Studying images on seals is the most traditional method of working with Ancient Eastern glyptics. Even in the publications of L. Delaporte ¹, the principles that have become common to most publications of seals were laid down: grouping monuments by subjects, searching for image options, and describing iconographic features.

¹ Delaporte L. Cylindres orientaux. Catalog du Musee Guimet // Annales du Musee Guimet. T. Z. R., 1909; idem. Catalogue des cylindres orientaux et des cachets assyro-babyloniens, perses et syro- cappadociens de la Bibliotheque Nationale. P., 1910; idem. Musee du Louvre. Catalogue des cylindres, cachets et pierres gravees de style oriental. V. 1-2. P., 1920-1923.

page 126

changes by period. The image was the main criterion for classifying the material in almost all major catalogues of the Two Rivers glyptics ² . The stage of systematization of the material by plot feature was followed by the development of iconographic analysis of individual images and scenes, which was expressed in the search for variants and sources of the image and its interpretation ^.3 To this day, the cut-out images are an argument for a wide variety of studies, identifications, and interpretations. There is no need to speak once again about the ambiguity and controversy of individual interpretations. It is important that the main role in the study of glyptics belongs to the image, its iconography and stylistics (what G. Frank-fort called seal design ⁴), although the adoption of the image as the basis for the classification of seals is no longer the only possible ⁵ .

Depending on the tasks of specific research and the selected classification features, the number of plot schemes identified varies from half a dozen (B. Goff) to one and a half to two dozen (P. Amier, R. Boehmer). However, it has been pointed out more than once that for all the variety of images on Sumerian seals, they embody only a few basic themes and are reduced to several plots ^.6 This is explained both by the ritual and magical purpose of the seals themselves, and by the connection of the images on them with myth and ritual, which was pointed out by G. Frankfort [⁷]. The correspondence of things to their sacred meaning required following regulated, proven schemes, and the similarity of a particular monument with samples and analogues was more important than individual characteristics. Thus, the adequacy of the image to the content that it was intended to convey was guaranteed, which in turn ensured the stability of the ritual and magical functioning of monuments. All images (as, indeed, their carriers ⁸ ) had the character of symbols or signs indicating the most important figurative representations that were transmitted to the Internet.

² Ward W.H. The Seal Cylinders of Western Asia. Washington, 1910; Weber 0. Altorientalische Siegelbilder // Der Alte Orient. Bd 17-18. Lpz, 1920; Osten Н.Н. von der. Ancient Oriental Seals in the Collection of Mr. Edward T. Newell // OIP. 1934. 22; Frankfort Н. Cylinder Seals: A Documentary Essay on the Art and Religion of the Ancient Near East. L., 1939; Moortgat A. Vorderasiatische Rollsiegel: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Steinschneidekunst. В., 1940; Amiet P. La glyptique mesopotamienne archaique. P., 1961 (далее - GMA); Boehmer P.M. Die Entwicklung der Glyptik Wahrend der Akkad-Zeit. В., 1965.

³ I will only give examples that reflect the various stages in the development of iconographic analysis and its application to Mesopotamian glyptics: Buren E. D. van. The Flowing Vase and the God with Streams. В., 1933; idem. Representations of Fertility Divinities in Glyptic Art // Orientalia. 1955. V. 24. N 4; Porada Е. Notes on the Sargonid Cylinder Seal Ur 364 // Iraq. 1960. 22; Кирреr J.-R. L'lconographie du Dieu Amurru dans la glyptique de la Ie dynastie babylonienne. Bruxelles, 1961; Goff B.L. Symbols of prehistoric Mesopotamia. New Haven-London, 1963; Afanasyeva V. K. Gilyamesh and Enkidu. Epicheskie obrazy v iskusstvo [Epic Images in Art], Moscow, 1979; Amiet P. The Mythological Repertory in Cylinder Seals of the Agade Period (c. 2335-2155 B.C.) // Ancient Art in Seals. Princeton, 1980; Braun-Holzinger E. A. Die Ikonographie des Mondgottes in der Glyptik des III Jartausends v. Chr. / / ZA. 1993. 83; Kurtik G. E. Astral symbolism in Mesopotamia of the third millennium BC. 1998. N 2.

⁴ Frankfort. Cylinder Seals... P. 8.

⁵ See Klochkov I. S. Glyptics of Margiana (Principles of description and classification) / / VDI. 1997. N 1. P.107.

