Statistics
| Number of Journals | 22 |
| Number of Issues | 501 |
| Number of Articles | 5,252 |
| Article View | 9,906,545 |
| PDF Download | 6,602,422 |
The Semiotics of Central Zagros Iron Age Pins Head | ||
| پژوهش های باستان شناسی ایران | ||
| Article 5, Volume 9, Issue 23, February 2020, Pages 71-90 PDF (1.12 M) | ||
| DOI: 10.22084/nbsh.2019.18606.1909 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Mohammad Hasan Salek Akbari* 1; alireza Hojabri Nobari2; REZA Afhami3 | ||
| 1M.A. Student in Archaeology, Tarbiat Modares University | ||
| 2Professor, Department of Archaeology in Tarbiat Modares University | ||
| 3Associate Professor, Department of Art Studies, Tarbiat Modares University | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Pins of Central Zagros in Iron Age are categorized into two main groups of Straight Pins and Headed Pins. The second group has three subgroups: 1-Castting Pinheads, 2- Openwork Pinheads and 3- Dis-headed Pins. These Pinheads contain various motifs such as humans, animals, imaginary creatures combined, herbs, geometric and abstract shapes. many scholars began to propose various interpretations concerning the nature, function, and symbolic meanings of these motifs. Among them, one can point out to the theories that attributed them to Mesopotamian gods & Iranian gods and myths. None of the ideas has been presented based on the analysis of all sorts of disc-headed pins; therefore, they are not able to provide a fairly comprehensive theory that can be regarded as true for all of them and /or present a viewpoint about the beliefs of those people who made them. Therefore, in the present study, as a substitute for the traditional symbols of these works, the method of Saussure’s structuralism semiotic method was used and 145 disc-headed pin from various museums of the world were studied. Trying to achieve common semantic categories, the analysis process was based on analyzing the structural relationships of the set of designs on the pinheads including, A. go togetherness (rational relations between the motifs) and B. replacement (the possibility of presenting one motif as another). The results of the analysis indicate three possible categorizations such as groups of male, female, and human-like central motifs and separate motifs associated with each of these groups. Another group of pins also displays common motifs between women and men’s groups in the form of a common affiliation with the domination of the female groups on the male groups conveying concepts such as bonding and birth. With regard to the characteristics of the eastern state of art, these groups can be attributed, respectively, to female and male goddesses, as well as pseudo- humans with horns, the underworld god who is neuter and dominates both male and female group. Keywords: Central Zagros Pins, Head-Pin Motifs, Saussure’s Semiotic Method, Syntagmatic & Paradigmatic. Introduction Pins of Central Zagros in Iron Age are categorized into two main groups of Straight Pins and Headed Pins. The second group has three subgroups: 1-Castting Pinheads, 2- Openwork Pinheads and 3- Dis-headed Pins. These Pinheads contain various motifs such as humans, animals, imaginary creatures combined, herbs, geometric and abstract shapes. many scholars began to propose various interpretations concerning the nature, function, and symbolic meanings of these motifs. Among them, one can point out to the theories that attributed them to Mesopotamian gods & Iranian gods and myths. None of the ideas has been presented based on the analysis of all sorts of disc-headed pins; therefore, they are not able to provide a fairly comprehensive theory that can be regarded as true for all of them and /or present a viewpoint about the beliefs of those people who made them. The question of this research should be to review the motifs of this pins with the aim of providing a new semiotic interpretation