarimov and Sh. M. Abdikalikov, we examined a fragment of an early Iron Age statue. Its iconography and set of attributes reflect not only the originality of the stone anthropomorphic sculpture of the Sary-Arka group, but also the similarity with the Eastern European Scythian ones.

Description of the statue

The statue in question (hereinafter referred to as the second Sartogan statue) was discovered in 2011 by M. Abdikarimov, an employee of the Ulytau Nature Reserve Museum, together with a fragment of another (hereinafter referred to as the first Sartogan statue), which was delivered to the museum, where it was documented by L. N. Ermolenko and Zh. K.Kurmankulov, who introduced it into scientific circulation [2011a, b]. The second Sartogan statue was located 15 m to the west-northwest of a stone-earthen mound with a diameter of 30 m, a height of 2 m, surrounded by a ditch up to 3 m wide (Fig. 1).

* The study was carried out within the framework of the federal target program "Scientific and scientific-pedagogical personnel of innovative Russia" (project No. 14.B37.21.0954).

page 86

Fig. 1. The statue lying near the mound.

2. The second Sartogan statue.

The mound is visually defined as a monument of the Early Iron Age. Coordinates of the find: 49° 31 '24.9" N, 67° 30 '46.2" E, height 519 m above sea level. According to M. Abdikarimov, the first statue was found near the same mound.

The statue is carved from a block of dirty lilac fine-grained stone, broken in the waist section, where the waist is decorated with ledges in front and sides. Only the lower part of the monument has been preserved (Fig. 2); couldn't find the top one. The surface of the stone bears traces of damage in some places, otherwise it can be concluded that the natural shape of the block was little changed by the carver. In profile, the statue gradually expands towards the middle and narrows to a rounded base. Full face the outline is uneven and asymmetrical: the block expands downwards, in the lower third it is beveled and pointed on the right side. The dimensions of the surviving fragment of the figure are 130 x 30...50 x 20...35 cm.

The statue reproduces weapons and body attributes. The weapon is rendered in bas-relief; it is represented by a dagger and coinage. The image of the dagger is located at the top of the front face, directly below the break line and parallel to it, almost horizontally, with a slight slope towards the tip (Fig. 3, a). The handle faces the right side of the statue, where a coinage is carved on the protrusion corresponding to the level of the ilium in the human skeleton (Fig. 3, b). Its handle is pointed down, and the pointed combat end is directed to the front face of the figure.

3. Images on the second Sartogan statue, a -dagger; b-coinage; c-phallus; d-buttocks.

page 87
Images of body attributes are made with a groove. The front face shows the genitals (rounded testicles and a U-shaped phallus) (Fig. 3, c), while the back face shows an inverted Y - shaped figure (Fig. 3, d), apparently outlining the dividing line of the buttocks and the inner outline of the thighs.

Statue attributes and analogies

Dagger. The weapons depicted on the statue were analyzed to clarify the dating of the monument. However, direct analogs of the dagger (Fig. 4, 7) could not be found. Its handle has an antenna-shaped (arc-shaped, even parabolic) pommel, a wide crosshair that protrudes significantly beyond the base of the blade, a slightly expanding blade in the middle part and tapering in the last third. The total length of the dagger is 27.5 cm, the handle with a pommel and crosshair is 13.5 cm (including 3.5 cm on the pommel, 3 cm on the crosshair), the blade is 14 cm, the blade width is 3 cm. Crosshair length approx. 6 cm, its edges stand out by 1.5 cm. It should be noted that the position of the dagger assumes a suspension, the details of which are not transmitted. Taking into account the clearly formed tip, it can be assumed that the dagger is shown without a scabbard.

Comparison with archaeological material is complicated by the fact that the dagger is reproduced rather schematically, especially the crosshair (in addition, the outline of its edge bordering the fault is broken). The crosshair can be defined as an oval crosshair. Copying by the method of wiping showed that it does not protrude at an angle in the direction of the handle, like the butterfly-shaped or heart-shaped one; on the intact edge, there is no pronounced angularity, like the butterfly-shaped and bar-shaped one; on the side of the blade, it does not clearly show a notch, like the kidney-shaped one. Despite the certain similarity of the Sartogan dagger pommel with the crescent-shaped and horn-shaped pommels of Prokhorov-type blades, the configuration and width of its crosshair, as well as the combination with coinage, can be a basis for comparison with Scythian weapons.

