СФЕРОКОНИЧЕСКИЕ СОСУДЫ ЦАРЕВСКОГО ГОРОДИЩА

Сфероконические сосуды – особая категория посуды полифункционального назначения, часто встречающаяся на средневековых поволжских памятниках археологии. В статье рассматриваются основные типы сфероконусов Царевского городища, хранящиеся в Археологическом музее Казанского федерального университета, Волгоградском областном краеведческом музее, Государственном Эрмитаже, а также форма из камня для изготовления конусообразных сосудов. Обзор этих изделий в контексте изучения сфероконических сосудов с других золотоордынских памятников позволяет установить особенности их бытования на нижневолжских памятниках. ЛИТЕРАТУРААбызова Е.Н. К вопросу о сфероконусах из Старого Орхея и Костешт // Археологические исследования в Молдавии в 1977-1978 гг. / Отв. ред. П.П. Бырня. Кишинев: Штиинца, 1982. С. 171–174.Алпаткина Т.Г. Место стеклянных сфероконусов из Золотой Орды в общей классификации этого вида ремесленных изделий // Золотоордынская цивилизация. Вып. 4 / Отв. ред. И.М. Миргалеев. Казань: Фолиант; Институт истории им. Ш. Марджани АН РТ, 2011. С. 238–244.Валиулина С.И. Стекло Волжской Булгарии (по материалам Билярского городища). Казань: КГУ им. В.И. Ульянова-Ленина, 2005. 280 с.Виноградов З.З. Сфероконические сосуды с узким горловым отверстием // Казанский музейный вестник. 1922. №2. С. 75–119.Волков И.В. Химическая посуда в золотоордынских городах // 125 лет обществу археологии, истории и этнографии при Казанском университете. Проблемы историко-культурного развития Волго-Уральского региона. Археологические исследования: сб. научных докладов и сообщений. Ч. 1 / Под ред. С.И. Валиулиной. Казань: КГУ, 2004. С. 145–149.Джанполадян Р.М. Сфероконические сосуды из Двина и Ани // СА. 1958. №1. С. 201–213.Джанполадян Р.М. Сфероконические сосуды из Двина и Ани. Ереван: АН АрмССР, 1982. 50 с.Зиливинская Э.Д., Васильев Д.В., Гречкина Т.Ю. Раскопки на городище Самосделка в астраханской области в 2000-2004 гг. // РА. 2006. №4. С. 24–35.Йосифов Д. За технологичните особености на каменните калъпи от София // Изследвания по българска средновековна археология / Отг. ред. П. Георгиев. Велико Търново: Фабер, 2007. С. 396–404.Кравченко A.A. Средневековый Белгород на Днестре (конец XIII–XIV в.). Киев: Наукова думка, 1986. 186 с.Кротков А.А. Сфероконические сосуды из Археологического Отдела Саратовского Государственного Областного музея // Труды Нижне-Волжского областного научного общества. Саратов, 1926. Вып. 35, ч. 1. С. 51–66.Ленц Э. О глиняных сосудах с коническим дном, находимых в пределах мусульманского востока // ЗВОРАО. Т. 15, Вып. 4. СПб.: Типография Императорской Академии Наук, 1904.. С. 101–115.Масловский А.Н. Керамический комплекс Азака.Краткая характеристика // Историко-археологические исследования в г. Азове и на Нижнем Дону в 2004 году. Вып. 21. / Отв. ред. В.Я. Кияшко.Азов: Азовский музей-заповедник, 2006. С. 417–420.Недашковский Л.Ф. Золотоордынский город Укек и его округа. М.: Восточная литература, 2000. 224 с.Нуретдинова А.Р. Сфероконические сосуды из старых собраний (XIX – начало XX вв.) музеев России. Казань: Изд-во Казан. ун-та, 2018. 108 с. URL: https://shelly.kpfu.ru/e-ksu/docs/F_1521378007/Sferokonusy_elektr..izdanie.pdf (дата обращения: 31.05.2021). Нуретдинова А.Р. Типология сферо-конических сосудов Волжской Булгарии // Урало-Поволжье в древности и средневековье. Материалы международной научной конференции V Халиковские чтения / Археология Евразийских степей. Вып. 11 / Отв. ред. Ф.Ш. Хузин. Казань: Институт истории АН РТ, 2011. С. 150-160.