the motifs that were applied on the pins head. The hypothesis of the present study is also existence of a comprehensive and orderly semiotic system on this pins head in which the motifs are depicted corresponding to different gods. Identified Traces Central Zagros pins are part of the Luristan bronzes with stunning motifs on their pins head. These motifs reflect the thoughts of the people who made and used them. In relation to these motifs, various theories have been put forward which are all based on traditional semiotics and do not provide any comprehensive theory. In this research we created a set of pins head and trying to achieve common semantic categories, the analysis process was based on analyzing the structural relationships of the set of designs on the pinheads including, A. go togetherness (rational relations between the motifs) and B. replacement (the possibility of presenting one motif as another). The results of the analysis indicate three possible categorizations such as groups of male, female, and human-like central motifs and separate motifs associated with each of these groups. Another group of pins also displays common motifs between women and men’s groups in the form of a common affiliation with the domination of the female groups on the male groups conveying concepts such as bonding and birth. With regard to the characteristics of the eastern state of art, these groups can be attributed, respectively, to female and male goddesses, as well as pseudo- humans with horns, the underworld god who is neuter and dominates both male and female group. Conclusion Pins of Central Zagros in Iron Age are categorized into two main groups of Straight Pins and Headed Pins. The second group has three subgroups: 1-Castting Pinheads, 2- Openwork Pinheads and 3- Dis-headed Pins. These Pinheads contain various motifs such as humans, animals, imaginary creatures combined, herbs, geometric and abstract shapes. many scholars began to propose various interpretations concerning the nature, function, and symbolic meanings of these motifs. Among them, one can point out to the theories that attributed them to Mesopotamian gods & Iranian gods and myths. None of the ideas has been presented based on the analysis of all sorts of disc-headed pins; therefore, they are not able to provide a fairly comprehensive theory that can be regarded as true for all of them and /or present a viewpoint about the beliefs of ancient men who made them. Therefore, in the present study, as a substitute for the traditional symbols of these works, the method of Saussure’s structuralism semiotic method was used and 145 disc-headed pin from various museums of the world were studied. Trying to achieve common semantic categories, the analysis process was based on analyzing the structural relationships of the set of designs on the pinheads including, A. go togetherness (rational relations between the motifs) and B. replacement (the possibility of presenting one motif as another). The results of the analysis indicate three possible categorizations such as groups of male, female, and human-like central motifs and separate motifs associated with each of these groups. Another group of pins also displays common motifs between women and men’s groups in the form of a common affiliation with the domination of the female groups on the male groups conveying concepts such as bonding and birth. With regard to the characteristics of the eastern state of art, these groups can be attributed, respectively, to female and male goddesses, as well as pseudo- humans with horns, the underworld god who is neuter and dominates both male and female group. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Central Zagros Pins; Head-Pin Motifs; Saussure’s Semiotic Method; Syntagmatic & Paradigmatic | ||
| References | ||
|