A partial analogy is found among daggers with butterfly-shaped crosshairs and parallel blades from burials of the Sauromatic period. One of them, with a crescent-shaped pommel, was found in mound 1 of the Besoba burial ground in Western Kazakhstan (Kadyrbayev and Kurmankulov, 1977, Fig. 2, 8) (Fig. 4, 3). M. K. Kadyrbayev and Zh. K. Kurmankulov noted the archaic nature of its crosshairs in comparison with straight ones ("in the form of slats").) crosshairs, which are common for daggers with crescent-shaped pommels [Ibid., p. 113]. Taking into account the period of existence of the latter, which the authors define as the V-III centuries BC, and the time of operation of the Besoba burial ground (the second half of the VI-beginning of the V century BC), the dagger is dated "no later than the beginning of the V century BC" [Ibid.]. Despite the differences in details, it is close to the proportions considered.

Another dagger with an antenna - shaped (horn-shaped) elliptical finial comes from the border 1 of mound 3 of the Priozerny burial ground in the Palassovsky district of the Volgograd region (Kokurkina, 2007, Fig. 2, 7) (Fig. 4, 5). According to O. V. Kokurkina, this burial, which belongs to the first chronological group of diagonal burials (the end of the VI - V centuries BC), "can be dated to the V century BC" [Ibid., p. 197]. At the same time, referring to the works of A. I. Melyukova and K. F. Smirnov, the author states the similarity of the dagger with similar Scythian and Sauromatic blades of the VI-V centuries BC [Ibid., p. 196]. Priozernensky and Sartogan daggers, among other things, differ in proportions: the former has a longer blade and a different ratio of blade length and tip.

A dagger with an antenna-shaped pommel, a butterfly-shaped crosshair and a ribbed (with two longitudinal flutes) handle, found in Issyk-Kul, dates from S. S. Ivanov V-IV centuries BC [2008, p. 41, Fig. 1, 6] (Fig. 4, 4). Compared to Sartogan, it has short "antennae-horns" and other proportions (more elongated).

Let's move on to pictorial analogies. Geographically most popular-

4. Daggers depicted on the first and second Sartogan sculptures and their analogues. 1 - the second Sartogan statue; 2 - the first Sartogan statue; 3 - Besoba (according to [Kadyrbaev and Kurmankulov, 1977, Fig. 2, 8]); 4-Issyk-Kul (according to [Ivanov, 2008, p. 41 fig. 1, b]); 5-Priozerny (according to [Kokurkina, 2007, Fig. 2, 7]); 6-Fedorovka (according to [Melyukova, 1964, Table 19, 9]); 7-Sofiyevka (according to: [Ibid., Tables 19, 10]).

page 88
the image of a dagger with an antennal (crescent-shaped?)shape is very close to the one under consideration. pommel on a statue from Stepnogorsk (Akishev and Khabdulina, 2011, p. 182). The weapon is shown at the waist level obliquely, with the handle to the left (from the position of the depicted character). The crosshair is not displayed, but the proportions of the Stepnogorsk dagger are close to those of the Sartogan dagger. The caption to the drawing of the statue, defined by the authors of the publication as "Saka", shows the date-VI-V centuries BC.

The Sartogan dagger should be compared with the Prokhorov-type bladed weapon depicted on the" Sarmatian " sculptures of the Aral-Caspian region dating back to the IV-II centuries BC (Olkhovsky, 2005, p. 145). It is represented by the same type of swords and daggers. The sword is stamped on the front face of the statue, the dagger-on the side (except for rare cases of the image of a pair of daggers). The sword, with its hilt pointing towards the figure's right hand, is shown below the waist in a horizontal position or with an inclination towards the tip. The dagger is depicted on the right hip vertically, with the handle facing up. In the design of bladed weapons, according to V. S. Olkhovsky, antenna-shaped and crescent-shaped finials predominate (straight, ring-shaped or claw-shaped are rare), narrow crosshairs are straight, bar-shaped [Ibid., p. 144]. Swords and daggers, as well as other attributes, are reproduced in detail. This is largely due to the properties of an easy-to-process source material-limestone. According to researchers, the flat appearance of many "Sarmatian" sculptures is also due to the natural tile-like shape of the stone (Samashev et al., 2007, p. 211). Bladed weapons are depicted in scabbards, often with buteroles. On the scabbard, a face can be reproduced [Ibid., p. 248] or a longitudinal relief strip, as defined by V. S. Olkhovsky, "the rib of the blade" [2005, p. 144]. Since the " rib " passes through the bottle, it is most likely an element of the design of the scabbard. The suspension system is carefully rendered, but not on all statues whose weapon positions suggest it.