⁶ Goff. Op. cit. P. 95; Antonova E. V. Essays on the culture of ancient farmers in Front and Central Asia. Opyt rekonstruktsii mirovospriyatiya [Experience of reconstruction of world perception], Moscow, 1984, p. 165. Dukhovnaya kul'tura i gliptika drevnego Dvurech'ya [Spiritual culture and glyptics of the ancient Two Rivers]. NAA. 1981. N 6. pp. 63-64.

⁷ Frankfort N. Gods and Myths on Sargonid Seals / / Iraq. 1934. 1. P. 2, 6; see also Antonova E. V. To the reconstruction of the ideology of the population of ancient cities / / City as a socio-cultural phenomenon of the historical process. Moscow, 1995. p. 288; ona. Problemy interpretatsii pamyatnikov kul'tury Vostoka [Problems of Interpretation of monuments of Culture of the East], Moscow, 1991, 11 p. (in Russian). K semantike znakov svobodnosti epokhi bronzy [On the semantics of property signs of the Bronze Age]. Sibir ' i ee sosedi v drevnosti [Siberia and its Neighbors in Ancient Times]. Novosibirsk, 1970. p. 317; Kononenko E. I. K voprosu o magicheskoi funktsii mesopotamskikh seti // Drevnyj Vostok i antichnij mir [Ancient East and Ancient World], Moscow, 1998, pp. 24-25.

⁸ See Antonova E. V., Raevsky D. S. On the sign essence of material monuments and ways of its interpretation / / Problems of interpretation of monuments of culture of the East. Moscow, 1991.

page 127

in the form of metaphors and were systematically fixed in myth and ritual ⁹ . The stable iconography of monuments shows that both individual elements-anthropomorphic figures, carnivores, herbivores, etc., and images were entirely a kind of code, and the content that this image indicates does not necessarily come from the characteristics of characters, but inevitably includes the interpretation of these images and scenes in the minds of the carriers of this culture. Therefore, images are elements of a certain classification system, which has already been repeatedly discussed ¹⁰ . It is probably legitimate to consider as such elements of the classification not only individual stable images, but also entire plot - compositional schemes, which in this case should be perceived as a kind of "plot units" that are part of more developed compositions (visual texts). And if there is no doubt about the use of pictorial material for studying the political, social, cultural processes and features of the worldview of ancient civilizations, then the opposite is also legitimate - using the data we know about the worldview of archaic societies to interpret images on seals, systematize them and study their semantics ^.11

Analyzing the metaphorical structure of the imaginative world perception of ancient societies, O. M. Freudenberg came to the conclusion that "processions, fighting and eating are the three main structural acts that were deposited as a result of a special perception of the world" ¹² . These three acts, recorded in myths and constantly reproduced in rituals, turn into visual metaphors that correspond to the main plot and composition schemes of the Mesopotamian glyptic of the third millennium BC. ¹³

* * *

The meal was in one form or another in almost all ancient rituals, and through the chain "eating - a feast for the gods - a feast for the gods" the line between images of human food and the meal of the gods is blurred (we are talking about an image - not a fact, but its perception). Food gets cosmogonic semantics and becomes a metaphor ¹⁴ . Visually, this metaphor was constantly reproduced in various variations and with varying degrees of detail, including in the glyptic, where it corresponded to the so - called "banquet scenes" - profile images of drinking anthropomorphic characters. In Russian Assyriology, this subject has only once become an object of independent research ^.15 The subject of the analysis was the "Ursky standard", on which the feast scene is placed in the upper case of the side of the" world " and therefore , according to the established order of reading images from bottom to top16, closes the process of collecting trophies and accepting gifts. Researcher

⁹ For details of such an information system, see E. S. Novik Essay on magic // Traditional beliefs in modern culture of ethnic groups. SPb., 1993. S. 6; Rotenberg, E. From canon to style // Questions of art studies. 1994. N 2-3. pp. 175-176; Antonova. Ocherki kul'tury [Essays on Culture] ... pp. 29-39. Dukhovnaya kul'tura... P. 68; Lotman Yu. M. Kanonicheskoe iskusstvo kak informatsionnogo paradox [Canonical art as an informational paradox]// Problema kanona v drevnem i srednevekovom iskusstve Azii i Afrika [The problem of Canon in the ancient and medieval Art of Asia and Africa], Moscow, 1973, pp. 16-21; Freidenberg O. M. Poetika zazheta i zhanra [Poetics of the plot and genre], Moscow, 1997, pp. 50-53; Baiburin A. K. Semiotic status of Things and mythology // Materialnaya kul'tura i mifologiya [Material Culture and Mythology], Leningrad, 1981.