Пигарев Е.М. Сфероконические сосуды из фондов Астраханского краеведческого музея-заповедника // Древности Волго-донских степей Вып. 4. / Ред. В.И. Мамонтов. Волгоград: Перемена, 1994. С. 210–215.Полевой Л.Л. Городское гончарство Пруто-Днестровья в XIV в.: по материалам раскопок гончарного квартала на поселении Костешны. Кишинев: АН МолдССР, 1969. 211 С. 135–136.Ртвеладзе Э.В. Сфероконические сосуды из Маджар // СА. 1974. №4. С. 280–284.Самашев З., Кузнецова О., Плахов В. Керамика Сарайчика ( на казахском, русском и английском языках). Алматы: ZUR advertizing, 2008. 264 сСкэнлон Дж.Т. Заметка о фатимидско-сельджукской торговле // Мусульманский мир / Отв. ред. В.В. Наумкин, М.Б. Пиотровский. М.: Наука, 1981. С. 282–291.Станчева М. Каменни калъпи за сфероконуси от София // Археология. 1961. № 1. С. 22–27.Древние памятники, отрываемые в Царевском уезде Саратовской губернии // ЖМВД. Спб., 1843. Ч. II. С. 426–430.Трубникова Н.В. Обломок сфероконического сосуда из Булгар // Сборник статей по археологии СССР. Труды ГИМ. Вып. XI / Под ред. Д.Н. Эдинга. М.: Изд-во ГИМ, 1940. С. 137–139.Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Научный отчет о раскопках 1962 г. на городище Сарай-Берке – столицы Золотой Орды / Архив ВОКМ. Д. 12.Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Научный отчет о раскопках на Царевском городище /Сарай-Берке/ в 1964 г. / Архив ВОКМ. Д. 17.Федоров-Давыдов Г. А. Золотоордынские города Поволжья. М.: Изд. МГУ, 1994. 232 с.Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Раскопки Нового Сарая в 1959 – 1962 гг. // СА. 1964. № 1. С. 248–271.Федоров-Давыдов Г.А., Вайнер И.С. Мухамадиев А.Г. Археологические исследования Царевского городища (Новый Сарай) // Поволжье в средние века / Отв. ред. А.П. Смирнов. М.: Наука, 1970. С. 68–171.Feherwari G. Ceramics of the Islamic World inthe Tareg Rajab Museum. I.B. Tauris. London, New York, 2000. 399 p.Ettinghausen R. The uses of sphero-conical vessels in the Muslim East // Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 1965. V. XXIV, № 3. P. 218–229.Mănucu-Adameşteanu Gh. Din nou despre vasele sferoconice in lumina descoperirilor din nordul Dobrogei // Peuce: rapoarte, cataloage, studiişi note de istorieşi arheologie. 1984. Peuce IX (seria istorie). P. 363–374, 716–723.Monchamp J. Sphero-conical Vessels from the Ayyubid Wall in Cairo: A Typology (11th–15th c.) // Journal of Islamic Archaeology. 2016. Vol. 3, № 2. P. 195–207.Nicolle D. Medieval Islamic Fire Grenades: Further Evidence from a Military Context // Journal of Islamic Archaeology. 2016. Vol. 3, № 2. P. 163–177.Sharvit J. The sphero-conical vessels // IAA Report. Paneas. Vol. II. Small finds and other studies. 2007. № 38. P. 101–112. Stănică A.-D., Szmoniewski B.S. The sphero-conical vessels from Lower Danube in the ligth of new discoveries from Isaccea, county Tulcea, Romania // Sprawozdania Archeologiczne. 2016. № 68. P. 327–344.Valiulina S. Medieval workshop of an alchemist, Jeweller and Glassmaker in Bilyar (Middle Volga Region, Russian Federation) // Pamatky Archeologicke. 2016. Vol. 107. P. 237–278.Vezzoli V. Sphero-conical Vessels from Baalbek: A Diverse and Challenging Collection // Journal of Islamic Archaeology. 2016. Vol. 3, № 2. P. 209–231.Whitcomb D. A Note on “Grenades” as Fire-starter Flasks // Journal of Islamic Archaeology. 2016. Vol. 3, № 2. P. 179–186.Wulzinger K., Wittek P., Sarre F. Tongranaten oder Handbrandgeschosse // Das islamische Milet. Berlin; Leipzig, 1935. S. 76–78.