Although the dagger depicted on the first Sartogan statue (Figs. 4, 2) differs from the one depicted on the second, the joint finding of these statues in situ requires a detailed examination of it. The dagger is shown suspended from the belt on a single "strap" (length 4 cm, width 0.8 cm), almost horizontally, with a slight slope to the tip. Its total (reconstructed) length is approx. 13 cm, the handle is approximately 5 cm, the crosshair width is up to 1.7 cm, it protrudes from one side by 0.8 cm. The handle is approx. 2 cm tapers slightly to the crosshair, and its end is rounded. The end of the dagger's relief is damaged by chipping, but when rubbed, rounded outlines are revealed. This detail, along with the" strap", can mean that the weapon is shown in a scabbard. The one-sided protrusion of the crosshair is noteworthy, possibly indicating a single-edged blade.

According to S. V. Makhortykh and S. A. Skorogo, a Scythian-type bladed weapon without a pommel appears in the early 7th and possibly late 8th centuries BC in the Caucasus. Its spread to the west and east could have been caused by the activity of steppe Scythians or by the convergent development of weapons (Makhortikh and Skoriy, 1986, p. 76). A poorly preserved dagger without a pommel, with a crosshair similar to a heart-shaped one, was found in mound 2 of the Karsakbas burial ground in the former Turgai region. [Tairov and Botalov, 1996, p. 175, Fig. 2, 8].A.D. Tairov and S. G. Botalov note that the shape of the handle and crosshair is close to swords and daggers without a pommel, dating from the VI-V centuries BC [Ibid., p. 166].

Taking into account the assumed single-edged nature of the bladed weapons reproduced on the first Sartogan statue, analogies are found in the Scythian weapons code published by A. I. Melyukova among seven single-edged swords without pommels, three of which date back to the IV-III centuries BC [1964, Table 19]. Thus, there is a similarity in the shape of the crosshairs of the Sartogan dagger and the sword of the beginning of the IV century BC from the mound in the Krugliku tract in the village of Fedorovka [Ibid., Tables 19, 9] (Fig. 4, b). A small bend of the "scabbard" on the statue seems to correspond to the concavity of the blade of a short sword from the burial near the village of Fedorovka. Sofiyevka [Ibid., Tables 19, 70] (Figs. 4, 7). (By the way, A. I. Melyukova also notes a slight bulge in the back of the Fedorovsky sword.) As for A. I. Melyukova's attribution of the Sofiyevsky specimen (its length is 41 cm) to swords, we note: this is not indisputable, since, according to her statement, "daggers had a length of 17 to 40 cm", and most swords - from 50 to 70 cm [Ibid., p. 46]. Following V. Ginters, the researcher believes that single-edged swords appear among the Scythians "as a result of the influence of mahaira on ordinary Scythian forms" [Ibid., p. 60].

Confirmation of the existence of bladed (non-single-edged) weapons without a pommel by S. V. Makhortykh and S. A. Skoryi is found in pictorial monuments: a horseman's sword on a badge with a hunting scene from the Siberian collection of Peter the Great [Makhortykh and Skoriy, 1986, p. 76, Fig. 2]. There is no consensus on the dating of such plaques: It varies between the fifth and third centuries BC (Gryaznov, 1961, p. 21, 25; Artamonov, 1971, p. 86; Makhortikh and Skoriy, 1986, p.76-77). A more specific date of their creation (the first half of the third century BC) was justified by M. I. Artamonov (1971, p. 90). Meanwhile, S. V. Makhortykh and S. A. Skoryi believe that the sword depicted has a kidney-shaped crosshair rather than a straight one, and the plaques should be dated to an earlier time (Makhortykh and Skoriy, 1986, p.77).

In the subject set of "Sarmatian" sculptures known to science, single-edged weapons are not found.

page 89
Chisel. Identification of the minted coin depicted on the second Sartogan statue (Fig. 5, 1) with real weapons is difficult. First, only the outline is reproduced. Secondly, the shape of the coinage is distorted due to the fact that the relief of the striker section (near the tip) fell on the edge of the monolith. On the copy made by the method of wiping, you can see: the end of the striker is bent up - a detail inconsistent with the function of this item of offensive weapons.

The total length of the coin is 20.5 cm, the obushka is approx. 6, the striker is up to 11 cm (including the points-about 2.5 cm). The width of the blade is almost 2.5 cm along the entire length, near the tip - approx. 3 cm. The end of the rim is rounded, but slightly slanted from top to bottom. At the top, there is an arc-shaped protrusion with a length of 4.5 cm and a height of approx. 0.5 cm. There is no clear border between the base of the coin and the handle. The image of the handle is partially destroyed, its thickness, apparently, was approx. 4 cm. The coinage, like the dagger on the same statue, is shown hanging (on the belt) without reproducing the details that characterize the method of attachment.

The coinage is most likely not eyelet, otherwise the upper end of the handle, judging by the Altai eyelet coinage with remnants of handles (Kubarev, 1987, Fig. 33; 1991, fig. 18], as well as images of weapons of this type, for example, in the mountains of Kulzhabasy [Samashev, 2011, Fig. 17-19]*, should have been issued more strongly. The protrusion between the striker and the rim may convey the upper edge of the bushing or a convex shield above it, although the lower edge of the bushing is not highlighted.

The considerable width of the blade allows us to assume the existence of a flat prototype, more precisely, a flat-rhombic cross-section, since the triangular tip of a flat blade, in our opinion, requires the presence of a stiffener. With this in mind, a random find from the "territory of the Sauromats" can be cited as an analogue - a bronze coinage from the village of Krasny Yar in the former Samara uyezd (Smirnov, 1961, Fig. 42, 1) (Fig. 5, 3). K. F. Smirnov suggested its Siberian (Tatar) origin, pointing out the alienness of this species weapons to the Sauromats [Ibid., p. 74]. According to M. V. Gorelik, the coinage from Krasny Yar dates back to VI-V bb. B.C. [1993, p. 273]. It is similar to the one depicted on the statue in the ratio of the size of the striker and the butt (approximately 2: 1), the outlines of their endings, although the Sartogansky pointed end is shorter.

Another variant of reconstruction of the prototype is also possible due to the fact that the triangular outline of the tip on the second Sartogan sculpture resembles the faceted end of the striker of massive coinage. An example is a bronze coinage from mound 1 of the Alypkash burial ground, which, according to A.D. Tairov, dates back to the 7th century BC and "finds no direct analogies in either Tatar or Ananyin monuments" (2007, p. 147, fig. 47, 2) (Fig. 5, 4). Still, it is more than Krasnoyarsk, differs from Sartogan, for example, by the rectangular end of the rim, proportions (the blade is somewhat narrower, the firing pin is longer), as well as the curvature and cut of the firing pin.

The coinage depicted on the second Sartogan statue should be compared with the one depicted on the first one (Figs. 5, 2).Its total length is 11 cm, the obushka is 3, the striker is 7.2 cm (including the points - 2.5 cm). The width of the butt with a rectangular end is up to 1.8 cm, the striker is -1.9-2.2 cm (the smallest near the handle, the largest at the point of transition to the tip). The handle length of 11 cm slightly expands to a rounded end (thickness at the base of the stamp is 1.0 cm, at the end-1.4 cm). The coin is shown hanging on a" strap " with a length of 3.5 cm and a width of 0.6 - 0.8 cm. Unlike the second sculpture, the first one has its point turned towards the back of the figure.

Fig. 5. Coinage depicted on the first and second Sartogan sculptures and their analogues. 1 - the second Sartogan statue; 2 - the first Sartogan statue; 3-Krasny Yar (according to [Smirnov, 1961, fig. 42, 1]); 4 - Alypkash (according to [Tairov, 2007, p. 147, Fig. 47, 2]); 5-Tobol (according to: [Chlenova, 1981, fig. 1, 6]); 6-Donetsk region (according to: [Alekseev, 2003, Fig. 4, 8]).

* Z. S. Samashev based on the fact that the armament of one of the two characters consisted of a wedge-shaped eyelet (?) He dated the battle scene of the Kulzhabasy petroglyphs to the 5th-3rd centuries BC (2011, p. 61).

page 90
Due to the reduced size of the first Sartogan statue and the disproportion of the hands depicted on the torso, the dimensions of the attributes also hardly correspond to the actual ones. At the same time, it should be noted that the mints depicted on the first and second sculptures are close in the ratio of the length of the striker and the obushka, both have a triangular tip (longer for the first one) and the expansion of the striker at the transition to the tip (less pronounced for the second one). The minted blade of the first Sartogan statue is much wider (if compared with the proportions). As noted in the preliminary publication, it is possible that a bimetallic sample was reproduced in this case [Ermolenko and Kurmankulov, 2011a, p. 254]. Thus, a certain similarity was found with two such mints: from the right bank of the Tobol River (Chlenova, 1981, Figs. 1, 6) (figs. 5, 5) and from the Donetsk region (Alekseev, 2003, Figs. 4, 8) (Figs. 5, 6). Both have a rectangular end of the obushka, a symmetrical tip, and a close ratio of the length of the obushka and the striker. There are also differences: the firing pin of bimetallic hammers is not expanded at the transition to the tip, there is no loop-like detail between the base of the firing pin and the sleeve, as well as a longitudinal face (stiffeners). A.D. Tairov clarifies the dating of bimetallic mints (first half of the 7th century BC) and explains their distribution in the North Caucasus, Southern Urals, Eastern Aral Sea, and Western Siberia by their connections with the Kama Region [2010, p.102, 103].