¹⁰ Goff. Op. cit. P. 60; Antonova. Essays on culture ... p. 63.

¹¹ See Antonova E. V. On the problem of functions of seals of primitive farmers of the East / / SA. 1980. N 4; ona. Zooanthropomorphic characters of seals of Iran and Mesopotamia in the social context / / Reconstruction of ancient beliefs: sources, method, purpose. St. Petersburg, 1991.

¹² Freudenberg. Uk. op. p. 134.

¹³ These iconographic schemes should preferably be called "plot-compositional" to emphasize the correspondence between the content and formal aspects.

¹⁴ See Freudenberg, UK. op. pp. 58, 64-65.

¹⁵ Bobrova L. "Pir" v drevnem Sumer ["Feast" in ancient Sumer]. Issue 4. Yerevan, 1983.

¹⁶ Afanasyeva V. K. K probleme interpretatsii sumerskikh relefov [On the problem of interpretation of Sumerian reliefs]. Drevnost ' i rannee srednevekovie [Ancient and Early Middle Ages], Leningrad, 1978.

page 128

She relied directly on the features of the image itself and analogs, but an iconographic analysis of the details of the standard allowed her to conclude that "this is not a feast as such, but some kind of cult act that preceded the feast, perhaps a libation in honor of the gods in gratitude for the victory won" ¹⁷ . The following evidence was presented in support of this conclusion.

1. The images on the "standard" describe all the stages of military operations, and it is unlikely that Sumerian artists could have omitted a sacrifice or other act of gratitude to the gods with such a detailed narrative.

2. The scene of the "feast" on the Ur monument is a kind of abbreviated scheme, without details and even without a table, while in the glyptic, for example, the" feast " is always depicted more fully.

3. The participants of the meal are depicted barefoot, shaved and naked to the waist - so they appeared before the deities; other monuments - seals and a palette from Khafaj-represent the feasters dressed and bearded ¹⁸ .

The first proof is supported, in particular, by compositional analogs - for example, the Ur-Nanshe palette, where the feast scene follows the act of laying the foundation stone of the temple. However, in Sumerian glyptics, the feast scenes were depicted both in a more detailed way, with a large number of explanatory details and in the context of other subjects, and, on the contrary, in extremely abbreviated schemes, reaching only two figures of feasting, and taking such scenes into account devalues the opposition of seals and the "standard". In addition, it is unlikely that the depiction of the participants of the feast bearded and dressed makes the scenes of the meal on the seals and reliefs "less ritual" than the composition of the Ur monument. Accentuating differences in detail is necessary when analyzing a particular image, but in this case it is more important that the general thing that allows you to combine these works into one plot scheme. Additional characters, elements of the setting and details of the external appearance concretize the depicted scene and expand or refine its interpretation, but in no way detract from the ritual significance of the feast itself.

"Ursky Shtandart" is the most detailed composition, including the image of a feast and allowing - at least for one specific case - to reconstruct the place of this act in the whole process of victorious military operations. The interpretation of the" feast " as a celebration of victory is also found in P. Amier ¹⁹ . But it is obvious that this particular interpretation does not apply to all the scenes of the feast in the glyptic, where they are often presented in more detail than on the "standard", but, as a rule, in isolation, without "backstory", explanatory plots. Images of the glyptic, like all monuments of symbolic art in general, being part of a special information system, are designed not to convey an exhaustive idea of the subject or phenomenon, but only to indicate it, activating the viewer's consciousness. Therefore, the selected metaphors and their corresponding visual forms ("plot units "or" plot-compositional schemes") allow us to develop several dominant themes that were preserved due to the significance of the ideas behind them and are ultimately reduced to one: service to the deities. The ritual meal as a "feast for the gods" fully corresponds to this single and unique theme of Sumerian self-consciousness and embodies it, perhaps, more clearly and expressively than other "plot units". As a plot unit, meal scenes in abbreviated or expanded form were included in the compositions on the seals, and an analysis of the details and "context" of the images indicates their sacred nature.

One of the most characteristic details that allows us to identify the scene of the feast is a vessel with tubes through which the participants of the meal absorb its contents.

¹⁷ Bobrova Street. Uk. soch. p. 62.

¹⁸ Ibid., p. 63.

¹⁹ GMA. P. 130.

page 129

Such a vessel with drinking straws lowered into it was used as a sign-pointer to the feast scene - in the absence of figures of feasters-for example, in combination with an erotic scene ²⁰ , a visual embodiment of the rite of "sacred marriage". This Sumerian rite has been repeatedly mentioned as one of the most important, and the combination of its images with a feast vessel proves the sacred symbolic essence of this object itself. It should be noted that the "feast" or libation is depicted on a well-known Uruk vase associated with the rite of "sacred marriage" ²¹ . The vessel with tubes was especially often depicted in abbreviated versions of the" feast "that do not have a" context "- for example, on a number of seals from the royal graves of Ur ²², where the" feast " is represented and only two feasters are depicted in one register , and in the other - a geometric ornament. Please note that this is the only group of seals where the "feast" is combined with a geometric pattern.

Several seals - both stamps and top hats-combine scenes of feasting with images of snakes and scorpions, which are also associated with ideas about fertility and the rite of "sacred marriage" ^.23 In particular, the scorpion can be depicted not only on the periphery of the composition, but also in the center of the abbreviated diagrams, between the feasting ²⁴ .

Another ritual attribute is the rook, which is usually a means of transportation for a water or solar deity, and is often used as a stage for a feast; P. Amier generally identified the "feast in the rook" as a separate iconographic type (banquet en barque) ^.25 The most obvious proof of the sacredness of the" feast " should be considered a fairly frequent image of a meal near the temple, which brings such compositions closer to the "temple and flock" motif ²⁶ scheme, to which many pre-dynastic glyptic plots are reduced. According to B. Goff, the temple should be considered not only as an indubitable pointer to a ritual action, but as a kind of catalyst that turns all the elements depicted next to it into sacred symbols ^.27

All these details show that in these cases it should be a ritual feast (this follows from the very fact of their depiction in glyptics and small plastic) and these images act precisely as" plot units " in compositions, other elements of which enhance or correct the sacred significance of these scenes. Hence, any image of a feast, regardless of the degree of detail, indicates a ritual action, but the rites themselves could have different directions: feasts, like libations, had to be included in a variety of rituals, and it is hardly legitimate to associate images of a meal with only one action.

The proof that the images of the "feast" can be based on various rituals is the division of these scenes into two main iconographic types, which for some reason were ignored by researchers: the feasters are represented as 7) drinking from a common vessel through tubes, and 2) with individual goblets in their hands. A simple calculation based on P. Amier's catalog shows that the" expansion " of the feast scenes due to details is not distributed equally in these types. Thus, the introduction of servant figures is quite rare for scenes with a total vessel of ²⁸, but usually for images with cups

²⁰ GMA. N 1203.

²¹ Antonova Street. A thing in the context of a ritual...

²² GMA. N 1054-1056, 1060.

²³ See Kononenko E. I. Images of a scorpion in the Mesopotamian glyptic of the third millennium BC. 1997. N 2. pp. 90-92, ibid. bibliography.

²⁴ GMA. N835, 1060, 1160, 1169-1171, 1320, 1380, 1374.

²⁵ GMA. P. 123 f., 190. N 1204-1206, 1374.

²⁶ Frankfort Н. Stratified Cylinder Seals from the Diyala Region // OIP. 1955. 72. P. 15 f.; Goff. Op. cit. P. 95-99.

²⁷ Goff. Op. cit. P. 99.

²⁸ GMA. J 1056, 1152, 1186, 1359. 1367.

page 130

(more than 30 at Amyet). The Glyptic rook feast is exclusively represented by Type I ²⁹ . A feast near a temple building or temple gate is much more typical (17:4) for type 2, as is the combination of this type with scenes of the "frieze of the combatants" (9:5). Images of the herd and farm work are combined, with rare exceptions, with type 2 (8:1). Relief palettes only contain scenes of "feast with cups" ³⁰ .