Are Postcolonial Narratives useful in Al-Andalus Archaeology?.

Archaeological investigations of al-Andalus has become increasingly important in medieval studies, but it has traditionally been left out of the research agenda of European medieval archaeology. This is due to its exoticism and not fitting in well with the construction of a European identity and Spanish national history based on Christian expansion and the “Reconquest” process. At the same time, due to the geographical location and geopolitical position of the Iberian Peninsula within the “West”, scholars working on Islamic archaeology have dedicated less attention to al-Andalus than to other territories. Several factors pose a challenge for current research: the possibility of confrontation with feudal societies; the increasing importance given to technological transfer all along al-Andalus; religious, economic and institutional differences within Christian territories; the importance given in recent years to the identity construction of alterity; and the strong impact that the Andalusi period had on the creation of current landscapes, especially due to irrigated agriculture. This paper tries to reflect on and analyze the historiographical marginality of al-Andalus in both European medieval archaeology and Islamic archaeology. The aim is to understand how we have built an international narrative of the marginality of a territory that is theoretically outside Europe and outside the environment in which classical Islam developed, based mainly on literature produced in English on this matter. In short, this paper poses the question of whether postcolonial theory is a valid category of analysis for al-Andalus.

Ifriqiya and the Central Maghreb

North Africa played a pivotal part in the development of Islamic archaeology as a discipline through the important French excavations at the Qal’a of the Beni Hammad in Algeria in the late 19th century, one of the earliest excavations at an Islamic site by European archaeologists anywhere in the Islamic world. Despite this early promise, for most of the 20th century, the Islamic period was the preserve of art historians, with only a handful of small-scale excavations conducted at the spectacular palatial-cities, mosques, ribats, and fortresses of Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya. Since the 1990s, there has been a significant rise in the number of projects and amount of evidence available, as well as a new interest in revisiting old questions and models for the Islamic period. This chapter charts the development of Islamic archaeology and lays out the key scholarly debates in Ifriqiya and the central Maghreb, broadly understood as encompassing modern-day Tunisia, Algeria, and western coastal Libya.

The Maghreb al-Aqsa

Islamic archaeology in Morocco has its roots in the colonial period and developed in concert with architectural and urban studies of the imperial cities of Fes, Marrakech, and Meknes. For many years, it remained the poor relation to classical archaeology, and it was only in the 1970s and 1980s that systematic excavations began at Islamic sites. Since then, there has been a significant rise in the number of projects and amount of evidence available for urban and rural sites, particularly between the 8th and 14th centuries, though many challenges remain in terms of funding, training, finds analysis, and the use of new scientific technologies. This chapter charts the development of Islamic archaeology and lays out the key developments in urban and rural archaeology and the study of material culture in Morocco.

The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Archaeology

Born from the fields of Islamic art and architectural history, the archaeological study of the Islamic societies is a relatively young discipline. With its roots in the colonial periods of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, its rapid development since the 1980s warrants a reevaluation of where the field stands today. This Handbook represents for the first time a survey of Islamic archaeology on a global scale, describing its disciplinary development and offering candid critiques of the state of the field today in the Central Islamic Lands, the Islamic West, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Asia. The international contributors to the volume address such themes as the timing and process of Islamization, the problems of periodization and regionalism in material culture, cities and countryside, cultural hybridity, cultural and religious diversity, natural resource management, international trade in the later historical periods, and migration. Critical assessments of the ways in which archaeologists today engage with Islamic cultural heritage and local communities closes the volume, highlighting the ethical issues related to studying living cultures and religions.