As for pictorial analogies, among the striking weapons depicted in the Scythian anthropomorphic sculpture, one can hardly find any exact similarity to the Sartogan mints*, as well as in the number of "battle axes", drawings of which are given by A. I. Melyukova in the code of Scythian weapons [1964, Table 21]. Nevertheless, the fact that this attribute is widespread in the iconography of Scythian statues is important. Items of impact weapons (axes, axes, and pliers) are included in the subject repertoire of the early (VII-VI and VI-V centuries BC) chronological group of Scythian sculpture and are its indicators (Olkhovsky and Evdokimov, 1994, p. 71). An identical way of carrying weapons of this kind (on the right side, "handle down, point forward") is depicted on the Scythian and second Sartogan sculptures [Ibid.]. The reverse orientation of the tip on the first Sartogan sculpture corresponds to the position of the "axe or cleaver" depicted on the Scythian sculpture of the third quarter of the VI century BC from Kutsevolovka [Ibid., il. 45, 78].

Among the attributes of the "Sarmatian" statues of the IV-II centuries BC. e. shock weapons are not represented. A T-shaped object depicted on a sculpture made of Karamunke can be defined as a narrow coinage (Olkhovsky, 2005, il. 150). It is located handle-up on the right side of the front face. The end of the handle reaches the waist. The coinage and belt are limited to the set of objects reproduced on this statue with a broken head.

Thus, attempts to correlate the attributes of the second Sartogan statue with the archaeological material (material and visual) from the Eurasian monuments of the early Iron Age, on the one hand, demonstrated the originality of the dagger and coinage carved on it, on the other hand, revealed a certain similarity of the depicted weapons items with the finds of the VI-V centuries BC. e. Partial analogies with weapons The figures of this type reproduced on the first Sartogan statue have a broader chronological framework - from the seventh to the fourth to the third centuries BC. However, this discrepancy in dates does not agree with the above conditions for the discovery of these statues. Since both were located near the same burial mound, they could have originally been part of the same archaeological complex, being simultaneous and single-cultural.

Perhaps the search for more precise analogies is complicated by the fact noted by A. Y. Alekseev for Scythian sculptures: the images of akinaks on them do not fully correspond to real samples due to the lack of "additional details", for example, stylized images of eyes at the base of the antennate pommels [1991, p.275]*. The attributes of most Scythian sculptures made of sandstone, as well as those of Sartogan, also made of fine-grained stone, are usually reproduced generically.

* Earlier, we pointed out some similarity between the outline of the coinage depicted on the first Sartogan sculpture and the impact weapon carved on the Scythian sculpture from Kozhemyak (late VI - early V centuries BC), which is defined by V. S. Olkhovsky as a "battle axe or a klevets" (Olkhovsky and Evdokimov, 1994, p. 21, il. 20, 33; Ermolenko and Kurmankulov, 2011a, p. 254]. However, in the work of V. S. Olkhovsky and G. L. Evdokimov, in the figure in the summary table of impact weapons, the firing pin of this axe/cleaver is beveled [1994, Tables 16, 33], just like in the profile image of the statue, and in the full-face view it looks symmetrically pointed [Ibid., il.20, 33]. Unfortunately, we can't verify the drawing with the original. However, knowing the importance that V. S. Olkhovsky attached to creating accurate drawings [2000, p. 254], we can assume that such a discrepancy is explained by a perspective distortion of the bas-relief detail made on the surface of a three-dimensional figure. The shape of the coinage in the profile drawing of the first Sartogan statue and a separate copy made by wiping differs for the specified reason.

* We will add that iron akinaks can be significantly modified by corrosion, their pommels are not always preserved, and forged products differ from each other in one way or another.

page 91
Peculiar attributes of Early Iron Age sculptures from Sary-Arka and the problem of similarity with Scythian sculpture

The second Sartogan sculpture, in our opinion, can be included in the Sary-Arka group of sculptures of the Early Iron Age. The set of weapons depicted on it is the same as on the first one. In turn, the position of the hands of the first Sartogan statue (exaggeratedly large hands with spread fingers pressed one to the chest, the other to the stomach) is similar (although mirrored) to the position of the hands of the statue from the Aibas-Darasy tract [Ermolenko and Kurmankulov, 2011b, Fig. 1,3, 4]. This detail of iconography and the specific composition of the depicted weapons find analogies in Scythian sculpture [Ibid., p. 158].

Judging by the dagger with an antenna-shaped pommel, the Stepnogorsk statue shows a commonality with the second Sartogan statue. The presence of the latter's hairstyle-an image of a tuft of hair on the top of his head ("forelock", "oseledets", "aidar") - confirms our assumption that the fragment of a statue with a" forelock " from the Karaganda Museum belongs to this group of early Iron Age sculptures [Ibid., Fig. 1, 1]. It is also accentuated by large kidney-shaped ears, transmitted by a closed roller.