اورلت، برونو، 1392، عصر آهن اولیه در پشتکوه لرستان. مترجمان: کمالالدین نیکنامی و امیر ساعدموچشی، تهران: سمت. - پرادا، ادیت، ، هنر ایران باستان(تمدنهای پیش از اسلام). مترجم: یوسف مجیدزاده، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران. - چندلر، دانیل، 1387، مبانی نشانهشناسی. مترجم: مهدی پارسا، تهران: انتشارات سوره مهر. - دولتآبادی، هوشنگ، 1379، جای پای زُروان، خدای بخت و تقدیر. تهران: انتشارات نی. - ضمیران، محمد، 1383، درآمدی بر نشانهشناسی هنر. تهران: نشر قصه. - کالمایر، پیتر، 1376، مفرغهای قابل تاریخگذاری لرستان و کرمانشاه. مترجم: محمد عاصمی، تهران :سازمان میراث فرهنگی کشور. - کومن، فرانتس، 1380، آیین پر رمز و راز میترایی. ترجمه و پژوهش: هاشم رضی، انتشارت بهجت. - گدار، آندره، (و جمعی از نویسندگان)، 1371، آثار ایران. مترجم: ابوالحسن سروقد مقدّم، مشهد: انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی، چاپ دوم. - گدار،آندره، 1358، هنر ایران (با تجدید نظر)، مترجم: بهروز حبیبی، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه ملی ایران. - ژیران، ف.؛ دلاپورت، ل.؛ و لاگوئه، گ.، 1389، اساطیر آشور و بابل. ابوالقاسم اسماعیلپور، تهران: انتشارات قطره. - ماسکارلا، اسکار وایت، 1387، برنز و آهنهای حسنلو. مترجم: علی صدرایی و صمد علیون، گنجینه هنر. - مجیدزاده، یوسف، 1372، تاریخ وتمدن بینالنهرین. جلد دوم، «تاریخ فرهنگی- اجتماعی». تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی. - مجیدزاده، یوسف، 1375، «تاریخگذاری سرسنجاقهای مفرغی لرستان». مفرغهای لرستان، جلد اول. گردآورنده: سید فرید قاسمی، خرمآباد: انتشارات پیغام، صص: 105-128، - مجیدزاده، یوسف، 1380، تاریخ وتمدن بینالنهرین. جلد سوم، «هنر و معماری». تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی. - ملازاده، کاظم، 1394، «تأثیر کاربرد ساختههای آهنی در پیشرفت فناوری و تحولات اجتماعی و اقتصادی جوامع عصر آهن پایانی (با تأکید بر غرب و شمالغرب ایران)». جامعهشناسی تاریخی، دورهی 7، شمـارهی 1، بهار و تابستان، صص: 226-227 - موری، پی. ار. اس، 1379، زیرخاکیهای مفرغی قدیم ایران. مترجم: علی داراب بیگی، کرمانشاه: انتشارات کرمانشاه.
- Amiet, P. , 1974, ‘Un carquois du Luristan”. Syria 51, no. Fasc. 3/4: 243-251. - Ayazi, S., 2008, Discـheaded Bronze Pins from Luristan: A Symbol of Ancient Iran's Art. Legat. - Black, J. & Green, A., 1992, Gods, Demons and Symbols. University of Texas press. - Dussaud, R. 1949, “Anciens bronzes du Louristan et cultes iraniens”.Syria 26, no. Fasc. 3/4: 196ـ229. - Dussaud, R., 1934, “Ceinture en bronze du Louristan avec scènes de chasse”. Syria, Archéologie, Art et Histoire 15, no. 2: 187ـ199. - Ghirshman, R., 1958, “Notes Iraniennes VIII. Le Dieu Zurvan sur les Bronzes du Luristan”. Artibus Asiae 21, no. 1: 37ـ42. - Godard, A., & Rogers, M., 1965, “The Art of Iran”. Translated by: Michael Heron. - Moorey, P. R. S., 1975, “Some Elaborately Decorated Bronze Quiver Plaques Made in Luristan, c. 750–650 B.C.”. Iran 13, no. 1: 19ـ29. - Muscarella, O. W., 1988, Bronze and iron: ancient Near Eastern artifacts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Metropolitan Museum of Art. - Overlaet, B., 2004, Luristan metalwork in the Iron Age. Persia’s ancient splendour, mining, handicraft and archaeology, Deutsches Bergbau—Museum, Bochum: 328ـ38. - Moorey, P. R. S., 1977, “A Note on PreـAchaemenid Bronze StandardـTops from Western Iran”. Iran 15: 141ـ146. - Schmidt, E. F., 1989, Maurits Nanning van Loon, and Hans H. Curvers. The Holmes Expeditions to Luristan. No. 108. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. - Van Buren, L. & Douglas, E., 1954, “BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN RELIGION”. By SH Hooke (World Religions, ed. by Professor EO James). London, Hutchinson's University Library, 1953, pp. XII, 128. Price, 8s. 6d. Antiquity 28, no. 110: 119ـ121. - Los Angeles County Museum of Art (April 2019) From https://collections.La.org/search/site/pins - The Metropolitan Museum of Art (Apri l2019) From https://www.metmuseum.org/pin - Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (April 2019) From - https://www.mfa.org/collections/object/rosetteـpin | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 708 PDF Download: 1,985 |
||