Southern Syria

Traditionally associated with the “Holy Land” and the target of early scientific investigations, southern Syria is one of the most intensively studied regions by archaeologists. Islamic archaeology has very old roots here, and many of the debates that have driven development of the field arose first in this region. This chapter, focusing primarily on Palestine and the Transjordan, evaluates the contributions to the field by archaeologists working there and critiques recent fieldwork as it informs such highly debated topics as Islamization, the collapse of the Late Antique polis, the militarization of frontiers, and rural resilience in times of political chaos. A special emphasis is placed on environmental and landscape research that has been opening new windows on rural society and the later historical periods.

Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia’s Islamic archaeology remains unexplored and poorly understood. A perception even persists amongst some scholars that the region does not constitute fertile ground for the archaeologist, with its high humidity destroying valuable remains. This chapter, however, demonstrates that Southeast Asia is home to a fascinating array of early Islamic artifacts. Focusing on the sites of four early Southeast Asian Islamic kingdoms, namely Barus, Lambri, Samudera-Pasai, and Brunei, this chapter considers their archaeology in the context of recent claims that Muslims from China were involved in the region’s Islamization. Consonant with conversion, the chapter demonstrates that all four locations did indeed experience a connection of some sort with China. Most notably, all the sites (except Samudera-Pasai, for which no systematic ceramic evidence is available) yielded considerable amounts of Chinese pottery, pre-modern China’s principal export item. Three of the sites, Lambri, Samudera-Pasai, and Brunei, also witnessed the utilization of numerous Chinese artistic motifs in association with their earliest Islamic artifacts. Most strikingly, however, Brunei provides strong evidence not only of a much earlier sultanate than previously suspected but also of a direct connection with the major Chinese port of Quanzhou. While continually stressing that the presence of Chinese trade items and/or cultural influences does not establish a Chinese (Muslim or otherwise) presence at the examined locations, they do demonstrate that Southeast Asia’s first Muslim kingdoms emerged within an environment suffuse with Chinese trade goods and at a time when Chinese cultural influences were being freely adopted by the local Muslim population.

Central Asia

This chapter explores the Islamic archaeology of Central Asia. Central Asian medieval ities were investigated by Russian researchers since the last quarter of the 19th century but the results of these excavations remain little known in the west. The predominance of historical survey studies, extensive excavations, and an impressive number of publications provides a basis for understanding the organization and distribution of the Islamic Central Asian cities. Their interactions within this vast territory and with the Middle East emerge in contemporary debates. Trade plays a major role in these contacts, and the sedentary-nomadic interface stimulated the economy. Nevertheless, few studies bring together the work carried out over the long term and enable an understanding of the variation and evolution of Islamic trade and urbanism in Central Asia. Outlines of the medieval societies are known, but the details remain unclear. This chapter follows the main river basins (Amu Darya and Syr Daria) and steppic and desert interfaces to understand the basis and extent of Russian archeology in Central Asia from the Tsarist period (c. 1850–1917) until today. The construction of a field of Central Asian Islamic archaeology and the main challenges confronting researchers in the five Central Asian republics are also considered.

Central Sudan

In view of the paucity of research, the Islamic archaeology of the Central Sudan and Sahel remains one of the less well known of the African continent. While this also applies to the material legacy of the past six centuries, it is particularly sites and remains from the early period of Islamic influence in the region that are virtually unexplored. The earliest and most expressive elements of the archaeology of Islam in the Central Sudan and Sahel are elite sites related to powerful indigenous states: Kanem-Borno around Lake Chad and the Hausa city-states to the west. In view of their pivotal role in the introduction and propagation of the new religion and culture, the archaeology of those states is particularly significant when addressing the theme. Taking into account the current absence of a comprehensive body of archaeological evidence, this chapter relies on historical knowledge and interpretation as background to discussing a range of archaeological sites, structures, and features that are relevant material expressions of the impact of early and late Arab-Islamic influence in the region. The authors conclude by emphasizing the still untapped, enormous potential of research on the archaeology of Islam in the Central Sudan and Sahel.