Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 4 | 5 || 7 |


-- [ Страница 6 ] --

The width of walls is 0,8 m. At the westen wall laye in one bick has been eseved, at the noth-westen cone wee fixed fou layes of bicks on clay base.

Mausoleum is quadangula in sizes 55 m diected by its cone to the sides of Univese. In the cente of mausoleum was situated the buial of sub tiangle fom and it was diected by the line East-West. Fagments of aw bicks and bunt bicks, emains of wooden constuctions wee found in the obstuction. Fagment of ceamic to at of mausoleum with geen glaze was found in a filling. A woman was buied in a it in sizes 2,250,81,0 m in olonged osition on he back with head tuned to the Noth-West and face tuned uwad.

Mausoleum #3 is situated in 80m to the south. Befoe excavations it had the fom of a hill in sizes 2116 m and height 1 mete. Outwad sizes of mausoleum ae 98,5 m, inne ones ae 76,5 m. The walls of mausoleum ae built of bunt bicks on black silt gound solution without the base. The width of the emained walls is fom 1,02 to 1,06 m. They ae fomed of fou bicks altenately. The bick is quadangula with sizes 24255 cm, 26255,5 cm and 25,5266 cm.

Entance in width 0,8 m was fixed in the south-westen wall. In the cente of mausoleum was situated the buial it (#5), at the southen cone-thee buial its (#6-8). Cental buial was obbed.

Cental it had sub ectangula fom and it was diected by the line South-East-NothWest. Layes of bicks suounded the buial it. In the filling of a it was mixtue of gound and a big quantity of laste fagments. On some of them wee eseved the taces of hebal atten made by dak blue, ed, light geen and yellow colos.

Chapter IV Buial chambe had a fom of buial vault made of aw bicks. The floo of buial vault was coveed by aw bicks in thickness 5 cm. Deth of buial it is 1,3m. In the westen cone wee ut the bones of not whole skeleton of a man: bones of shoulde, shoulde blades and seveal ibbons.

Thee buial its situated in one ow wee excavated at the southen cone of mausoleum.

One of them (#6) contained the buial of a child. The buial #7 was cenotah.

Burial #8 was established exactly at the entance to mausoleum. The sizes of it ae 2,00,740,9 m. In a filling wee found fagments of bicks. On the bottom unde long nothen wall was a buial of a man with head tuned to the Noth-West.

The inteesting ae fagments of alabaste lasteing found in the filling and in obstuction of cental buial #5. Nea the it wee found small fagments of glazed iala decoated by hebal onamentation made by bown and geen glaze and fagments of ceamic to at of mausoleum with geen glaze.

Mausoleum is situated on the westen bank of a site. It was a hill of oval fom in sizes 1510 m, height 0,5 m. The nothen half of a hill, 4 buial its wee discoveed and excavated.

Pit #1 is diected by the line West-East. The bottom of it is situated in 1,4 m fom to at. The sizes of it ae 1,251,0 m and in deth 1,4 m.The bottom was coveed by longitudinal laid boads. Cove of walls was built on them of bicks of diffeent sizes. Six layes of bicks wee in laye in height 0,5m. Low ow of longitudinal walls was fomed of bicks in sizes 36258cm.High ow consisted of bicks in sizes 362,56 cm. Side walls of buial chambe ae built of bicks in sizes 252015 cm. The bicks wee fixed by yellow clay solution. Bick laye on to had ovelaing made of bicks ut in a fom of “fu-tee”.

Pat of them was destoyed and elaced. On the bottom of buial chambe was excavated the buial of a man olonged on back with ams along the body with head tuned to the west and face tuned to the South.

Pit #4 is situated to the west and it is diected by long axis by the line Noth-South.

The it on the level of mausoleum’s floo on to was ovelaed by hoizontal laye of aw bicks. The at of them felt inside the filling. On the bottom (1,4 m) the it had the sizes 2,00,7 m. In its cente on wooden bedding was excavated the skeleton of a man tuned to the Noth with ams olonged along the body. The buial was accomanied by the itual food. At the noth-easten cone was ut a skull of a hose with muzzle tuned to the Noth.

At the ight shoulde was found a fagment of low jaw. So, the buial #4 is diected by head to the Noth and it was accomanied by two skulls of hoses.

Mausoleum #5 is situated on the south-westen cone of southen block’s bank. Befoe excavations it had the view of a buial mound in diamete 15 m and height 1m.

Mausoleum is quadangula in lan and its “otal” wall is diected by the line NothWest-South-East. The walls of mausoleum ae fomed of bicks on light clay solution. The sizes of bicks ae 40-4824-26 cm, 38-4422-28 cm.

Length and thickness of walls ae not simila: the nothen one is 6, 651,2 m; the westen one is 6,21,2 m; the easten one is 6,11,1 m; the southen one is 6,60,9 m.Inne sizes of mausoleum ae 4,54,3 m. The floo of mausoleum is coveed by thick lime laye.

Entance in width 0,8 m is situated in the middle of southen wall.

Mausoleums of Bozok site ae efeed to the tye of one camea quadangula in lan mausoleums. The walls ae built without the base, thickness of walls is 0,8-1,2 m.

Mausoleums ae built of bunt and aw bicks. It is ossible to establish that ovelaing of mausoleums is made of bunt bicks and cowned by the ceamic tos-kubbas coveed Memorial Architecture by dak geen and bight dak blue glaze. Kubbas by thei fom ae two ste and shee shaed.

Judging by the findings of caved bicks the smatest was the mausoleum #1. Its date (late XIII – fist half of the XIV cc.) is established by the findings of lain ion aow edges.

It is distinguished by comehensive building and decoative caved bicks. Pobably, this mausoleum had initially the otal with two semi-columns. It is oved by findings of mould bicks with ound shaed side.

Mausoleum #3 can be efeed to the XIII–XIV cc. We can suose that the site became the lace of a cemetey unde the cult-memoial comlex in the XIII centuy and buials wee been continued thee duing all XIV c.181 Mausoleum Janybek-Shalkar is situated in Akmola egion on a hill joining to the lake Janybek-Shalka.

