Edging or patterns on Iranian tunic

[Dan D'Silva]

Most reconstructions I've looked at show the Achaemenian tunic as covered in floral-looking prints, but a few have it as solid with broad edging at the hem, neck and cuffs with a single broad strip down the middle. I like the latter look better, but I haven't seen a period depiction of it, and the only reconstruction clearly of a historical event is a retouch of the Alexander Sarcophagus. Is an edged tunic historically supported, and if so, is it allowable as far back as the Greco-Persian Wars?

Thanks for your advice.

[bachmat66]

Ushta Te,
in my opinion the ancient Greece artworks show Persians wearing these colorful tunic while the Achaemenid art show a bit different picture.
as per reconstructions then actually in Nick Sekunda's Achaemenid Persian Army (Osprey) there are plenty of reconstructions showing tunics with single strip down the midle of the tunic. And if you look at the Alexander Mosaic the king Dariush III wears such tunic. Also amongst the Oxus treasure figurines (sword scabbard, on gold sheet etc) there are riders wearing tunics with broad stripe in the middle. also there is a rithon from Yerevan of a Persian noble (?) wearing a bit different tunic.
Also Pazyryk finds show a whole array of tunics - like this Achaemenid shabraque (horse blanket) http://storm.ca/~cm-tntr/pazyryk.jpg http://www.erugsdirect.com/images/History4.jpg , rider http://www.persiancarpetguide.com/sw-as ... dddr98.jpg
The best place to look for more clues probably is Yacenko (Yatzenko) book on the ancient Iranian costume - I think it is only available in Russian (like most of his works).

also, these 'floral' adornments on the ancient Achaemenid and Scythian tunics are not floral at all - they are geometric and often zoomorphic, perhaps some were felt or other fabric appliqué work or metal (gold) work, vide Scythians and Saka - here the most amazing example is so called Golden Man (or as Davis-Kimbal want the Godlen Maiden) from Issyk http://www.csen.org/WomenWarriors/ww.issyk.pr.jpeg http://www.theorientalcaravan.com/image ... en_Man.jpg
Actually it seems that pants were often more colorful (as per textiles) than the tunics - eg based on the Sctyhian art, Pazyryk etc.
But you can consult English works available on the net, libraries, or in the bookstores - eg Nikonorov, Armies of Bactria. Briant's From Cyrus to Alexander,
the Mosaic
http://davidderrick.files.wordpress.com ... mosaic.jpg
eg theOxus tresure
http://www.goldipedia.gold.org/assets/i ... re_big.jpg
http://z.about.com/d/arthistory/1/0/e/M ... nid_03.jpg
the best place to look is probably here , monsieur Brant's site http://www.museum-achemenet.college-de-france.fr/
anyhow, this is just the tip of this 'iceberg,' so good luck in your research, and...I be happy to learn more

[MeinPanzer]

I like the latter look better, but I haven't seen a period depiction of it, and the only reconstruction clearly of a historical event is a retouch of the Alexander Sarcophagus. Is an edged tunic historically supported, and if so, is it allowable as far back as the Greco-Persian Wars?

That's not a touch up, just a reconstruction of the original colours which were quite visible upon discovery, but which have now all but faded.

Ushta Te,
in my opinion the ancient Greece artworks show Persians wearing these colorful tunic while the Achaemenid art show a bit different picture.
as per reconstructions then actually in Nick Sekunda's Achaemenid Persian Army (Osprey) there are plenty of reconstructions showing tunics with single strip down the midle of the tunic. And if you look at the Alexander Mosaic the king Dariush III wears such tunic. Also amongst the Oxus treasure figurines (sword scabbard, on gold sheet etc) there are riders wearing tunics with broad stripe in the middle. also there is a rithon from Yerevan of a Persian noble (?) wearing a bit different tunic.

It is also mentioned in one or two literary sources (can't remember if there is more than one, but I think the primary one is Diodorus) that Alexander adopted the purple tunic with a solid stripe down the middle as his royal costume because it was the attire of the Persian king.

Also, most of the Persian figures for whom their tunic decoration is visible on the painted scenes on wooden beams from an Anatolian tomb now in Munich, dating to the late 6th or first half of the 5th c. BC, wear solid colour tunics with a single stripe down the front in a contrasting colour.

http://www.antiquemilitaryhistory.com/i ... inting.JPG

[Dan D'Silva]

All right! Looks auspicious.