If it is true that the same scenes depicted could change their meaning depending on the context (just as the actions depicted themselves were included in various rituals), then it is not surprising that new content could be given not only to the metaphors "entirely", but also to their individual elements. For example, one can trace the successive transformation of two feasters ("a feast for the gods") into a " feast with god "(when one of the figures is endowed with divine attributes - horns or a horned tiara, and the feasters can use both pipes and goblets) and a "feast of the gods" ³¹ . The feast scenes were reduced to a single figure of a drinker (more often with a goblet), who, however, can be served by other characters. Probably, such a figure could serve as an iconographic basis for seated deities with cups and bowls in the scenes of the coming on Akkadian seals: carvers used the finished type, changing its characteristics ^.32

O. M. Freudenberg considered the struggle to be the central event in the system of images, the only category of perception of the world in the primitive hunting consciousness and the only content of its cosmogony ^.33 The motif of fighting (grappling, attacking, defending) is characteristic of the entire ancient art of Eurasia. For Mesopotamia, the theme of rivalry and conflict can be called one of the main ideological trends of the third millennium BC, which found specific expression in epic tales, in the texts of" disputes", and in monumental relief ^.34 In the Glyptic world, scenes of carnivorous attacks on herbivores and man-beast combat, which existed as ^early as the Uruk period, were used as a form of expression for the theme of struggle . The interpretation of the plot" protection of the herd from predators", initially quite naturalistic, gradually acquired a less dynamic and more conventional character, which led to the formation of a "figurative-linear style" in the glyptic (RD II; XXVIII-XXVI centuries BC) scheme, called the "frieze of the fighting". On Mesopotamian seals, this pattern remained quantitatively predominant until the mid-Akkadian period. A characteristic feature of such compositions is the symmetry of elements - figures in pairs and separate groups of two or three characters, as well as the intersection of figures. It should be noted that on the seals of the "figurative-linear style", a person (or other anthropomorphic character) does not always appear as an animal defender and almost never enters the fight alone, without help. The main burden of the fight is laid on fantastic mixamorphic creatures-man-bulls, androcephalic bulls, which act as ordinary opponents of predators ³⁶, which excludes the possibility of interpreting these plots as cattle-breeding scenes. In addition, in a number of compositions, the "frieze of the combatants" is combined with subjects related to ritual (temple scenes, sacrifices, meals).

²⁹ GMA. N 1204-1206, 1360.

³⁰ GMA. N 1222-1225.

³¹ GMA. N 1219, 1221, 1359, 1364, 1380, 1450.

³² For more information, see Frankfort. Gods and Myths... P. 6 f.

³³ Freudenberg. Uk. op. p. 52, 66.

³⁴ For more information, see Antonova Street. Essays on culture ... pp. 182-185, ibid. bibliography.

³⁵ See Goff. Op. cit. P. 63 ff. In ceramic paintings, this theme is found already in the Khalaf period. Antonova E. V. Mesopotamia on the way to the first states. Moscow, 1998. p. 21 sl., ibid. bibliography.

³⁶ See Frankfort. Cylinder Seals... P. 46 Afanasieva. Gilgamesh and Enkidu ... pp. 37-55; Kononenko E. I. K voprosu o proiskhozhdenii miksamorfnykh obraz v sumerskoy gliptike [On the origin of mixamorphic images in Sumerian glyptics].

page 131

The meaning of the images of the "frieze of the combatants", the content that determined the appearance and development of this motif and those connected with it, have repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. Interest was primarily aroused by the search for possible mythological connections of individual images of animals and mixamorphic creatures with images of the Mesopotamian pantheon. First of all, anthropomorphic characters were interpreted. Their combination in one composition with wild and domestic herbivores and scenes of " protecting the herd from predators "made it possible to interpret such an image as the" master of animals "³⁷ , and this concept means both the mythological patron of nature and the real person - the ruler or priest who performs this role during the rite. P. Amier saw in such images the role of the "master of animals". images of the "priest-leader" show evidence of the development of cult practice in the early stages of Mesopotamian history ³⁸ . In relation to the anthropomorphic character with zoomorphic features (characteristic of the Ubaid and Uruk glyptics), the possibility of using ritual costumes in the course of ritual actions was indicated ³⁹ . A. Mortgat and E. D. van Buren simultaneously, but with different arguments, connected the appearance of this image with the pastoral religion of ancient Mesopotamia and identified the anthropomorphic hero with Dumuzi; the first researcher emphasized the aspect of the dying and resurrecting deity , ⁴⁰ while the second one relied on the ritual of "sacred marriage" ⁴¹ . Even earlier, O. Weber confidently classified all monuments where a person appears surrounded by animals and enters into some kind of relationship with them as directly related to mythology and the epic, and above all-with the plots of songs about Gilgamesh. ⁴² The possible identification of the anthropomorphic hero with this epic character has become a common theme of many iconographic studies. F. Ackerman considered the motif of fighting animals to represent the "heroic hunt" as part of the epic of Gilgamesh, borrowed by Elam along with Mesopotamian iconography ^.43 This identification led to the identification of the godman with Enkidu, the satellite of Gilgamesh, and the consideration of the compositions depicted on the seals as illustrations of fragments of the epic cycle. But if some images really seem at first glance to be a direct illustration of the texts (for example, the fight with lions, the defeat of the bull by heroes), then others clearly need a different explanation (in particular, it is not clear why Enkidu, who occupied a clearly secondary position in Sumerian songs and only in the Akkadian version became an equal hero, appears in the image of the on Rennes dynastic seals much more often than Gilgamesh himself). In addition to direct identification of glyptic images with specific mythological or folklore images, characters and seal scenes can be interpreted as symbols and personifications that have some very general ideas behind them. V. K. Afanasyeva pointed out the possibility of reflecting in Sumerian glyptics echoes of magical rites of early hunting and cattle breeding religion . ⁴⁴ P. Amier suggested that image elements should be considered as symbols and personifications. symbols of cosmic forces, and the compositions themselves-as some figurative models of the "dramatic concept of world order" ⁴⁵; then the fighting animals can be interpreted as the personification of the struggle of world principles or the main oppositions of the cosmic level. Developing the" cosmic level " of Amier, E. V. Antonova pointed out a number of possible options

³⁷ Porada E. Ancient Iran. The Art of Prehistoric Times. L., 1965. P. 32. ^3S GMA. P. 72.

³⁹ Antonova Street. Zooanthropomorphic characters ... p. 1 Yu.

⁴⁰ Moortgat A. Tammuz, der Unsterblichkeitsglaube in der altorientalischen Bildkunst. В., 1949.

⁴¹ Buren E.D. van. Ancient Beliefs and Some Modern Interpretations // Orientalia. Roma, 1949. 18.

⁴² Weher. Op. cit.; also see Porada E. Mesopotamian Art in Cylinder Seals of the Pierpont Morgan Library. N.Y., 1947. P. 24.

⁴³ Ackerman Ph. Early Seals. Some Specific Problems // SPA. 1964. 1. P. 293; see also Borowski E. Le cycle de Gilgamesh. A propos de la collection de cylindres orientaux du Musee d'Art et d'Histoire. Geneve, 1944.

⁴⁴ Afanasieva Street. Gilgamesh and Enkidu ... p. 71.

⁴⁵ Amiet. The Mythological Repertory... P. 38.

page 132

oppositions acceptable for explaining the semantics of individual images on seals ⁴⁶ .

Finally, the fight scenes can also be interpreted at the "historical level" ⁴⁷ . The early Dynastic period was for Mesopotamia a time of "war of all against all", constant armed conflicts between the city-states of Sumer. In the texts, political conflicts are explained by mythological reasons, primarily by the anger of the patron gods, who deprive the defeated cities of their intercession and go over to the side of the victors, or by the fact that the deities of one center are stronger than the deities of another. This situation, according to T. Jacobsen, gave rise to one of the main "metaphors" of Sumerian religion - "a new figure of a ruler-a deliverer from troubles, raised above mortals; a warrior who causes fear; a powerful ruler who inspires awe" ⁴⁸; but the power of such a mythologized ruler and the success of his actions are based primarily on service to the gods, in full compliance with the divine ordinances.

Such a variety of interpretations of the" frieze of the combatants " proves that this plot-compositional scheme turned out to be universal for imaginative representation of the content relevant to contemporaries. Obviously, all (or almost all) sufficiently reasoned hypotheses explaining the meaning of the" frieze of the combatants " in the Glyptic and, more broadly, the theme of struggle in Mesopotamian art are legitimate and complementary. We are talking about the pictorial tradition on multifunctional monuments of ritual significance that existed for a long time and reflected various ideas about the world around them, the foundations of the worldview: "Worldviews, which are carried by artistic images, do not so much embody objective laws of the real world, but transform them into special dogmatic forms and structures that meet the aesthetic norms of the era" ⁴⁹ . The traditional subject matter for images on seals, which originated in the pre-dynastic period, formally changed over time and could acquire different content that reflected the most relevant ideas and realities of a particular era, which provided it with such a strong place in art and such a long existence.