In the museum of the Ulytau Nature Reserve, another sculpture with a "forelock", also broken off to the waist, is on display, which was brought in 2004 by Zh. K. Kurmankulov from the village. Yeghindy of Ulytau district. It was found while plowing a field, but it was not possible to specify where exactly. This statue shows similarities with the second Sartogan in the color and structure of the stone, as well as the shape of the section at the fault site.

The Egindin statue is an image of a human head. A single T-shaped bas-relief shows the eyebrows and nose. The shape of the head and the outline of the face give the impression that the face is shown framed by a deep headdress, like a hood (Fig. 6, a). However, this is clearly not consistent with the large ears, which are stylized with bracket-shaped rollers (Fig. 6, b)*. A "forelock" of "flask-shaped" outlines is depicted in bas-relief on the head: a narrowing bas-relief strip extends from the rounded plane slightly protruding on the crown to the back of the head (Fig. 6, c). The symmetrical arrangement of the hair bundle on the head is a feature of the iconography of the Egindin statue, while the Karaganda and Stepnogorsk "forelocks" are curved and laid respectively on the back of the head. right and left sides. The combination of such features of a sculptural image from Eginda as a straight lock of hair, ears, and a peculiar way of decorating the face and head, which evokes an association with a headdress, corresponds in the iconography of Scythian sculptures from Kutsevolovka (Black Sea region, third quarter of the VI century BC) and Manych (North Caucasus, late VII - third quarter of the VI century BC). BC) [Olkhovsky and Evdokimov, 1994, il. 45, 78; 89, 154] The combination of such elements on them is interpreted by researchers as a "Kuban-type helmet" [Ibid., pp. 27, 39, 67]*. Note that the T-shaped image of the eyebrows and nose of the Egindin statue also finds analogies in Scythian sculpture [In the same place, il. 9, 12; 22, 38; 42, 75].

On the front and left side faces of the Egindinsky statue, under the notch separating the head and torso, a roller is carved, which is open under the chin and tapers to the end located below the left ear. At the junction of the front and right side faces, it bends downwards, and on the rightmost face it is almost invisible due to chipping. It is difficult to say what this roller conveys. Probably not the hryvnia, since it is not only open at the front, but also not shown at the back**. Although V. S. Olkhovsky and G. L. Evdokimov interpreted the roll on the Scythian statue of the IV century BC from the Crimea, which is not closed on the front and back sides of the neck, as a hryvnia [Ibid., il. 64, 107].

In addition to the above-mentioned features of iconographic similarity of Sary-Arkin statues with Scythian ones, we have previously noted others. This is a significant width of the side faces, a characteristic profile of the head: a flat face, roundly modeled crown and nape [Ermolenko and Kurmankulov, 2011b, p. 156, 158].

The second Sartogan sculpture provided a new material for comparison with the Scythian sculpture - a set of realities. Let us remind you that his iconography combines weapons (dagger and coinage) and body (phallus and buttocks) attributes. A similar combination is found only on Scythian sculptures (instead of coinage - their own varieties of impact weapons). In the Black Sea region, these are sculptural images from Kozhemyak (late VI-early V century BC) and Novovasilyevka (first third of the V century BC), in the North Caucasus - from Prokhladny (first half of the VI century BC), possibly from Beskorbnaya (second half of the VI century BC). [Olkhovsky, Evdokimov, 1994,

* Thus, all three Sary-Arkin statues with a "forelock" show large ears. On the Stepnogorsk statue, judging by the published drawing, they are ring-shaped.

* It is possible that the "ears" and "forelock" of Kutsevolovsky and Manych statues are imitations, decorative details of the headdress.

** It is unlikely that this is an image of the collarbone, which, judging by the works of ancient art known to us, were not accentuated.

page 92

Fig. b. Statue from the village. Eginds.

il. 20, 33; 10, 15; 85, 147; 72, 120]. On some of these sculptures from the Black Sea region, the buttocks are marked with a protrusion on the back face [Ibid., il. 41, 74; 46, 79]. On a number of Scythian sculptures, an incomplete set of these attributes is found [Ibid., ill. 14, 20; 53, 90; 69, 117]. Similarly stylized are the phallus and testicles on the statue with the "axe or axe" from Sibioara (first half of the sixth century). 1, 1] and in the second Sartogan language.

On the "Sarmatian" sculptures of the Aral-Caspian region, the phallus and buttocks were not depicted. S. Yu. Gutsalov and A.D. Tairov noted the reproduction of these bodily features on earlier sculptures of the western part of the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes, from Kashkantau (late VI - first half of the fifth century BC) and Ilinka (Gutsalov and Tairov, 2000, p. 239; Tairov and Gutsalov, 2000)., 2001, fig. 1, 2, 4]. In their opinion, the Kashkantau statue with the image of a phallus * shows "traces of the influence of the Scythian pictorial tradition" [Gutsalov and Tairov, 2000, p. 247].V. S. Olkhovsky attributed it to the group of "Scythoid" monuments among the seven Volga-South Ural monuments [2005, p. 141-142].

Conclusion

The second Sartogan sculpture joins the recently selected group of Early Iron Age sculptures from Sary-Arka. So far, there are only six of them: four were found in the valleys of the Ulytau mountain range (Sartogan and Aibas-Darasy tracts, the village. Egindy), one - near the city of Stepnogorsk, another non-passport is kept in the museum of Karaganda. With the exception of Stepnogorsky, the Sary-Arkin statues of the early Iron Age have not been preserved in their entirety, but even their fragments show signs that are not typical for numerous medieval sculptures.

The Sary-Arka sculptures of the Early Iron Age differ from the ancient Turkic and Kygpchak sculptures of the Kazakh steppes not only in their iconography and subject repertoire (in the terminology of V. S. Olkhovsky), but also in their material. If the medieval ones are mostly carved from pink medium-and coarse-grained stone, then fine-grained stone of dirty lilac or brown color was used to make sculptures of the early Iron Age. Their outline is peculiar: all of them have wide side faces, while the Stepnogorsk and Karaganda ones have a concave or flat face profile that contrasts with the three-dimensional modeling of the head.

Because of the partial nature of sculptures, it is impossible to judge iconography as a whole, only about its elements and their combination. Two statues (the first one in Sartogan and the second one in Aibas-Darasin) have the same, but mirror-like position of the hands, the hands with spread fingers are hypertrophied, one of them is pressed to the chest, the other to the stomach. The position of the hands of the Stepnogorsk sculpture is unclear (are they brought together on the stomach?). It is possible that the statues represented by the upper part of the fragment (Karaganda and Egindin) were originally breast images.

The realities of the Sary-Arkin sculpture of the early Iron Age are specific. Original attribute - "forelock"

- marked on three statues: Karaganda, Egindinsky and Stepnogorsk. Peculiar forms of weapons

- chequers with a wide profile, the ratio of the striker and the rim of which is approximately 2: 1; daggers

* V. S. Olkhovsky questioned the reliability of the transmission of this detail due to the "sketchiness of the drawing" [2005, p. 142].

page 93
with an antenna-shaped pommel (one of them with a wide oval crosshair), a bladed weapon without a pommel on the handle, apparently single-edged.

The analogies between the weapons depicted on the statues and real weapons in archaeological materials are partial, but together with the iconographic data showing proximity to Scythian statues (Black Sea and North Caucasus), they allow us to attribute the Sary-Arka group to the Saka period. The cultural identity of these statues, due to the peculiarity of their realities, is not yet possible to establish. We can only state a well-known fact: in the Saka era, the territory of Ulytau, where Sary-Arka statues were found in situ, was part of the Tasmolinian culture area (Vostochnaya Sary-Arka..., 2004, p.219).

List of literature

Akishev K. A., Khabdulina M. K. Antiquities of Astana: Bozok ancient settlement. Astana: Evraz. nats. un-t, 2011. -260 p.

Alekseev A. Yu. Etude ob akinakakh [Etude on akinaks] / / Klein L. S. Archaeological typology. - L.: LF TSENDISI AN SSSR. Leningr. nauch. -research. archeol. United, 1991, pp. 271-280.

Khronografiya evropeyskoy Scifii VII-IV vekov B.C. [Chronography of European Scythia of the VII-IV centuries BC]. Hermitage, 2003. -416 p.

Artamonov M. I. Kompozitsii s landshaftom v skifo-sibirskom iskusstve [Compositions with landscape in Scythian-Siberian art].

Eastern Sary-Arka: The Karkaraly region in the past and present. Almaty: Evero Publ., 2004, 564 p.

Gorelik M. V. Weapons of the ancient East (IV millennium-IV century BC). - Moscow: Nauka, 1993. -349 p.: ill.

Gryaznoe M. P. Drevneyshie pamyatniki geroicheskogo eposa narodov Yuzhnoi Sibiri [Ancient monuments of the heroic epic of the peoples of Southern Siberia].

Gutsalov S. Yu., Tairov A.D. Stelae and anthropomorphic sculptures of the Early Iron Age of the South Ural steppes / / Archeology, paleoecology and paleodemography of Eurasia, Moscow: GEOS, 2000, pp. 226-251.

Ermolenko L. N., Kurmankulov Zh. K.Izvayanie rannego zheleznogo veka iz muzeya Ulutauskogo zapovednika (predvaritelnoe posledenie) [Sculpture of the Early Iron Age from the Museum of the Ulutau Nature Reserve (preliminary message)]. arheol. conf., Astana, April 20-22, 2011-Astana: Evraz. nats. un-t, 2011a, pp. 253-256.

Ermolenko L. N., Kurmankulov Zh. K. Original sculpture from the funds of the Karaganda Museum of Local Lore / / Archeology of Southern Siberia: To the 80th anniversary of Ya. A. Sher. - Kemerovo: Kem. State University, 2011b. - pp. 156-161.

Ivanov S. S. Daggers of the early nomads of Semirechye and Tien Shan // Ancient and medieval nomads of Central Asia. Barnaul: Azbuka Publ., 2008, pp. 37-41.

Kadyrbaev M. K., Kurmankulov Zh. Materials of excavations of the Besoba burial ground / / Archaeological research in Otrar. Alma-Ata: Nauka KazSSR Publ., 1977, pp. 103-115.

Kovalev A. A. Chemurchek cultural phenomenon (article of 1999) / / A.V.: Collection of scientific works in honor of the 60th anniversary of A.V. Vinogradov. Saint Petersburg: Kult-Inform-Press, 2007, pp. 25-76.

Kokurkina O. V. Territory and time of existence of early diagonal burials // Questions of history and archeology of Western Kazakhstan. Uralsk, 2007, No. 2, pp. 195-210.

Kubarev V. D. Kurgany Ulandryka [Mounds of Ulandryk]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1987, 301 p. (in Russian)

Kubarev V. D. Kurgany Yustyda [Mounds of Yustyda]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1991, 190 p. (in Russian)

Leus P. M. Stone stelae from Hakkari (Turkey)and some parallels to them. -2007. - Vol. 14. - p. 56-61.

Махортих С. В., Скорий С. А. Мечі та кинджали скіфського часу без навершів // Археологія. - 1986. - N 56. - p. 72-78.

Melyukova A. I. Armament of the Scythians, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1964, 91 p. (SAP; vol. D 1-4).

Olkhovsky V. S. Monumental sculpture of nomads of Eurasia: problems of source studies // Archeology, Paleoecology and Paleodemography of Eurasia, Moscow: GEOS, 2000, pp. 252-276.

Olkhovsky V. S. Monumental sculpture of the population of the Western part of the Eurasian steppes of the Early Iron Age, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 2005, 299 p.: 156 ill.

Olkhovsky V. S., Evdokimov G. L. Scythian sculptures of the VII-III centuries BC-Moscow: PA RAS; Institute of Archeology of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 1994. - 188 p.

Самашев З. About one battle scene of petroglyphs of the early Iron Age from Kuzhabasy to Zhetysu / / Kazakhstanskaya arkheologiya i etnologiya: sovremennye dostizheniya i innovatsionnye tekhnologii: mat-ly Mezhdunar. nauch. - practical conference "III Orazbayev readings". April 29-30, 2011-Almaty, 2011. - pp. 55-74.

Samashev Z., Kusherbayev K., Amanshaev E., Astafyev A. Treasures of Ustyurt and Mankystau - Almaty: Aktau State University named after Sh. Esenov, 2007.-400 p.

Smirnov K. F., savromatov, Moscow: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1961, 162 p. (MIA; N 101).

Tairov A.D. Nomads of the Ural-Kazakhstan steppes in the VII-VI centuries BC-Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of the South Ural State University, 2007. - 274 p.: ill.

Tairov A.D. Bimetallic coinage from the Southern Trans-Urals. - 2010. - N 4 (13). - p. 101-108.

Tairov A.D. Botalov S. G. The Karsakbas burial ground / / Voprosy arkheologii Zapadnogo Kazakhstana. Samara, 1996, issue 1, pp. 164-175.

Tairov A.D., Gutsalov S. Yu. O genezise kamennykh antropomorfnykh izvayaniy Aralo-Kaspiyskogo regiona [On the genesis of stone anthropomorphic sculptures of the Aral-Caspian region]. Volgograd, 2001, issue 1, pp. 161-168.

Chlenova N. L. Svyazi kul'tury Zapadnoi Sibiri s kul'turyami Priural'ya i Srednego Povolzhya v kontsey ekho bronzy i v nachale zheleznogo veka [Connections of Western Siberian cultures with the cultures of the Urals and the Middle Volga Region at the End of the Bronze Age and at the Beginning of the Iron Age]. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1981, pp. 4-42.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 02.03.12, in the final version-on 07.06.12.

page 94

Permanent link to this publication: