<<

BRONZE AXES FROM THE KARAKORAM Results of the 1958 Expedition in Azad

KARL JETTMAR

Reprinted from PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, Vol. 105, No. 1, February, 1961 Originalveröffentlichung in: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 105/1, 1961, S. 98-104

BRONZE AXES FROM THE KARAKORAM Results of the 1958 Expedition in Azad Kashmir

KARL JETTMAR University of Vienna

I law and order by bowing their necks under . The valleys became part of the BEFORE 1947 most of the Karakoram belonged Agency and are now administered by an Assistant to the State of and Kashmir. A part of Political Officer (A.P.O.). His residence is Shu­ this area, including the famous principalities of mari in Tangir. This enabled the members of and Nagir, was leased to the British and the German Hindukush Expedition of 1955, Pro­ administered by a Political Agent residing at Gil- fessor Adolf Friedrich, Dr. Georg Buddruss, Peter git. After partition and a period of cruel fighting Snoy, and myself, to enter this formerly forbidden the territory was divided into two parts by a cease­ country for linguistic and anthropological research. fire line. Owing to Professor Friedrich's untimely death at The East— and the valleys immediately Rawalpindi, in 1956, only a few preliminary re­ surrounding the basin of Kashmir—belongs to ports have as yet been published.'1 . The West, with Gilgit as a center, forms The expedition was helped by the intelligent and a part of Azad Kashmir, i.e. Free Kashmir, and efficient Mr. Ismael Khan, then A.P.O. at Tangir­ is administered by Pakistan. It is still called Darel. He is himself a Shina­speaker, born in the Gilgit Agency as in British times. On the south­ Astor valley, and is deeply interested in the history ern border of the Gilgit Agency on both sides of of his people. During many long hours Friedrich the River Indus there was a large tribal area explained to him the aims of anthropology and barring the direct way into Swat and into the archaeology. Mr. Ismael Khan told us that in Darel Punjab. the locals had frequently found gold, bronzes, 1 The tribal area was called Shinkari, because the and ceramics in their fields. When we hurried inhabitants were mostly Shina­speaking Dards. to Darel, he showed us a place where graves had They were famous for their bravery and their been opened by the peasants and invited us to spirit of independence, but also for lawlessness make excavations. This was, however, forbidden and robbery. Murder and blood­feuds went on by an agreement between the Department of almost constantly. They had no higher political Archaeology and the expedition (without the co­ 2 organization so that Barth speaks of them as operation of a specialist of Pakistan). Moreover, "acephalous" communities. the site had been thoroughly spoiled. Unfortu­ The area was in general completely closed to nately, all further investigation had to be stopped foreigners. Sir Aurel Stein was able to enter the because one of my companions fell ill and we had two large valleys of Tangir and Darel only be­ to return to Gilgit. cause a conqueror, Pakhtun Wali Khan, had tem­ An invitation of the Austrian Himalaya So­ 3 porarily imposed his rule on their inhabitants. ciety to join the Haramosh Expedition of 1958 Soon after Stein's visit Pakhtun Wali Khan was enabled me to return to the Gilgit Agency.5 At murdered and the old disorder prevailed for an­ Gilgit we met Mr. Ismael Khan, now head of the other thirty­five years. A few years ago, how­ Village Aid Department. He told me that it was ever, the elders of the two valleys decided spon­ a great pity that we had not been there two years taneously in the spirit of Islamic unity to introduce 4Jettmar, 1957a; 19576. 1 Biddulph, 1880: 8. Shina belongs, to the Dardic group 5 The team (Dr. Franz Mandl, Stefan of Indian languages. Southwest of Shinkari was an­ Pauer, Dr. Rudolf Hammerschlag and Rudolf Ebner) other tribal territory, Indus­Kohistan. The western under the leadership of Heinrich Roiss (deed.) conquered part of Indus­Kohistan has been governed by the highly the Haramosh peak. The scientific team consisted of efficient ruler of Swat since World War II. the geographer Professor Konrad Wiche, the zoologist 2 Barth, 1956 : 79­86. Dr. Eduard Piffl and myself as ethnologist. Cf. Wiche, 3 Stein, 1928: 1: 10­2S. Schomberg, 1935: 272. 1958.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, VOL. 105, NO. 1, FEBRUARY, 1961

Reprint Printed in U.S.A. 99 KARL JETTMAR [PROC. AMER. PHIL. SOC.

••>.•.

K'.- «* £8

FIG. 1. FIG. 3. before (1956), because a big hoard, mainly of bronzes, had been found at the village of Manikhal that they had originally been provided with shaft­ in Darel. It consisted of a large number of axes, holes. Their shape was reminiscent of the modern but there were also big flat spoons and forks, and iron axes used today in the Gilgit Agency, but some rods. they were clumsier and made of bronze or copper. As he had heard so much of archaeology from Their average thickness was between 2 and 3 cms. Professor Friedrich, Ismael Khan saved some pieces and said he had taken them with him when Measurements of the fragments: he was transferred to Gilgit. He immediately breadth (on the cutting edge) ordered a servant to bring them. The servant, length 10.7 cms. (fig. 1) however, confessed that they had been lost. No. 1. 17 cms., No. 2. 16 cms., 11 cms. (fig. 2) A grant from the American Philosophical So­ No. 3. 15.5 cms., 11 cms. (fig. 3) ciety enabled me to revisit Tangir and Darel. No. 4 16.8 cms., 9.7 cms. (fig. 4). On the seventh of July I was again at Shumari, in the Tangir valley, and there the new A.P.O., Ten days later we shifted to Shumari, in Darel, Mr. Malik Muhammad Azim Khan, told me that and there I tried to obtain further objects from some bronzes had been left behind in the house the same site. On the twenty­first of July, when he replaced Mr. Ismael Khan. They came Gafur, a man of Lower Manikhal, came and from Lower Manikhal and apparently belonged to brought me objects nos. 5­7. the things missing at Gilgit. The A.P.O. wanted No. 5 is a bronze axe apparently almost of to present them to me. The lot consisted of four the same shape as nos. 1­4, but more slender. heavily patinated axes. They were broken and There is a break at the shaft­hole, but no part the necks were lacking, but it was quite clear is missing. The flat neck is still intact. The piece looks old, but is not much patinated. Length 20.2 cms., breadth 9.7 cms. (fig. 5).

V A

t 9

FIG, 2, FIG. 4. VOL. 105, NO. 1, 1961] BRONZE AXES FROM THE KARAKORAM 100

v.

FIG. 7.

the slope, each year big avalanches of stone and FIG. 5. gravel go down. In a few decades all the houses which lie just on the rim of the slope will have No. 6 is a narrow axe with a shoulder behind disappeared. The owner, who wanted to delay the shaft-hole. The neck is in the shape of an this process, cut a step into the slope a few feet almost round tap. Length 14.3 cms., breadth below the corner of his homestead in order to 5.3 cms. (fig. 6). build a buttress. In this step he found the ­ No. 7 has almost the same contour as no. 6 jects. When he worked here, plenty of people but is a flat trunnion celt. Length 14.2 cms., were around because this place, in spite of the breath 4.6 cms. (fig. 7). gaping abyss, was used as a latrine by the whole Gafur told me the following story concerning village. the provenance of these objects: Two days later another man appeared and brought a bowl (no. 8) which he pretended to have Near the kot, i.e., the village fortress of Lower found at the same spot. It was not patinated but Manikhal (Kirinu-Manikhal), a man was repair­ strongly greased and dark, because it had been ing his house and made a deep pit. In this pit he used as a kitchen pot. It is a bowl of bronze or found bronzes and pieces of gold. When people copper. Beneath the lip there are two circular ran together and started digging they found cop­ flutes. There are some traces of a plating made per objects, mainly axes, some vessels made of of a light­colored metal (tin?). The piece is copper, and golden ornaments and plates. There quite similar to modern metal vessels still used were no iron objects and no coins. Since Gafur in the Punjab. Diameter (on the rim) 13.3 came relatively late he did not get any gold, only cms., height 6 cms. (fig. 8). the three axes. Most of the copper axes were I took the objects to Karachi and, conforming sold to a merchant at Chilas. The whole lot to the law, handed them over to the Archaeological must have weighed more than a mound, i.e. over Service of Pakistan for the National Museum of 80 pounds. Karachi. By courtesy of Mr. Khan, chief of the In this story many points are not clear, es­ Department of Archaeology, I got the photographs pecially why the man was making such a pit for which are the basis of my description. I hope a house. The common Dareli house is not sub­ that further examinations, chemical analysis of terranean and has no solid foundations. the bronze, and perhaps excavations on the site When we reached Lower Manikhal this prob­ will be made by Pakistan specialists. lem was solved. The kot lies on a low hill and is easily accessible from three sides. On the fourth side there is a steep slope leading down to the Darel River. As the river gnaws at the foot of

-

FIG. 6. FTG , 8 101 KARL JETTMAR [PROC. AMER. PHIL. SOC.

II from a period which was still carrying on Bronze Age traditions. At least the likelihood of their In view of the circumstances of discovery it doing so is no less strong than with other bronzes appears by no means sure that the objects really found by chance in Pakistan (for instance the belong to one complex. famous trunnion celt of Shalozan).11 Most dubious is object no. 8 (fig. 8). It was brought to me when there was already a rumor Ill abroad that I would pay for pieces like that. It could be a relatively modern object. Similar In spite of a clay model found at Mohenjo­ bowls made of wood are still used in Eastern daro which, according to Piggott, "seems to repre­ Turkestan and in . sent a form of shaft­hole axe," flat copper and We may be more hopeful as regards the ob­ bronze axes or adzes were typical of the Harappa jects nos. 5­7 (figs. 5­7). Any comparable civilization. Apparently they were inherited from bronzes are missing from modern inventories, and some early Iranian culture. The perseverance of yet nobody would think of making fakes inten­ the form was due to the "inherent conservatism" tionally. But since their patination is quite dif­ of India and "partly to the lack of effective con­ ferent from that of nos. 1­4 (figs. 1­4) we may tact with Mesopotamia or immediately adjacent assume that they need not belong to the same Elam."12 hoard, but were perhaps found at some other When, probably in post­Harappa times, shaft­ place in the valley. hole axes appeared on the , The axes nos. 1­4 were collected by the A.P.O. they were very rare and remained like foreigners immediately after the discovery of the hoard. As near the threshold. far as I can see, the locals had no prospect of One axe was found in Burial B of the Shahi­ getting paid for them. So there is no reason why tump Cemetery in South Baluchistan. It was they should not have come from the place desig­ compared with those from Maikop and Tsarskaia nated. According to their heavy patination they in South Russia.13 cannot be modern or even of a relatively recent Another axe was found in the Jhukar levels at date. Chanhu­daro.14 It is quite possible that there were more bronze A ceremonial axe with a shaft­hole was found or copper objects, but we have not the slightest in a burial place at Khurab in Persian indication whether we are faced with a place for not far from the border of Pakistan.15 offerings, or a graveyard for ashes after cremation The famous copper axe­adze from Mohenjo­ 6 (the people said that they found "coal" ) or a daro may be mentioned, with some reservations. depot. The terminus ante quem is surely given It can be compared to pieces from Hissar III, by the time when bronze was replaced by iron Shah Tepe, Turang Tepe, Sialk cemetery B10 the daily use. The Shina word for iron "cimer" (and perhaps also Maikop).17 A similar object (from Burushaski "chuma'r," cf. Turkish found in Sogdiana18 has never been mentioned "timur," "temir") may indicate its introduction in this connection up till now. A pick­axe from not from India but from Central .7 Here Faskau, in the Vienna Museum of Ethnology, may as attested by Herodotus 8 and by the excavations be a derivative of this type.19 There is a useful in the Minussinsk Basin, bronze for weapons and map of the finding places in the paper of Bongard­ tools were used during the Scythian period,9 Levin and Deopik.20 partly side by side with iron. Even in the 11 First indicated by Ann. Rep. Archaeol. Survey of armories of Achaemenid Persia there were still India, 1913­1914, reproduced by Heine­Geldern, Lai, and 10 bronze weapons. others. Anyhow, we are justified in summarizing that 12 Piggott, 19S0: 198­199. the objects really date from the Bronze Age or is Piggott, 19S0: 219, fig. 2b; Lai, 1953: 90. Childe has protested, but in fact the difference is not considerable. 6 Cremation was prevalent in the valley during the pre­ "Lai, 1953: 90, 89,.fig. 2/8. Islamic period. Cf. Biddulph, 1880: 113/114. 15 Gordon, 1954/55: 169, and pi. LXVI. 7 Morgenstierne, 1926: 68. io Piggott, 1950: 228. Heine­Geldern, 1936: 93­94. 8 I/2SS. Cultural influence from the north is attested " Hancar, 1937: 251, pi. XLIII/2, and Heine­Geldern, by the find of Ishkuman. Stein, 1944: 14­16. Litvinsky, 1936: 93. 1960. is Terenozhkin, 1950. Table between pp. 154­155. "Kiselev, 1951: 27S. i° Heine­Geldern, 1936: pi. XVII, fig. 12. io Schmidt, 1939: SO, fig. 30. 20 Bongard­Levin, G. M., i D. V. Deopik, 1957: 48/49. VOL. 105, NO. 1, 1961] BRONZE AXES FROM THE KARAKORAM 102

Our axes of Darel fit perfectly into this map, the holy animals of the Luristan bronzes. We meet since they, too, were found in the northwestern with a special correspondence between goat and corner of the subcontinent. The same applies to tree, as depicted in so many West Asiatic seals. the trunnion axe (obj. 7, fig. 7). It has only The chief female deity of the Dards, the Mur­ one actual parallel in the Indian subcontinent: the kum, not only gives easy childbirth to the women­ axe found at Shalozan in the Kurram valley.21 folk like Artemis, but she is also the owner of all (The Kurram is a tributary of the , wild animals, especially the ibex and . not very far from Darel, just on the border of Her residence is on the top of the highest moun­ the subcontinent.) Evidently the pieces are re­ tain. She can restore to life animals killed and lated, but the Darel one is more slender, indicating eaten up by putting their bones together. If there perhaps a later date. If we look for further rela­ is a rib or any other bone lacking, she will replace tives we have to go to and . it by a twig or wooden stick. The small shaft­hole axe no. 6 (fig. 6) evi­ This conception is rooted in a special kind of dently belongs to a type of western origin. The hunting­magic which is widely distributed in time hammer­shaped neck makes us think of the picks and space.27 But the nearest parallel can be found of Achaemenian times.22 Similar weapons were in Caucasian lore. Even the characteristic trait used in the steppe­belt, e.g. in Minussinsk.23 of the missing rib is present.28 It was presumably We have already mentioned that the shaft­hole from the Causasus that this motif came into the axe (no. 6, fig. 6) and the flat trunnion celt (no. tales of the .28 7, fig. 7) have the same outlines. Corresponding In modern Karakoram the axe is still a highly phenomena can occasionally be observed among venerated instrument used in religious ceremonies Caucasian materials, for instance, in the shaft­ by the pagan Kalash­Kafirs. Only ideas like these 24 hole axe of Gagry and the flat celts from the can explain the amazing evolution, rich in fancy, 25 museum at Krasnodar. Obviously, the co­ex­ which the axe underwent in Prehistoric Caucasia. istence of types of flat axes and shaft­hole axes From the linguistic point of view it must "be related to one another is common in this western said that only one part of the Dardic vocabulary area. The hammer­shaped neck appears there in is Indo­Aryan. Some roots of the rest can be the last centuries of the second millennium. explained by Burushaski, but others are still ob­ Summing up, we may say that all the Darel scur.30 The Dards certainly contain a considerable axes have definite western, possibly Caucasian, alien element of unknown origin. affinities. It is somewhat surprising that in a I think when we have an anthropologic analysis forlorn valley of the Karakoram more shaft­hole of the Dards, we shall see that their nearest rela­ axes of bronze have been found than were ever tives are not other Indian peoples but the moun­ discovered in the soil of the Indian subcontinent. tain folk of Western Asia. When I came to the conclusion that so many IV Caucasians or, at least, West Asiatic traits were In this connection, I may be allowed to point included in the old Dardic pattern, I was not able out that the pre­Islamic spiritual inheritance of to say in what way and at what time they were the Dardic peoples differs in many respects from imported. Now there is at least a faint possibility that of the other Indo­Aryan groups and has pe­ that they were brought by the same wave of men culiar affinities to the traditions of the highlanders and ideas which carried the shaft­hole axe and of Western Asia, in , the Zagros moun­ the trunnion celt into the borders of the North­ tains, and particularly in the .26 west Frontier Province. As Heine­Geldern The holy animal of the Dards is not the cow, 2?Friedrich, 1943: 193­218; Nachtigall, 1952; Meuli, but the wild as well as the domestic goat, i.e., 1946. Beninger observed this connection already in 1934. Cf. Beninger, 1958/59: 80. 21 Heine­Geldern, 1936: 87; 19S6: 137; Lai, 1953: 90, 2SDirr, 1925: 140­143. fig. 4. 20 22 L. Schmidt, 1952: 520­524. Finally it reached the E. F. Schmidt, 1939: 49, fig. 14 and 30. Germanic peoples of Scsnd'navia. 23 Kiselev, 1951: 241,­ pi. XXIV. 30 Morgenstierne, 1932 : 48. Burushaski is an enigmatic 24 lessen, 1951: 81, fig. 3. Among Chinese Ko­weapons language unrelated to any of the great families and as well. spoken today only in the most inaccessible valleys of 20 lessen, 1951: 63, fig. 22. the Karakoram (Yasin and Hunza). Cf. Lorimer, 1955a 20Jettmar, 1957a and 1957/;, 1958

V, / r/A' a y w /y M A

W/f/t

A m

K SZ/mf M ffAAfOSH z: A/i

A A//?/A 9/ S A/ 54 AT

Cmfes

#/7?. ArraaA KS

o- # A Z \A bi/res Si AT S M /—a

MAP 1. Main area of the Shina language and adjacent . X denotes site of the hoard. /////// denotes altitude over 2,500 meters. VOL. 105, NO. 1, 196l] BRONZE AXES FROM THE KARAKORAM 104

pointed out tribes of Caucasian origin may have LAL, V. V. 1953. Protohistoric Investigation. Ancient joined the Aryans in their migration to India.31 India, No. 9: 80­102. LITVINSKY, B. A. 1960. Archaeological discoveries on the eastern Pamirs and the problem of contacts be­ BIBLIOGRAPHY tween , and India in antiquity. XXV International Congress of Orientalists. Papers BARTI-I, FREDRIK. 1956. Indus and Swat Kohistan—an presented by the U.S.S.R. Delegation. Moscow. ethnographic survey. Studies Honoring the Centen­ nial of Universitetets Emografiske Museum 2. Oslo. LORIMER, D. L. R. 1935­1938. The Burushaski language. Vol. I Introduction and grammar. Vol. II Texts BENINGER, EDUARD. 1958/59. Das junghallstattische Freithofholz von Wimsbach-Traun. 5. Jahrbuch des and translations. Vol. Ill Vocabularies and index. Instituttet for sammenlijnende Kulturforskning. Muscalvercines Wels, 47-82. Serie B: Skrifter XXIX, 1, 2, 3. Oslo. Vol. I BIDDULPH, I. 1880. Tribes of the Hindoo Koosh. 1935a, Vol. II 1935&, Vol. Ill 1938. Calcutta. MEULI, KARL. 1946. Griechische Opferbrauche. Phyl­ BONGARD-LEVIN, G. M., i D. V. DEOPIK. 1957. K prob- lobolia fur Peter von der Miihl sum 60. Geburtstag. leme proiskhozhdenia narodov munda. Sov. Etno­ Basel. 185­288. grafiia 1: 46-56. MORGENSTIERNE, GEORG. 1926. Report of a linguistic DIRR, ADOLF. 1925. Der kaukasische Wild- und Jagd- mission to . Instituttet for sammenlig­ gott. Anthropos 20: 139-147. nende Kulturforskning, Serie C 1­2. Oslo. FRIEDRICH, ADOLF. 1943. Knochen und Skelett in der . 1932. Report on a linguistic mission to north­ Vorstellungswelt Nordasiens. Wiener Beitr'dge sur western India. Instituttet for sammenlignende Kul­ Kulturgeschichte und Linguistik, Jahrgang 5: 189- turforskning, C III­l. Oslo. 247. GORDON, D. H. 1954, 1955. The pottery industries of NACHTIGALL, HORST. 1952. Die kulturhistorische Wur­ zel der Schamanenskelettierung. Zeitschrift fur the Indo-Iranian border: a restatement and tentative Ethnologic 77: (2) : 188­197. chronology. Ancient India Nos. 10 and 11. PIGGOTT, STUART. 1950. Prehistoric India to 1000 B.C. HANCAR, FRANZ. 1937. Urgeschichte Kaukasiens von (Penguin Books). Harmondsworth. den Anfangen seiner Besiedlung bis in die Zeit seiner friihen Metallurgie. Wien. SANKALIA, D. H. 1958. New light on the Aryan HEINE-GELDERN, ROBERT. 1936. Archaeological traces "invasion" of India: Links with the Iran of 1000 of the Vedic Aryans. Jour. Indian Soc. Oriental B.C. Discovered in Central India. Illustrated Art 4: 87-115. London Neivs, Sept. 20, 1958: 478­479. , 1956. The coming of the Aryans and the end of SCHMIDT, ERICH F. 1939. The treasury of Persepolis the Harappa civilisation. Man, 56: 136-140. and other discoveries in the homeland of the IESSEN, A. A. 1951. Prikubanskii ochag metallurgii i Achaemenians. Oriental Institute Communications metalloobratki v kontse medno-bronzovogo veka. No. 21. Chicago, 111. Matcrialy i issledovaniia po arkhelogii Severnogo SCHMIDT, LEOFOLD. 1952. Der "Herr der Tiere" in Kdvkaca, N. 23: 75-124. Moscow-Leningrad. einigen Sagenlandschaften Europas und Asienes. JETTMAR, KARL. 1957a. Heidnische Religionsreste in Anthropos 47: 509­538. Hindukusch und Karamorum. Wisscnschajt und SCIIOMBERG, R. C. F. 1935. Between the Oxus and M^eltibild—Viertcljahrsschrift fur die Grundlagen der the Indus. London. Forschung, Juniheft, 126-131. Vienna. STEIN, SIR AUREL. 1921. Serindia. Detailed report of . 1957/;. Schmiedebrauchtum im ostlichen Hindu­ explorations in central Asia and westernmost China. kusch. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Ge­ 1, Text. Oxford. sellschajt in Wien, 87: 22­31. . 1928. Innermost Asia. Detailed report of ex­ . 1958(7. Das kulturhistorische Ergebnis der oster­ plorations in central Asia, Kan­su and eastern Iran reichischen ­Expedition. Osterreichische 1­4. Oxford. Hochschulseitung, 15th of Dec. 1958: 4. . 1944. Archaeological notes from the Hindukush . 1958?;. Volkerkundliche Forschung im Haramosh­ . Jour. Royal Asiatic Soc. 1­2: 5­24. gebiet (Gilgit­Agency). Zcitschrift fur Ethnologic 83/2: 252­256. TERENOZHKIN, A. I. 1950. Sogd i Chach. Kratkie Soobshch. Instit. Istor. Matcrialnoi Kultury 33: KISELEV, S. V. 1951. Drevniaia istoriia Juzhnoi Sibiri. 152­169. 2nd ed. Moscow. WICIIE, KONRAD. 1958. Die osterreichische Karakorum­ 31 Heine­Geldern, 1956: 139. For other explanations Expedition 1958. Mitteilungen der Gcographischen see my second article in this book. Gcsellschaft Wien, 100 (3)': 1­14.