* * *

Processions are "one of the most stable elements of any primitive action" ⁵⁰ and were obviously an integral part of almost all rituals. Images of processions in various contexts and with varying degrees of detail are found on many Sumerian monuments (Uruk vase, Ur standard, Ur-Nanshe palette). In the glyptic, the motif of the procession appeared in the period of Cemdet Nasr as a variant of the depiction of economic scenes near the temple building ⁵¹, which clearly indicates the sacred nature of the scene. On early dynastic seals, such a compositional scheme - a string of characters in profile, directed to one element (temple, throne, otherwise oriented figure) is almost not found (with the exception of individual monuments from Ur), giving priority to the "frieze of the fighting". However, Akkadian seal carvers once again turn to this "frieze-shaped procession" scheme, using it for most narrative scenes-standing before the deity's throne, prayers, and " judgment of the gods." This scheme allowed

⁴⁶ Antonova Street. Essays on Culture ... pp. 175-177, ibid. argumentation and bibliography; for a different point of view, see Ackerman. Op. cit. pp. 297-298.

⁴⁷ Antonova street. Spiritual culture ... p. 69 el.

⁴⁸ Jacobsen T. Treasures of darkness. History of Mesopotamian Religion, Moscow, 1995, p. 95.

⁴⁹ Rotenberg. U k op. p. 178.

⁵⁰ Freudenberg. Uk. op. p. 66.

⁵¹ Goff. Op. cit. P. 96-99.

page 133

clearly convey the hierarchy of characters-standing at different distances in front of a sitting figure (usually the supreme deity). P. Amier also pointed out the possibility of identifying two generations of deities in such compositions ^.52 The "frieze-like procession" scheme was one of the main types of Sargonid glyptic composition , ⁵³ and by the end of the Akkadian period it had also replaced the "battling frieze". This plot-compositional scheme, used for scenes of standing before the deity and investiture, became dominant for the glyptics of the era of the third dynasty of Ur and retained its significance until the Kassite conquest ^.54 If in previous periods the main theme of images-service to the deity-was embodied in quite diverse forms, then since the third dynasty of Ur it is reduced to the constant reproduction of one plot - literal worship of god; perhaps this narrowing of the plot repertoire is explained by the development of the idea of the ruler-deity, which resulted in royal cults, and the addition by the end of a new "religious metaphor" (according to T. Jacobsen ⁵⁵) - the perception of the deity as a personal patron. On the seals of the third dynasty of Ur, the composition is limited to the image of several people in front of a sitting deity, but, unlike the seals of Akkad, often without divine attributes-now they are not gods, but mortals. Constant reproduction of one scene led to the appearance of its "abbreviated versions", when the entire composition consists of two or three figures, and such a scheme is fixed not only in the glyptic (then the main part of the cylinder surface was reserved for the inscription), but also in monumental relief (in particular, the Ur-Nammu stele, later-the Hammurabi stele).

Obviously, other motifs of Sumerian glyptics, regardless of the mythological or ritual content they convey, can be reduced to the selected three plot-compositional schemes. Over time, changes in the worldview inevitably occurred, and the rituals that reflected this worldview also changed, but the new content was embodied in traditional forms. In order to convey the most relevant ideas and realities, the already existing stable pictorial schemes and iconographic types were adapted, which ensured their preservation over several historical periods ^.56 At the same time, " actions, rites, festivals, etc., therefore retain the same stable elements of struggle, procession, eating, and the productive act. These stable elements of the rite, which owe their differences to objective reasons for the arrangement of images, take various forms depending on changes in public consciousness; however, they can always reveal the same semantic identity with an external metaphorical difference. " ⁵⁷ Just as processions, contests (or mysteries), and libations (sacrifices) were all components of the same rites and expressed the general idea of serving the deities, ⁵⁸ these metaphors, while also conveying the same ritual content in principle, could be combined in various compositions and in any combination. In the scheme of the "frieze-shaped procession", heraldic pairs are introduced, which are common for scenes of wrestling ⁵⁹ ; "feast" (or another plot presented in the same scheme) occupies a separate register on seals with an image.

⁵² Amief. The Mythological Repertory... P. 40-41.

⁵³ See Kononenko E. I. Stylistic features of Akkadian glyptics / / VDI. 1996. N 3. p. 91.

⁵⁴ This scheme, which is common to a number of subjects, was one of the arguments for identifying E. Radaya as the "third stage of development of Mesopotamian glyptics" - from Akkad to the middle of the second millennium BC (Porada. Mesopotamian Art... P. 5, 13).

⁵⁵ Jacobsen. U k op. s. 170-190.

⁵⁶ See Goff. Op. cit. P. 57; Kononenko. Images of a scorpion ... pp. 100-101.

⁵⁷ Frendenberg. U k op. p. 107.

⁵⁸ According to O. M. Freudenberg, in the archaic ritual the metaphors of "food", "struggle" and "procession" are equated and semantically identified (Uk. soch. pp. 64-67, 73-74, 134-137).

⁵⁹ Boehmer. Op. cit. N 280.

page 134

examples of combining "processions" and "feasts" are given by many Sumerian reliefs and the "Ur standard" 61 .

Moreover, since these metaphors referred to the same rituals and expressed the general idea of worshipping deities, the compositional and plot schemes were not only complementary, but also interchangeable. If at the end of the IV millennium BC all three of these schemes co-existed, then in the Early Dynastic period the main place on the seals was occupied by the "frieze of the combatants", the "processions" were practically not depicted (except for individual scenes of sacrifice, semantically and compositionally close to ritual processions), and images of the meal reappear only in the glyptic of the Ur period "Royal tombs", and in this group of seals, the scenes of the "feast "are quantitatively comparable to the"frieze of the combatants". It should be noted that the inscriptions placed on these cylinders indicate that they belong to persons of high status (for example, the priestess of Puabi). The field of these samples is divided into two registers that contain groups of figures of the same appearance; these groups are often not formally related, but can mirror each other ^.62 Often, within the same print, a "feast" is combined with fight scenes. However, the iconographic innovations of the "school of royal carvers" were not continued in the works of the masters of the First dynasty of Ur, who gave priority to the"frieze of the fighting men". "Pir" again appears only on the Lagash seals that make up the main group of the pre-Akkadian glyptic (RD Shs). Several prints indicate a temporary revival of interest in the depiction of the ritual meal and represent scenes" with goblets", expanded by the figures of servants ^.63 The composition on these prints is divided into registers, and the modeling of figures is simplified, "fluent" and gives the impression of inept work. It is unlikely that the rituals in Ur and Lagash differed significantly; rather, due to some circumstances, attention was paid primarily to scenes of mythological struggle or temple actions, for which the formal embodiment was the scenes of the "frieze of the combatants" - this scheme probably turned out to be the most expressive for transmitting the rite in the glyptic during this period. At the beginning of the Akkadian period, the " frieze of the combatants "and the" frieze-shaped procession "scheme co-exist, and the" feast "disappears from the carvers' repertoire; by the end of the third millennium BC, the" processions " that conveyed the hierarchy of characters replace all other schemes.

Thus, the images on Mesopotamian seals did not simply relate to myths and rituals, but metaphorically expressed the structural elements of the latter, and despite all the plot and figurative differences, these metaphors were semantically identical. The means of visual embodiment of these metaphors in the glyptic were the plot-compositional schemes that developed by the end of the IV millennium and existed throughout the III millennium BC, complementing and replacing each other.

SUBJECT AND COMPOSITIONAL PATTERNS IN MESOPOTAMIAN GLYPTICS

Ye.I. Kononenko

The images of Mesopotamian seals expressed metaphorically structural elements of myths and rites. In spite of the variability of subjects and forms these metaphors were crystallized in several iconographical patterns. The article analyzes the main subject and compositional patterns of the glyptics

⁶⁰ GMA. PI. 83, 88-89.

⁶¹ Cf.: "The apparent disjointness of individual episodes or motives turns out to be a coherent system in which all parts are semantically equal to each other and only variously formed-the result of thinking stringing identical meanings, objectively different" (Freudenberg. U k op. p. 108).

⁶² GMA. N 1148.

⁶³ GMA. N 1105-1107.

page 135

of the IIIrd mill. ВС corresponding to three "structural acts" of archaic attitude (pointed out by О.М. Freidenberg) transformed into visual metaphors: eating, fighting and procession. The metaphor of eating was embodied in the scenes of ritual feast which are found in reliefs and glyptics since the Ubaid period through the Akkadian period. The idea of fighting was expressed by the "defending of garden" motif, which took shape of the "frieze of the fighting" in Summerian glyptics. The depictions of procession were transformed into the pattern of "frieze procession", which became one of the chief compositional types of Akkadian glyptics and supplanted all the other patterns by the end of the IIIrd mill. ВС. These iconographical schemes proved to be a universal means to express the chaging world attitudes in pictorial representation. Expressing the general idea of service to the deities, they could be combined to form highly variable and complicated compositions and were mutually complementary and even interchangeable.

Permanent link to this publication: