The Evolution of Swords and Daggers in the Sasanian Empire
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Iranica Antiqva, vol. XXXV, 2000 THE EVOLUTION OF SWORDS AND DAGGERS IN THE SASANIAN EMPIRE BY Kate MASIA (Sydney University) Introduction From 224 AD with the beginning of the Sasanian empire until its end in the middle of the seventh century, the Sasanians ruled over a vast realm. With the success of Ardashir I as a result of his victory over the Arsacids, the Sasanians inherited a land which consisted of small kingdoms at war with each other and with the royal Arsacid house (Harper, 1978, 12). The external policies of the Sasanian empire from the very beginning were marked by warfare, with both expansive and defensive measures being implemented. Warfare was an important and pervasive aspect of the Sasanian empire and resulted in contacts with various frontiers in the east (Afghanistan, Central Asia and China) and in the west (Rome, Asia Minor, Armenia, Syria and Egypt). As a result of this contact with other cultures through warfare and also through other avenues such as trade and diplomatic relations, one may suggest that this will affect and be reflected by the material culture. A study of the swords and daggers utilised throughout the Sasanian empire reveals the way in which technology is implemented and continues, changes and adapts. This will be observed in relation to conflicts with spe- cific enemies and contact with other cultures that have different traditions of weaponry and warfare and the impact this may have. Aspects of the Parthian tradition may also be continued and modified and a distinct Sasanian assemblage may be seen to develop. A study of the swords and daggers of the Sasanians utilises a variety of sources of evidence. These include archaeological material, reliefs and written sources relating to both the use of swords by the Sasanians as well as references to military activities. In relation to the former, the necessity of swords for a Sasanian warrior are attested to by four Islamic writers- Tabari, Dinawari, Bal’ami and Ferdowsi (Tafazzoli, 186 K. MASIA 1993/4, 187). There are numerous terms used to describe such a weapon as well as daggers and related appendages1. Material derived from archaeological research is important although this consists of a small body and often lacks a provenance. Iconographic depictions are pro- vided by the rock reliefs and silver plates and constitute an important source of evidence. The reliefs dating to the Sasanian period have been attributed to only ten of the thirty-one rulers. The earliest of the attributed Sasanian reliefs were produced under Ardashir I and this form of sculpture continued under Shapur I, Bahram I, Bahram II, Narseh, Hormizd II, Shapur II, Sha- pur III, Peroz and Khusro II. Many of the reliefs are attributed to a specific king with little or no contention by, for example, the presence of an inscription or a specific crown2. Peck (1969, 103) does suggest, however, that it is possible that there are variations we are not aware of concerning the crown types. In addition to this the numismatic evidence upon which the crown typology is based is not without problems3. Other reliefs are open to varying interpretations concerning their attribution and various methods have been used to determine this, including the use of details carved within the relief as well as the style in which it was carved. Attempts have also been made to develop a chronology within the reigns if more than one relief is present. Herrmann (1969 and 1970) has con- tributed much to this debate and a lot of her earlier chronological argu- ment was based on the style of the carving. Such an argument based on carving style and supposed levels of workmanship is somewhat problem- atic. It may be subjective and assumes a linear development in carving styles which may not necessarily have occurred. Basing the chronology of the reliefs on this is not necessarily a valid basis for a chronology and more precise indicators are necessary. There are aspects contained in the reliefs that may be indicative of a more precise date during a reign. These include the type of crown depicted 1 For a list of terms for daggers and swords as well as other types of armament see Tafazzoli, 1993/4. 2 See Frye,1983, 135, fig. 1 for an illustration of the personal crowns of the Sasanian kings (only the 6th crown of Ardashir I is absent) and Göbl, 1983, 324-325 for information on the Sasanian coin portrait. Also see Sarre, 1967, 595, note 2 for a description of the costume of each ruler as described in Persian and medieval texts. 3 See Harper and Meyers, 1981, 42-47 and Frye, 1984, 302 for a summary of the prob- lems of the numismatic evidence. THE EVOLUTION OF SWORDS AND DAGGERS IN THE SASANIAN EMPIRE 187 and fashionable details such as clothing and hairstyles4. Goldman (1993, 218) does suggest that considerable caution must be exercised when infer- ring that the type of costume shown supports the suggested dating of the work. The dress portrayed, for example, is not necessarily the style of dress current when the work was fashioned. This may be a particular prob- lem for monumental, state sponsored works (and this may also be the case for smaller works) where copying, formulaic patterns and craft traditions are operative factors. Goldman does suggest, however, that with this in mind there are general trends that may be observed (1993, 219). He notes, for example, that silver plates generally agreed upon as belonging to late Sasanian times, and to the early post-Sasanian years before Islamic styles had taken hold, illustrate men's fashions differently from those found in the earlier works. The silver plates of the Sasanian period are also open to interpretation concerning their date of manufacture and the areas in which they were produced. These works represent various elements of the material culture such as weaponry. They are detailed representations and provide a considerable amount of information concerning the weaponry of the Sasanians and should reflect technical innovation and change. This information has been tabulated and will be utilised to chart the development of the swords and daggers of this period chronologically. The chronology of both the icono- graphic and archaeological material is important in charting such develop- ments over time and these issues will be considered throughout the article. This method has been chosen as the features of these weapons are not sep- arate entities but part of a whole. Although in the periods that have numer- ous depictions they will be divided into categories within the reign, by observing these features chronologically one may see how the weapons developed over time and changes were implemented. This will be observed alongside literary evidence as well as in relation to comparative evidence of the various other cultures who may have played a role in the Near East at this time. 4 The use of such methods may be seen with the Salmas relief which has been attrib- uted by Hinz to the later years of Ardashir's rule (as in Herrmann, 1969, 74). Hinz bases this argument on the fact that both Ardashir and Shapur are wearing the crown of Ardashir and that this relief depicts the period of joint rule. This may also be supported by details of the clothing of the Sasanians which contain elements indicative of both Ardashir and Shapur. 188 K. MASIA Swords of the Sasanian Period: Observations and Comparative Evidence Examples Attributed to the period of Ardashir I While most of the reliefs attributed to the reign of Ardashir I which depict swords including Firuzabad I and II, Naqsh-i Rajab III and Naqsh-i Rus- tam I, are not disputed it should be noted that the chronology of these within the reign has been discussed5. Pommels Such pommel types as seen on the Naqsh-i Rajab III relief (fig. 3) may be seen as far back as the Assyrian period6. They are also depicted on the later Persian akinakes as seen on the bas reliefs of Persepolis7. Although these date to a period well before the Sasanians, such features as seen on the Persepolis reliefs, which also depict the Elamite dagger, may be observed. A relief from Hatra depicting a god of the underworld and dat- ing to the second century AD displays a similar pommel and most likely a similar hilt, although it is partly obscured by the figures hand8. One should note that these are different to some Parthian examples as depicted on reliefs9. This may suggest that in this area aspects of the Persian tradition continued to be an influence although there was a certain amount of vari- ation. The sword guards of the Sasanians are, however, significantly wider. The pommels on the relief of the joust at Firuzabad (plate 1 and fig. 2) display characteristics seen on Chinese examples from the Late Eastern Chou (prior to the Han period and dating from the 7th to the 3rd century BC) and Han periods10. This is particularly pertinent concerning the pom- mel of the page. The pommel of Ardashir is also similar but may appear distorted due to the angle at which it has been depicted. On a Palmyrene relief of the second century AD a soldier is grasping a sword which 5 See Herrmann, 1969. 6 See for example Burton, 1884, 205, fig. 211, right and fig. 212, left. 7 See Burton, 1884, 213, figs 231 and 232. 8 See Ghirshman, 1962, 86, fig. 98. 9 See for example the Parthian relief at Hung- i Nauruzi as in Mathiesen, 1992, 120, fig. 1. 10 See Trousdale, 1975, 14, figs.