I know, I ought to get From Cyrus to Alexander sooner or later -- probably from Amazon; my corner of Bucks is a bit of an academic wasteland.

[Duncan Head]

Most reconstructions I've looked at show the Achaemenian tunic as covered in floral-looking prints, but a few have it as solid with broad edging at the hem, neck and cuffs with a single broad strip down the middle. I like the latter look better, but I haven't seen a period depiction of it

There's also the similar tunic style shown in the Oxus Treasure plaques - http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/hi ... asure.aspx - with narrower edging on cuffs, hem, upper arm, centre-front and elsewhere.

[Alanus]

An illustrated monograph by Yatzenko is on the net as "Late Sogdian Costume." Its much later than what you're looking for, but it does picture Sogdian/Iranian costume before Turkic influences and then illustrates the latter. Incidentally, I followed up Davis-Kimball's reassessment of the socalled "Golden Man." She is correct; this person was a High Warrior Priestess. Her personal grave goods included a hand-mirror, earrings, a hauma-beater (which she now holds in her left hand), and an intaglio ring depicting a shaman's headress. Most amazing, her hat is exactly like the one worn by a warrior priestess depicted under the Tree of Life on a gold belt plaque now in the Hermitage. The Kazhaks have conveniently "lost" the bones of this person, so there's no way to ascertain her gender. :lol:

[bachmat66]

An illustrated monograph by Yatzenko is on the net as "Late Sogdian Costume." Its much later than what you're looking for, but it does picture Sogdian/Iranian costume before Turkic influences and then illustrates the latter. Incidentally, I followed up Davis-Kimball's reassessment of the socalled "Golden Man." She is correct; this person was a High Warrior Priestess. Her personal grave goods included a hand-mirror, earrings, a hauma-beater (which she now holds in her left hand), and an intaglio ring depicting a shaman's headress. Most amazing, her hat is exactly like the one worn by a warrior priestess depicted under the Tree of Life on a gold belt plaque now in the Hermitage. The Kazhaks have conveniently "lost" the bones of this person, so there's no way to ascertain her gender. :lol:

Privet,
Yatsenko on Sugdia/Sogidan and early Turkic costume is about 800-1000 years after the Scythian and Achaemenids, wouldn't you say?
Steppe costume is a subject of much research in Europe, and Yatsenko is in the forefront, sadly his costume books are not translated into English.. the same with Polosmak etc. Instead we got many thousands of books on the SS, German Wermacht and other great troops of WWII...

Ms Dvais-Kimball - this is pretty much off topic -
I would like to ask you why Davis-Kimball is right or correct in regards to Golden Man of Issyk being a Golden Girl?
I mean you accept her reasons as logical and reasonable or instead can explain the existence of the 'Golden Girl' through your own assessment of data etc?

...as a feminist scholar Ms Davis-Kimball sees women warriors 'everywhere,' perhaps rightfully so , but because she a a warrior of the feminist archeology that, I think, can cloud her reason more often than not. Please note that I am not a great fun of ideologies in social sciences, especially fields of history, anthropology or archeology, having experienced the Soviet-style commies.

Having said that I do think she raises some interesting points about this particular burial, about reconstructing remains and especially about the ideologies that permeate the academic world, to the detriment of good old truth, her own 'truth' included.
Let us remember that her article was written in 1997 and since than lot of new kurgans' burials came to light in the Caspian, Uralic, South-Siberian steppes and in the Altais. also we have not seen anymore books from her to show more proof of warrior-women of the 'Sea of grass' yet she did become a bit of a media celebrity herself. So I daresay that this ' sexy' debate is far from finished and Issyk Golden warrior must remain mysterious.
ps
... the stuff she wrote about so called Soviet archeology modus operandi: i.e., taking the surviving skull's measurements and discarding the rest of the skeleton is not very Soviet nor unusual in the world archeology I would rather say that is typical of the world archeology, unless unlimited resources are at the disposal of the particular team or there is some personal, political or economic issue to be gained from preserving the whole skeleton. I daresay that the Issyk remains were not lost on purpose but simply discarded because at that time they had not purpose for the archaeologists, especially since the Soviet anthropologists pioneered and perfected the techniques of reconstruction facial features from surviving skulls, and in this instance the skull itself was crushed ...
I have seen the same practice performed by the US, European and Peruvian archaeologists in northern, coastal Peru where there are thousands of mumified remains, not to mention the disgraceful treatment of the indigenous remains during these digs, late 1990s. I think that only few uncovered skeletons have the privilege to be buried or treated with dignity, whether it is former Soviet Union or the Americas...

[Alanus]

I'm not too thrilled about the way archaeologists handle post mortum remains, either. Kind of like tossing out the trash that God thought was golden.

And I'm not a Davis-Kimball fan. (A tad like Gloria Steinham.) But we hear from Ammianus Marcellinus that "only the most experienced warriors" became kings/chieftains of the "Alani" who both he and Dio note were also the "Massagetae." This Golden Character was either a youth-king (illogical) or a warrior priestess. The two sets of earings, the mirror (which was probably worn on a belt in this period), the shamanistic intaglio ring, the "kumis beater" (or perhaps more correctly a hauma mixer), and especially the tall Saka-styled hat, indicate a prestigious woman to me. Weapons in this culture cannot be affixed to gender. The hat is identical to the one worn by a priestess on a gold plaque now at the Hermitage. (maybe part of Peter the Great's collection) According to Russian authors of The Golden Deer of Eurasia, the plaque came from the Altai and perhaps a century or two older than the Golden Man/Woman. I think these cultures-- Altai Saka and Massagetae/Thessigetae-- were directly linked. But you probably know more on that than I do. It is off the main subject, but it's fascinating.

[MeinPanzer]

An illustrated monograph by Yatzenko is on the net as "Late Sogdian Costume." Its much later than what you're looking for, but it does picture Sogdian/Iranian costume before Turkic influences and then illustrates the latter. Incidentally, I followed up Davis-Kimball's reassessment of the socalled "Golden Man." She is correct; this person was a High Warrior Priestess. Her personal grave goods included a hand-mirror, earrings, a hauma-beater (which she now holds in her left hand), and an intaglio ring depicting a shaman's headress. Most amazing, her hat is exactly like the one worn by a warrior priestess depicted under the Tree of Life on a gold belt plaque now in the Hermitage. The Kazhaks have conveniently "lost" the bones of this person, so there's no way to ascertain her gender. :lol:

And I'm not a Davis-Kimball fan. (A tad like Gloria Steinham.) But we hear from Ammianus Marcellinus that "only the most experienced warriors" became kings/chieftains of the "Alani" who both he and Dio note were also the "Massagetae." This Golden Character was either a youth-king (illogical) or a warrior priestess. The two sets of earings, the mirror (which was probably worn on a belt in this period), the shamanistic intaglio ring, the "kumis beater" (or perhaps more correctly a hauma mixer), and especially the tall Saka-styled hat, indicate a prestigious woman to me. Weapons in this culture cannot be affixed to gender. The hat is identical to the one worn by a priestess on a gold plaque now at the Hermitage. (maybe part of Peter the Great's collection) According to Russian authors of The Golden Deer of Eurasia, the plaque came from the Altai and perhaps a century or two older than the Golden Man/Woman. I think these cultures-- Altai Saka and Massagetae/Thessigetae-- were directly linked. But you probably know more on that than I do. It is off the main subject, but it's fascinating.

I'm unfortunately not able to weigh in on this issue with any certainty, since I have little knowledge of the grave goods for women of the ancient steppe cultures and whether their presence definitively indicates that a burial is female, but I do have a few issues with some of Davis-Kimball's assessments.

Firstly, the hat is not exactly like the headdress of the female (goddess?) figure on the two belt plaques from the Siberian collection of Peter I (which is by most estimates about the same age as the Issyk burial). The Issyk hat was a tall conical cap adorned with a variety of gold appliques and surmounted at its peak by a small animal figurine, as was the norm for Saka caps. The hat on the belt plaque is quite different in construction, and is more of a pillbox shape with multiple (two?) tall vertical spikes emerging from it and, as a matter of fact, a cap almost identical to it has been found in Pazyryk barrow 5. Now, if we turn to what other comparative evidence we have for tall conical caps, we immediately come to the representation of the Saka king Skunkha on the Bisutun relief, which clearly shows just such a large cap prominently being displayed as a mark of male royalty.

Secondly, while some interpret the intaglio as depicting a shaman, others interpret it as depicting a sun god or other major deity or figure. The depiction is so simple, and the comparative sources we have so few, that it's almost not worth speculating about.

Thirdly, your quote is referring to the Alans written by a late Roman author living close to a millennium after the time of the Issyk burial, and it has next to no relevance to 4th-3rd c. BC Saka. It has to be remembered that this was a satellite burial, and it is well attested in numerous "royal" burials that noblemen and noblewomen alike were buried with the king. So it cannot logically be argued that this is a king, because it is not the primary burial; however, it is very likely that it is a prince or another high-ranking nobleman.

[Alanus]

A few good points.
I went back and took another look at the Hermitage belt plaque. It's not identical, but it's not a simple pill-box, either. The hat does taper upwards to a point that would represent 18 inches above her head, based on the standard height of a human head. (Sorry, I can't think in centimeters).

Above and beyond this point, a tall feather or perhaps arrows extend for another 18 inches. So, I'd say the hat and filigrees are actually taller than the Issyk version which has the same feather-styled thingies. I'm not trying to reinforce Davis-Kimbal's assessment. I'm simply trying it interpret what I see in the costume and jewelry of this remarkable person.

As for the observations of Ammianus, other than the fact that he was astute, can we say that Massagetae-Alanic society changed that much through the centuries? That's a tough call. His statement could be relevent, albeit not totally accurate. I tossed it in because he's the only person to ever mention a subject that Herodotus was silent on.

[MeinPanzer]

A few good points.
I went back and took another look at the Hermitage belt plaque. It's not identical, but it's not a simple pill-box, either. The hat does taper upwards to a point that would represent 18 inches above her head, based on the standard height of a human head. (Sorry, I can't think in centimeters).

Above and beyond this point, a tall feather or perhaps arrows extend for another 18 inches. So, I'd say the hat and filigrees are actually taller than the Issyk version which has the same feather-styled thingies. I'm not trying to reinforce Davis-Kimbal's assessment. I'm simply trying it interpret what I see in the costume and jewelry of this remarkable person.

It is apparent from the headgear from Pazyryk barrow 5 that the spikes coming out of the hat are actually a tall spire of hair probably supported by a stick (it's missing in the actual example, but the hair is there). This is mirrored in other, more recent Pazyryk burials, in which similar tall headdresses have been found in women's burials.

All that we know about the Issyk burial cap is that it was a tall cap surmounted by a small animal figurine and decorated around the bottom by gold detailing (including the golden feathers, which were attached near the face). We have numerous examples of peaked men's felt caps from Pazyryk burials, and it is the norm for them to be decorated with an animal figurine at its summit and with other details around the face. By taking this in conjunction with the depiction of Skunkha wearing a very tall conical cap, it can be fairly easily ascertained that the person buried in the Issyk burial was wearing just such a cap, and not a hat as seen on the belt plaque. This doesn't mean that the individual was not a woman - the burial at Ak-Alakha 1 included a man and woman similarly dressed, and the woman was wearing one of these caps predominantly found in men's burials - but it is not an indication that it was a woman.

As for the observations of Ammianus, other than the fact that he was astute, can we say that Massagetae-Alanic society changed that much through the centuries? That's a tough call. His statement could be relevent, albeit not totally accurate. I tossed it in because he's the only person to ever mention a subject that Herodotus was silent on.

Firstly, I don't think that it has been established in modern times that the Alans were necessarily the Massagetae - as with so many such steppe "transitions," it is incredibly hard to prove; I believe, however, that the theory with the most currency today is that the Alans were the Yen-Ts'ai of the Chinese sources. Secondly, the Issyk burial was of a Saka man, and though the Massagetae were perhaps a Saka tribe, that is uncertain, and we can at least say with certainty that they were a peripheral group. Perhaps Ammianus uses Massagetae as a blanket term for all Saka, but at any rate I doubt the authenticity of his comment. And even if his comment were pertinent to the Saka at the time of the Issyk burial, it wouldn't matter because this burial was a satellite one, and clearly not that of a king!

[Alanus]

Well at least we agree that the Issyk person was not a king. That leaves the other two options open. :wink:

From the size of the Hermitage plaque-- only 5" or so, all total-- it might be difficult in discerning details, especially the "missing" ones which we do find in the Issyk burial. I imagine the socalled Golden Man or alternatively, Golden Woman, will forever remain a "bone" of contention, even if the bones are no longer extant.

[MeinPanzer]

From the size of the Hermitage plaque-- only 5" or so, all total-- it might be difficult in discerning details, especially the "missing" ones which we do find in the Issyk burial.

And yet, it matches in detail the actual full-size hat found in the Pazyryk burial.