Geneal sizes of constuction by axis ae 14,514 m. In the cente was situated the base of mausoleum in sizes 12,27,5 m. Mausoleum is two camea and it is diected by the line Noth-East-South-West. Its main at has the ectangula fom in sizes 9,27,5 m with joint small ectangula camea in sizes 4,53,0 m in the noth-easten side wall.

Entance to mausoleum is situated fom the south-westen side. It is “deeened” inside the wings of otal which ae the continuation of long longitudinal walls going out fo two metes fom the south-westen wall of mausoleum. The width of otal walls is 2 m. Fom the both sides they ound the squae in sizes 3,52,0 m in font of the entance. The floo of entance squae is coveed by entagonal bicks. In the cente of otal squae was the entance to mausoleum. The width of entance is 0,8 m and it is maked by ste ass fom figue shaed and quadangula bicks of mausoleum’s floo.

Bick laye of mausoleum’s floo and the nothen cone of walls in thee laye bicks ae eseved well comaatively. The est walls ae fixed by the ints of bicks.

Judging by them, the walls of mausoleum wee in thickness 0,9-1,2 m and they ae ut of fou bicks in sizes 24-2624-275 cm. The taces of bicks ae in a fom of light stie with width 0,9m and they ae olonged along long nothen wall. The ints of bicks in a fom of small sections ae seen also along the southen wall which felt outwad and its emains in a fom of boken lates and ieces of ganch ae fixed in 3 metes fom mausoleum. Fagments of glazed lates fom mausoleum’s decoation combining elements of hebal onament and Aab lettes wee excavated on the level 0,6m along all length of its suface. Width of laye is not moe than 0,5 m. Boken bicks close the outwad fence and contous of buial it #4 which aeaed afte full excavation till gound eath.

Small camea of mausoleum (4,53,0 m) has the walls in width 1,2 m. Inne suface is coveed by the same entagonal bicks as well as the squae in font of the entance. Figue shaed bicks emained in ints. Fou buial its unde ##2-5 wee discoveed out of the bodes of mausoleum fom the easten side. The buial it #2 is situated at the south-easten cone of mausoleum. It has the laye of bunt and glazed bicks fom above. The it is diected by the line Noth-West –South-East in sizes 1,750,5-0,75 m. The it #3(1,750,5) is situated in the noth-easten section and joins to the westen wall of outwad fence. It is diected by the line Noth-Noth-West-South-South-East. Buial its #4 and#5 ae diected by the line Noth-West-South-East. They ae filled by fagments of bunt bicks, whole glazed lates and mixed boken ats. Pit#4(1,150,6 m) aeaed unde the southen wall of mausoleum unde the hea of boken bicks. Pit #5 in sizes 1,20,3 m was fixed in the noth-easten section out of the bodes of outwad fence.

Chapter IV Mausoleum is efeed to the tye of otal-cuola ones. Faade of mausoleum was decoated by glazed lates onamented by combination of vaious hebal and geometical attens. Toogahy of concentation of some kinds of lates gives the base to suose thei location in the dco of mausoleum. The stie of glazed geen late with eigahic onament could be situated ove the otal niche. The lates with ste geometical onamentation was situated highe the stie. The wings of otal wee coveed by ectangula glazed lates decoated by a ai of eight-edged stas with osettes and also glazed lates with simle geometical atten in a fom of caved thin lines. The ue at of long walls of mausoleum is decoated by the lates having caved atten in a fom of ectangula. Inne at of wings of otal on the cones of constuction is decoated by glazed lates with hebal onament182.

Gahical econstuction of mausoleum is esented.

Necropolis Buials and necoolis ae the most imotant achaeological souce, used unde the eseach of ancient and medieval histoy. Reseach of necoolis is vey imotant duing study of the eligions imaginations. It is influenced by two imotant factos, like ethnic eculiaities and ublic elations. Foming of taditions of buial ituals, like the mean of buial, buial and above buial constuction, accomanying inventoy is going in into tun though the eligion.

These henomena’s ae chaacteistic fo foming of buial actice and the society adoted Islam.

The bight changes in the buial actice ae seen clealy in Kazakhstan in the IX–XII cc.

and late, in connection with adotion of Islam by citizens, settled oulation, cattle-beedes and nomads.

Regettably, the level of study of necoolis of Islam eoch in Kazakhstan is not enough.

Secial lanning eseaches in that diection was almost not caied out, what, doubtless, wee the white sot in Kazakhstan achaeology.

Necropolis of Baba-Ata site is the buial gound, which is situated in 0,8 km to the south fom site’s citadel and it contains 19 buial mounds with loess embankments, situated ode less, nea each othe. Two buial mounds (#5, #12) wee evealed.

Squae in sizes 5,75,8 m, filled by 8-10 cm clay laye, diected to the sides of univese by cones was discoveed in the buial mound #12 in diamete 14 m, in height 0,6 m diectly unde the tuf. Unde the laye of clay thee was the fence with walls in thickness 0,8-1 m.

Aetue in width 0,5 m was established in the noth-easten wall. Fou ectangula buial vaults, situated aallel to the noth-westen wall wee situated inside the fence of the deth 0,95 m on the laye thickness 0 and 2 m of boken clay. Two of them ae fomed of aw bicks and two of them ae made of boken clay.

The fist buial vault in length 1,25 m with 0,6 m was fomed of aw bicks in sizes 40cm in height 5 ows of bicks without fixing solution.

The second buial vault, which was situated on distance 0,35 m fom the one, in length 1,25 m, was esented by the base with oened shot sides in height 0,3 m ovela by ut lain bicks in sizes 36158-9 cm and 42219 cm.

Two following clay boxes wee situated on distance 0,3 m fom the second buial vaults,

the next-one – one distance 0,5 m fom the thid one. The boxes had sizes consequently:

length 0,6 m width 0,63 m, height – 0,34; the second one – length and width – 0,37 m, height – 0,35 m.

Memorial Architecture Unde the laye of ahsa in thickness 0,2 m with boxes on to, on the deth gound, unde it – in the oosite fence’s secto thee wee situated two oval fom fences, fomed of aw bick and diected fom the Noth-West to the South-East. The both fences wee in height in height two bicks, the size of the fist one: length 1,55 m width of south-east. The both fences wee in height two bicks, the size of the fist one: length 1,55 m, width 0,68 m;

the second one – length 1,8 m, width of south-westen wall – 0,63 m, noth-easten – 0,82 m.

Thee wee no emains of buials inside them.

In the tuf laye of buial mound’s embankment thee wee found two boken ieces of vessels, one is thin walled, coveed by white angob and made on otte’s wheel of dense aste without admixtues, the second one – fom khum.

Pesence of clay laye above boxes oves, that they wee not obbed befoe the moment of building of fences and, obviously, tells about the absence of buials.

In the buial mound #5 in diamete 8 m, in height 0,2 m exactly unde the tuf laye aeaed contous of the ectangula fence, the nothen wall of which was fomed of boken clay and thee othes – of stones, fixed by clay. On the deth 1,2 m fom the cente thee was situated laying fom the west to the east, in the length 1,6 m, in width 0,45 m, in height 0,3 m made aw bicks in sizes 44-45229-10 cm, ut in thee ows lain without any solution.

Unde the laying thee was discoveed the buial it in deth 0,3 m with side hole in the southen wall. Domos is naow in width 0,45 m in length 1,8 m. In the side hole on the base of fine ebbles laid the skeleton in olonged osition, on back, width head to the west.

Thee wee not discoveed any inventoy duing the buial.

Excavated buial mounds can be dated by the X–XIV cc.

In the buial mound #12 thee is two layes of buials: low – two gounds its, coveed by bicks and ue – clay constuctions being something aveage between Moslem and buial vaults.

Tyical Moslem buial was discoveed in the buial mound #5.

Its location has the big imotance fo definition of the time of buial like the majoity of necoolis, left by citizens of towns it is situated not fa fom the walls of town which stoed its existence in the XIV – ealy XV c. Consequently, that date should be the ue bounday fo the buial mound #5 and ue bounday of the buial mound #12.

Low laye doubtless, was the ealiest, and can be efeed, judging by analogues, to the IX–X cc. The bicks in sizes 4044299-10 cm, used unde building constuction of ue laye of the buial mound #12, is chaacteistic fo the constuctions of all main hoizons of site and so it can not be the oientation fo dating. Buial its of low hoizon ae coveed by bicks in sizes 361810 cm, found mostly in low layes of citadel. Pobably, bicks of destoyed constuctions wee used fo thei building, what let to claify thei dating.

Buial mound embankments, and othe kinds of above buial constuctions, not containing buial, ae well known by achaeological and ethnogahical mateials of Kazakhstan and Cental Asia. Most likely it is necessay to efe them to the categoy of cenotahs, built in hono of elatives dead fa fom native land. It is inteesting to note, that suvivals of this taditions, a little bit changed, ae eseved among Uzbeks and Kazakh till cuent times. So, fo examle, duing visit by believes of buials of so called “saced” Akhmed Yasawi and Aslanbab, elatives of dead eole fa fom native land, build small hills of gound and dust nea the “sacificial” lace. Some Kazakh clans which live now in the egion of Tukestan have the tadition to install in the head of dead eole the wooden column, low at of which is on the bottom of buial it and ue one is slightly going out the buial hill. Imitation Chapter IV of such constuction is small hill nea the comlex of Akhmed Yasawi, with at into them “small sticks”183.

Necropolis of Keder town (site Kuiryktobe). The site Kuiyktobe situated in Ota oasis is identified with Kede town. Citizens of Kede built the Cathedal Mosque in the X c. Its emains wee found and situated. Mausoleum Aslanbab built in the XII c. was situated nea the site. The huge cemetey whee the buials wee done till the late XX c, is situated nea the above mentioned mausoleum. The ealy buials ae unde the buials of the eoch of the late Middle Ages and the Nea Time. The ealy Moslem cemetey on the embankments of the main channel of the VIII–XII cc. was discoveed to the south fom town in 1,5 km fom citadel.

Excavation I was established on the hill, whee 7 buials had been evealed. The buied wee olonged osition o on the ight side by the head tuned to the noth-west, by face to the south-south-west. Thei hands ae cuved in elbows o ut on beast. Thee was no inventoy. In buial #5, to the south of elvis bones thee was found bonze coin of Samanidian coinage184.

Excavation II was established on lain to of one of the hill. Raw bick lanning’s and emains of buied wee discoveed duing the suface investigation.

Cleaning with following widening of excavation squae evealed 12 buials in buialsvaults. Thei walls wee built of ow bicks Ovelas wee made of seveal bicks, ut acoss side walls of buial vaults, o of bicks, ut in decline acoss the side walls of buial-vaults.

Thee wee evealed comletely 5 of 12 buial-vaults. The deeds wee ut in olonged osition, on the ight side o on the back. Hands ae cuved in elbow and ut on beast.

Patial change fom the geneal scheme was noted in the buial 4, whee widely ut away hi and tibia bones of dead wee connected in bones of foot and fom the staight angle in the knee joint. Thee was no buial inventoy. Futhe deeening on the seaate sections of excavation showed, that majoity of the evealed buial-vaults ae situated on simila buial constuctions. One of fou buial-vaults was cleaed. The deceased was by the above descibed scheme. Two khumchas wee found on the level of that buial hoizon, lowe than the floo of buial 5.

Excavation III was established along inne sloe of the left bank of ancient iigational channel. Thee wee discoveed 10 buial constuctions and 7 of them wee cleaed. They ae not diffeent fom the buial-vaults fom excavation II by thei constuction, building mateial and ceemony of buial. On the westen edge of excavation, on the level of base of constuction thee wee found fou khumchas. The fifth one was lasteed by its side on the suface of buial-vault. Excavation was hot comleted till the eath185.

So, the mateials fom the above mentioned necoolis and also the data got unde study of buials in mausoleums, khanaka, give the ossibility to conside, that Moslem ceemony of buial among citizens was sead in the IX–XII cc.

It is known, that those, who adoted Islam, thee wee established thei own cemeteies, but the fist buials done by Islam ceemony, wee noted on the old town necoolis, fo examle, on the necoolis Djumakat, which functioned duing the long time – in the VI– IX cc., thee wee situated Moslem buials of the X c.186 Chapter V Artistic and Handicraft subjects Goods of metal A ticles made of metal like bonze, silve, gold amount a big gou of findings found duing excavations of medieval towns. They ae bacelets, finge ings, endants, amulets, belt set and hose haness. Pat of them has Aab inscitions.

Such findings ae objects of eseaches of achaeologists and secialists on eigahy.

The bight samle of such comlex wok in Kazakhstan science is aticle of V.Nastich devoted to the belt late fom Ota187, discoveed in statigahy excavation, in laye of the XII–XIV cc.188 The finding looks like a massive late in sizes 34.4 cm in a fom of ectangula shield with figuative edge in low at made of alloy of gold bonze, coveed by black colo atina.

Inscition in two lines by kuhic lettes in Aab language was laced on the facial side of late. The following was witten thee Range fom Allah.

The wod ange has seveal meanings in Russian language, like ange, ank. It can be inteeted like ublic osition.

The wod ange is esented not one time in Koan and it was used in the same meaning in connection with Allah, who distibutes eole by the levels o anks in hono o in unishment fo thei deals. It is doubtless, that inscition on the late is connected with the noted oems fom Koan189.

Kuhic style of inscition is known by eigahic monuments of Cental Asia and many of them ae dated clealy.

The following eigahic and numismatic monuments of the late X–XI cc. ae close to the discoveed late by style and eculiaities of inscition6 bonze fels [of moden Jambyl egion],dated by the X–XI cc.

So, the late is dated by the end of the XI–XII cc.190 Belt sets of Moslem eiod ae being found in athe big quantity, but thee ae known single samles of belts with eigahic foming.

Chapter V By the evidences of achaeological mateials and witten souces of the X–XI cc.

comosed belts wee widely used in the ancient and medieval eiods and in Ealy Moslem Cental Asia and Kazakhstan.

The evidences given above tell that among Tukic waios such lates wee also the secial sign of ange. It is oved also by the inscition on the late, whee it is witten, like eminde to the waio about his lace and obligations in the Moslem society191.

Tukic militay belts wee widely sead in Euasia. In the Moslem eoch, stating fom the time of the State of Samanidians that attibutes of militay equiment wee being develoed adot to the demands of a new ideology.

Needs of the Aab calihate and late of othe Moslem states, seaated fom it wee coveed in militay foces and wee coveed essentially at the exense of coming Tukic slaves fom Kazakhstan and Cental Asia. Afte the defeat of Samanidians thei ossessions wee divided between Kaakhanidian and Gaznevidian ules. Faab subub whee Ota town was situated, and neighboing with it Isidjab in 992-996 yy. wee included into the content of one of East-Kaakhanidian egions by the middle of the XI c.

V.N.Nastich made vey inteesting obsevation, seeing anthoomohic featues in foming of buckle, made by Aab lettes on the backgound of a buckle face in a head dess.

And he is ight, consideing, that in stylization of ictue on buckle with hel of lettes of Aab alhabet is seen e-Moslem tadition. In esent case it haened unde the influence of Moslem dogma on cultue and at of eole of Cental Asia192, whee Sunnite Islam, by the wods of A.N.Benshtam “took out all ainting of e-Islam time, giving the will of ainting to the maste in the field of onamental motives”193.

It is difficult to define the lace of oduction of these belts. But if to take into account infomation of Gadizi about thei oigin fom Tukestan, it is ossible to say, that the lace of thei oduction wee some of handicaft centes of the East Kaakhanidian state. High technical and atistic qualities of oduction of belt sets, judging by Ota late suose thei oduction in big town centes. Such centes ae called by al-Makdisi, like Fegana and Isidjab194.

At esent time some of such centes can be called suely enough.

It is Semiechie town Nawaket (Newaket), which is identified suely with the site Kasnaya Rechka. Duing obbey seaches with hel of metal seach devices thee was found on the site collection of atistic metal mostly fom ue layes (IX – ealy XIII cc.) The at of findings comes to the “makets of antique things”; othe ones ae in collections of scientific centes, in ivate collections. Aticles fom such collections (1100 samles) wee studied in the monogah of K.M.Baiakov, G.A.Tenovaya, and V.D.Goyacheva195. It is inteesting to note that thee was also found the late identical to Ota one.

The oblem on the ethic side of wok with such collections is not simle, but most

likely V.I.Saianidi is ight, who says the following concening analogues fom Afghanistan:

“It is difficult to value the ham bought by illegal excavations and the hono to the Fench achaeological mission in Afghanistan by ode of which M.Potie (1984). He could in some measue to make hotos fom illegal excavations (fo the fist tun-stams and amulets), not only in Kabul, but also in Balkh and Mazai Sheif (1998). I am hay and oud that I could intoduce my shae and to eseve fo science the hotos of things lost in ivate collections196.

Vessels, figues, mios, adonments and amulets ae included into collection fom the site Kasnaya Rechka. The most numeous ae the details of belt set-comound belt and hose haness.

Artistic and Handicraft subjects The analogous collections of things have been collected also on the othe sites identified with caital towns Suyab and Balasagun.

The at of things has inscitions in Aab language.

So, stating fom the time of adotion of Islam militay belts and othe attibutes of waios wee being taken to a new ideology keeing the taditions of othe ideology at the same time.

Bonze mios, jags, bowls, lates, motas and muffs fo joining of wooden suots of tents ae included into a big gou fom excavations of medieval sites of Kazakhstan and also occasional findings as it was mentioned above. Some of findings have inscitions.

Secial gou of things made of bonze, amounts lams with functional, cult and ideological chaacteistics. They ae shot caved inscitions on the body of chiag lams. Thee ae in a gou chiags with one o seveal noses, zoomohic in a fom of animals made with high atistic taste197.

Thee ae lams of comound foms consisted of seveal details. The inteesting comlex of such lams is in the mausoleum of Khodja Akhmed Yasawi. In the mausoleum thee is also bonze cauldon-toi Kazan and also doo hammes and edges of banne staff.

Inscitions on them have been ead and tanslated198.

Ceramics and glass Collection of not glazed, stamed and glazed ceamics with Aab inscitions has been collected duing achaeological woks.

Pat of these mateials has been ublished. The unique is finding of clay vessel boken with inscition in 10 lines fom the excavated dwelling of the X–XII cc. on the site Kuiyktobe199. Fagment of jag with elief inscition is fom Ota (block of ottes) fom the laye of the XIII–XIV cc.200 E.I.Ageeva ublished the boken of clay dish with inscition on its inne suface.

Fagment of dish was found in statigahy excavation on Chilik site and it is dated by the XII – ealy XIV cc.201 Inscitions on ceamics, including the inscitions made on bunt vessels, have been found on the boken ats discoveed duing excavation of Talga site. They ae dated by the XI-XIII cc.202 Ceamics with inscitions dated by the XIII–XIV cc. has been found in Taaz203.

Big collection of ceamics with inscitions has been collected duing excavation of Saaichik site. This ceamics is unglazed, stamed and glazed. It is dated in the ange of the second half of the XIV–XV cc.204 Aab inscitions on glazed vessels of the X–XII cc. has been discoveed duing excavations of the sites in Jetysu and Southen Kazakhstan. The numeous gous of bowls of diffeent sizes, dishes wee found in Talga, Taaz, Ota sites and sites of Ota oasis205.

Inscitions on glass vessels fom the medieval towns of Kazakhstan ae vey ae. One of inscitions is athe full made by elief blowing into the fom and it was obseved on glass vessel fom Ota206.

A.N.Benshtam aid attention at his time to the ottey with inscitions, consideing, that inscitions on ottey, made by Kuhic witing contain as the ule, the wod “Allah” and they ae eligious by thei chaacte. He efeed inscitions to the eoch of Kaakhanidians207.

Chapter V O.G.Bolshakov in his dissetation wok about the glazed ceamics of Cental Asia of the VIII–XII cc. devoted the secial chate to the analysis of Aab inscitions on it. These themes ae also in his othe woks208.

Aeaance of glazed ceamics in Cental Asia is doubtful. O.G.Bolshakov oves convincingly that oduction of ottey in Cental Asia towns was not local achievement by view of some eseaches, but it was adoted, most likely fom Iaq in the second half of the VIII c. and it did not exist befoe Aab conquest209.

The second half of the VIII c. was the most favoable time fo adoting of oduction of glazed ottey. At the same time in Bagdad a big quantity of Cental Asians settled in Bagdad. At the same time in Cental Asia thee was not small quantity of officials and militay officials fom Iaq and othe westen egions.

The fist develoed glaze in Cental Asia was coe – lead glaze210.

“Revolution in oduction of glazed ottey was done by assimilation of tansaent lead glaze which oened the widest ossibilities of sub glaze ainting with clea gahically bight ictue. Use of white angob made the suface of clay dish like ideal backgound fo atist. Imetus fo the aeaance of white angob ottey by ou view was stiving of otte’s handicaftsmen to ceate imitation of ich foeign ocelain. In any case one kind of white angob dish with sot shaed yellow-geen glaze and gaved sub-glazed onamentation aeaed like imitation of the concete vaiety of Chinese ottey. But we can not say that namely that kind of white angob ottey was ecuso of all othe kinds. Togethe with manne of decoation thee was adoted the new fom of table dish-late with wide almost hoizontal evese and smooth tun of back side, which was met at the beginning only togethe with sot shaed glazing of suface”211.

It is noted the essential similaity of its comlexes coming fom diffeent egions. They ae one and the same foms, onamentation, colo gamma.

Pottey of one style with Cental-Asian was sead in the IX–XI cc. fa out the bodes of Cental Asia; in Khoasan and ove all teitoy of Afghanistan. So, the egion of its sead coincides with the teitoy of Samanidian state. We can state suely, that such ottey aeaed in the IX–X cc. in Kazakhstan (in the South and Semiechie)212. In the XII c. the unity of style of glazed ottey existed in Maveannah (including Khoesm).

Similaity of glazed ottey on a wide teitoy is the evidence of close economical and cultual links and unity of tastes of consumes (fo the fist tun of citizens, main consumes of glazed ottey). At the same time thee is a question about the centes, which set the fashion.

One of them is in oduction of atistic ottey in Samakand.

Outwad stylistic eseach of ottey outwad the bode of Samakand egion does not let to eveal Samakand oduction.

Only chemical analysis of boken, glaze and ainting can hel to solve this oblem. But such kind of wok on “Samakand tye” ottey in towns of Cental Asia was not caied out. Thee is no comaative mateial on ottey of Afasiab, Cental Asian towns and towns of Kazakhstan (Isidjab, Ota, Taaz). But it is ossible to seaate the dish bought fom Samakand and the same ottey oduced in Ota, Kede, Taaz, and Talga by thei outwad featues, by the boken, quality of glaze and efection of ictue.

Pottey is not a convenient good fo tansotation because of its fagile chaacte. Its tansotation can be oved only unde the tems of high ices. So, moe exensive and bette is ottey, the wide is zone of its sead. Thee is moe similaity in ottey of one tye oduced in diffeent egions.

Artistic and Handicraft subjects Glazed ottey gives a ich mateial fo the eseach of some essential henomenon of cultue. So, it illustates clealy the histoy of esence of Aab language among citizens.

In the IX-X cc. the most chaacteistic subject in ainting of high quality ottey was Aab inscitions. They ae esented by diffeent in time and style inscitions fom stict simle kuhic of the IX c. adoted fom Koan o othe ich inscitions u to the comound decoative foms of blossoming kuhic213.

Atists used decoative ossibilities of Aab scit in ainting of ottey. Some inscitions by blossoming kuhic tansfeed, fo the fist view, into the line of hebal onamentation did not loose thei eadability.

All inscitions can be divided fo thee gous by thei contest. The fist one consists of diffeent good wills. The noted good wills ae the eductions of moe full initial fom, which is not obseved on ottey of Cental Asia, but it is known on ottey of Nea East.

It is ossible to make the conclusion, that they wee adoted aleady in the educed fom.

“Baaka” is often the comound element of long good will inscitions with accounting of diffeent wills fo the owne. Sometimes thee ae wills connected diectly with the intention of a dish, like “dink (o eat”) fo you health”.

Inscitions of the second gou have ahoistic chaacte. Fo examle, Aab sayings, like “toleance” is the key to joy, “faithfulness is a teasue”, “stat of study is sou fo taste and its end is sweete than honey”, “those who seak too much humble themselves”.

Thee ae inscitions chaacteistic fo Moslem ethics. Togethe with aeal to set hoes on to Allah thee ae sayings on the necessity to be glad by small things, to efuse fom thei wills.

Thee ae also the eligious inscitions like “modesty is the banch of belief” (al-iman) is obseved on some not witten inscitions whee ae seen the seaate wods, like aldjanna-”heaven”, an-na-”flame”; they doubtless, cay the eligious chaacte.

It makes to suose that some sentences, which as they seemed cay the secula chaacte, can be the hadises, not included into canon woks. Fo the fist tun such is the sentence “geneosity is the quality of ighteous men (inhabitants of heaven)”.It is athe obable that sayings about knowledge foesee not a science in geneal not ositive knowledge, but science about the eligion, theology, which was the Science fom a big lette-al-Ilm in the Middle Ages.

It is chaacteistic that all inscitions to hadises ae efeed to the X–XI cc. as well as all othe inscitions with the wod “belief”. Aaently, it is eflected by stengthening of Moslem othodox influence, by which was maked the beginning of the XI c.

In the XI c. thee was going the ocess of slow disaeaance of ottey with inscitions in Aab language. They existed still, but in a fom of coies of the ealiest samles. Only shot good wills eseved by the end of a centuy like “Baaka” and fashionable at that time in that centuy “al-iumn” (oseity). It is exlained by ousting of Aab language.

The new consumes, as well as handicaftsmen, who made that ottey, did not know Aab language. Fashion fo inscitions was eseved, but they coied without undestanding of the meaning of inscitions214.

Decoation of glazed ottey let to ut fowad one moe question-on the influence of Islam to fine ats. Fom one side thee is stong conviction that Islam ohibited to ictue the living beings. Fom anothe side it is consideed that ictues of alive beings was being unished stictly not in the X c. and following centuies, when Moslem ideology had been fomed finally and thee was the decisive attack on heteodox. Alive beings aeaed again in fine ats in connection with disintegation of Calihate, which imosed Islam to Chapter V conqueed eole and “stong anti calihate and yafetic meetings, which shake the osition of Islam”215.

O.G.Bolshakov consides that simila imaginations ae eflected by the geneal tendency to esent eligion in the “Middle Ages like something essing, but not the natual fom of medieval outlook. We would like to emind that Middle Ages joint to the theology and tansfeed them into thei banches all othe foms of theology: hilosohy, olitics and juisudence. Any ublic and olitical movement had to adot theological fom because of the above mentioned fact”216. It is efeed in the same measue to the Moslem East. “Religion seved like a weaon of otection of the existed fomation and ideology of fight with them. In the Middle Ages the fight was not against the eligion in geneal but against its concete foms, against one fom fo the sake of anothe one.

Atheism was available only fo the ominent minds of Middle Ages, single genius, and fo common handicaftsmen and easants the eligion was only one available fom of wold outlook”217.

Pohibition to ictue living beings is not efeed to the amount of the most imotant statements of Islam. It was fomed only at the end of the VIII c. Canonic collections of woks of hadises, which aeaed in the IX c., contain sayings ohibiting ictues, but many theologians till the X c. consideed them not against ictues in geneal, but against ictues intended fo woshi. Only in the XI c. thee was established wod fo wod undestanding of that hadises in the situation of fight with diffeent exessions of fee mind-fom Islamism to mutazilism.

At the end of the XI c. leading activists of othodox Islam wee definitely against ictues of living beings in ublic laces. Al-Gazali (ealy XII c.) wote: “Among blamed ictues ae those ictues, which ae on the doos of bath-houses o inside bath-houses; eveybody who entes thee must destoy it, if it is ossible, but if the ictues ae on high lace, which is not ossible to each by hand, it is allowed to ente thee only in case of the exteme necessity. It would be bette to go to anothe bath-house, because it is not allowed to look at blamewothy. And it is enough to soil faces on ictues to become not valid”. But he

adoted use of some things with ictues. Al-Gazali wote concening the meeting of guest:

“Among the above mentioned is hanging of cutains with ictues…what is concening ictues on illows and caets fo sitting thee is nothing blamed; the same is concening the ictues on lates and bowls, excluding vessels made in a fom of body; so, the to at of incense-bunes is in a fom of a bid, what is ohibited (haam), and so it is necessay to beak that at, which has the ictue”218.

So, by the view of stict othodox, like al-Gazali duing the last eiod of his life, use of ottey with ictue was accetable duing visits of guests, when it was demanded the most stict obsevance of all ules of oiety.

By the oint of view of O.G.Bolshakov aeaance of ictues of living beings on the glazed ottey of Cental Asia in the X–XI cc. is exlained not by the evival of e Moslem taditions, but some side influence. It is emakable, that the biggest at of such ictues is connected with lustum ottey, eeating the subjects of lustum ainting; on the othe ottey zoomohic ictues ae ae enough and they ae moe schematic in a fom of elements of onamentation. Vey common in Ian ainting illustation of the liteay subjects has not been obseved still in Cental Asia. The easons of the above mentioned facts ae not clea yet. In any case it is necessay to note, that in Cental Asia ohibition to ictue living animals, aaently was undestood moe wod by wod, than in othe counties219.

Artistic and Handicraft subjects At the end of the XI–XII cc. in ainting of glazed ottey thee was established moe motley, caet style of onamentation, which can be connected with Tukization of Maveannah.

Glazed ottey of the XIII – fist half of the XV c. is chaacteized by the change of technological schemes of its oduction.

The middle of the XIII c. is the eve of diffeent ceamic styles. Pottey with tansaent lead glaze on white angob disaeaed. Red, yellow and ink angob began to aea. Glaze is ainted by yellow, geen, ink, light blue and blue colos. Onamentation was hebal, geometical, and eigahic. But thee is also the gou of ottey with inscitions. So, in Ota duing excavations, thee was found the bowl, coveed by dak blue glaze and sub glaze inscition made by black colo. On the bodes was done onamentation in a fom of stylized Aab lettes and the next line had the inscitions made by talik scit of ealy vaiation. This fact let to efe the bowl to the second half of the XIV – ealy XV c. Tanslation of text is the following: “all you wills come tue by you will…… God is otecto of you thone.

Evening stated. You ae my lovely in the wold…” By its style this good will inscition, aaently, in Sufian lan, identify lovely with God220.

The big quantity of inscitions as it was mentioned above is obseved on glazed ottey fom the medieval town Saaichik identified with Golden hode and late Nogay and Kazakh town Saaichik.

In connection with chaacteistics of inscitions on ottey fom Saaichik it is necessay to know the at of a oem of Yusuf Balasagunsky on the wall of clay vessel which is tanslated as follows: “Seech is ich by wods, and thoughts ae ich by seeches. Peole ae nice by face and face is nice by eyes”221.

We can suose the same ocesses in change of mentality of custome by the aeaance of such sentences like in the South of Kazakhstan, but in diffeence 400 yeas, when in the Golden Hode and Saaichik of the XIV c. was going the ocess of active Islamization of ules and elite of Golden Hode.

Numismatics Changes in monetay ciculation-tansfeence to the coins of a new tye haened in connection with submission of South Kazakhstan and Jetysu to Samanidians, which followed the tis thee of Aab toos.

Arslanidian coins. Tuhuss coins of Jetysu degaded comletely. Cisis of monetay deal was obseved thee in the middle of the IX c. The new tye of coins was issued with legend of “Maste Aslan Bilgekagan fan” in the late IX – ealy X c.”222 O.I.Sminova descibed one of the vaieties of Aslanidian coins found on Ak-Beshim site (unique fo that time) unde the name “coin of unknown kagan”. Duing the last yeas on the sites of Chu valley thee wee found 4 moe samles of that tye.

Two new tyes of Aslanidian coins found on Kasnoechenskaya site wee ublished by V.N.Nastich. On the legend of one of them done in Sogdian scit eadable against watch hand thee was witten “Maste Aslan Bilge-Kagan fan”. This gou of coins is called “Aslanidians”.

V.N.Nastich suosed that dynasty of Aslanides could be the secific mediato between Tugeshes and Kaakhanidians who changed them in Semiechie in the X c. So, the time of oduction of Aslanidian coins was defined by them in wide anges fom the middle of the VIII c. to the middle of the X c.223 Chapter V It is known fom genealogy of Kaakhanidian ules that the name of gandfathe of Satuk Boga-khan who was the ancesto of the established in the X c. the dynasty of Kaakhanidians was ‘Bilga …. Kady khan O.Pistak calls him Bilga Kul Kady khan and A.Z.Togan calls him Bilge-kagan. Djamal al-Kady khan. O.Pitsak consides that afte Bilga Kady khan the both his sons uled in one and the same time : Bazi uled like the head (with title Aslan-khan) in Balasagun and Ogulchak uled like co-ule in Taaz and the last one had to be the contemoay of Samanidian Ismail b.Ahmad. Exactly unde his ule, by view of O.Pitsak Ismail conqueed Taaz in 893 y. taking into isone his khatun and 15 000 waios aftewad Ogulchak tansfeed his caital to Kashga and made a ti to Samanidian teitoy in 904 y.224 Date of Aslanidian coins by the late IX – ealy X c. let to date by the same time the issues of degaded Tugesh and Tuhuss coins. Pobably, thee was in ciculation big Tugesh coins issue of which wee being continued at least 150 yeas225.

Po Kaakhanidian coins of Jetysu. The coin of that tye found on the site Chigil (Taaz egion) was ublished fo the fist time by T.N.Senigova226.

Late V.N.Nastich infomed on five mystey coins oigin fom the sites Talga (Kazakhstan) and Buany (Kigizia) contained by samle of Chinese, but with kuhic Aab inscitions, situated by “coss” on the sides of quadangula hole. Ue at of inscition is ead by him like (malik), the ight one is ead like (aam?), the low (inal?) and the left (chig?). Back side of coins is smooth with not wide edges bodeing quadangula hole and dove. V.N.Nastich efeed those coins to “oto Kaakhanidian” issued befoe establishment in coinage of Kaakhanidian coins of the taditional Moslem shae. He dated the coins by the X c.227 comaing aleogahy of inscition with legends on Moslem coins.

Duing the last yeas thee wee collected 29 moe coins of that tye and 3 of them wee found on Kasnoechenskaya site. All othes wee found on the site Buana.

And it is not of a sudden as Buana coesonds to the towns of Kaakhanidians Balasagun, one of the caitals of the state of Kaakhanidians.

“Moslem” coins of South Kazakhstan. The new tyes of coins aeaed at that time in South Kazakhstan changing un eigahic coins of Kangas with ictue on one side of walking lion and on anothe side with ictue of tamga and the most sead in a fom of sign X228.

In 1975 y. duing of excavation of Ota thee wee discoveed two bonze Samanidian coins issued in Baab in 310/922-23 yy. with the name of Nas II ibn Ahmad (301-331/914yy.). The thid samle was of a bad safety and it was found in 1977 y.

In 1976 y. duing excavations of town wall on its noth-westen edge in the it cutting the wall dated by the XII c. thee wee found one moe bonze Samanidian coins stongly acidized and boken. Desite on the defect it is defined athe ecisely. It is Samakand fels of Nas I ibn Ahmad (250-279/864-892 yy.) issued in 272/885-86 o in 278/891-92 yy.

Descition of coins is following:

1. Obvese side. In the field, in cicle linea im is symbol of tust in thee lines. Aound the cicle-issue data: “In the name of Allah was issued this fels in Samakand in the yea two hunded seventy second (o eights)”.

Revese side. In the field-the second at of symbol of tust and the name “Nas” unde it. Aound the cicle between inne dots and outwad line ims: “About wills of ami Nas b. Ahmad “Allah olongs his life!”

2. Obvese side. In the field in a cicle linea im-symbol of tust as on the evious coin, above it-onamental sign like tamga; downwad-the wod (name “Ali”?). Aound the Artistic and Handicraft subjects cicle-issue data: “In the name of Allah was issued this fels in Baab in the yea thee hunded and tenth”. Outwad im is linea.

Revese side. In a cicle dot im-the second at of symbol of tust and unde itthe name “Nas”. Aound the cicle: “What ami Nas b. Ahmad will, Allah gloify him!”

3. The same tye with numbe 2, but thee is anothe ai of stams; cicle fom legends emained in fagments. On the obvese side (alif not missed) the name of mint with defects, data is olished almost. All eseved details of tye coincide with analogous on the evious samle229.

Findings of Samanidian bonze coins on the teitoy of Ota and Ota oasis wee aleady known by ublications230 and ove that the egion in the second half of the IX – ealy X c. was in the shee of economical and olitical influence of Samanidians. But till the last times it was consideed that at that eiod Ota did not have its own coins. Thanks to the finding and ublication of Samakand teasue of 1967 y.231 whee wee discoveed the coins of Baab of the yea 310 h. and two analogous felses fom Ota descibed above, we can suose that by the yea 310/922-923 Faab egion (Ota)232 was included into the content of Samanidian state on the ight of vassal ossession. At that time its ule was Ali (if the wod maked on the coins in the field of obvese side to conside like the name of vassal), who issued his coin in Faab233.

Submission of Ota to Samanidians, aaently, haened even ealie. It is known that ules of Maveannah seeing the Tuks like thei neighbos having the continuous militay theat gave the big imotance to the secuity of nothen and easten bodes of the state.

It seved like one of the easons of conqueing Isidjab by Nuh ibn Asad in 840 y. and its tansfeence into stong fotess234, ti of Nas I ibn Ahmad to Shawga (moden Tukestan egion) in the second half of the IX c.235 and othe olitical measues which bought finally to inclusion into the content of Samanidian ossessions of all teitoy of Isidjab egion whee Faab subub was included automatically236.

It is added also the fact of the local oduction of coins chaacteizing the economical condition of Faab in the second quate of the X c.

Cultual-economical asect of inteelations with the state of Samanidians is not less imotant in the eseach of oblems of Kazakhstan town cultue develoment.

Establishment of close economical and cultual links between two egions omoted moe active develoment of handicaft and tade, sead of the achievements of science and at of Cental Asia and in the South of Kazakhstan. Thee was fomed the secific cultue “based on mixtue of local taditions with achievements of othe egions. Such giants like al-Faab i, ibn Sina and al-Biuni wee bon on that soil”237.

In the eoch of Kaakhanidians thee was fomed finally such tyes of coins with Moslem foming. The demonstative ae coins of Budukhet, town nea Isidjab238. Descition is


1. Budukhet, 411/1021-21 yeas.

Revese side. Aslan-khan, Nazi ad-Daula Atim-tegin, Abd al-Malik.

2. Obvese side. Nazi ad-Daula; evese side.%Aslan-khan, Abu-l- Hasan Atim-tegin, Ali.

3. [Buduhket?], 414/1023-24 yeas.

The name of mints on the fist two dihems is shown so that the absence of diacitical signs admits many vaiants of eading. But the accetable is the following eading: “Buduhket is the town in Isidjab egion”. Witten souces name Buduhket situated in Isidjab egion Chapter V as the town (Pesian vesion Istahi)239, o settlement (Sam’ani)240. It was situated on the way fom Isidjab to Taaz by Makdisi-in one day oute fom Isidjab, by Ibn Hodadbeh and Kudama-in eight o nine fasakhes fom it241.Achaeologists identified Buduhket with the site Kazatlyk (IX–XI cc.)242. Now it is given the most convincing localization of town-on the lace of Totkol Balykchi site243.

Two ue levels of hieachic ladde shown in the legends of Buduhket dihems ae occuied by Aslan-khan Mansu b. Ali and his nehew Atim-tegin Ahmad (most likely, son of Muhammad).On the low level is located ‘Abd al-Malik, the name seen in the inscitions of Kaakhanidian coins. But it is not clea its belonging to the numbe of Kaakhanidians.

It is doubtless that ‘Abd al-Malik was the owne of Buduhket and, obviously, of its subub.

Diect suzeain of ‘Abd al-Malik, Atim-tegin Ahmad, judging by Isidjab dihems of 410/1019-20, 411/1020-21 and 412/1021-22 y. ossessed all egion of Isidjab, but in that yeas his Isidjab deuty was Nas.

Only the fist lettes of mint’s name ae eseved on dihems 3, but it is ossible to ead suely the wod Buduhket.

On the coin 3 is mentioned “Ali”, as the owne of Buduhket and vassal of Atim-tegin and Aslan-khan. Among the ules of ealy XI c. thee ae known seveal holdes of this name, among which the most known is ‘Ali-Tegin, but he ossessed Bukhaa fom the yea 411/1020-21.

Samle of Buduhket shows one moe time the comlicated Ealy Kaakhanidian indeendent inciality system.

Desite of the temoay chaacte of Buduhket’s mint its oduction is ieoachable by its outwad look (skilled location of legends, gamma of inscitions, nice, sue witing) and shows the maste’s hand having not small exeience in oduction of monetay stams.

The secific inteest fom the oint of view of Moslem tadition foming in issue of monetay signs is esented by coins of Ota-Faab, Paab-Baab-one of the centes of foming and develoment of Moslem cultue.

The ominent eseache of medieval coins of Cental Asia and Kazakhstan E.A.Davidovich wote at his time that, obably, “Kaakhanidian coins of Baab would be also discoveed once”244. That was oved comletely: B.D.Kochnev could eveal late Kaakhanidian coinage of Paab245.

Type 1. Paab, the yea is not maked (8 samles)246.

Revese side, field: Kutlug Bilgakhakan.

Type 2. Paab, 596/7 1199-1201, 609/1206=07 (?) yea.

(19 samles)247. Revese side,

field: al-Khakan al-‘ADIL Shams ad Dunia va-d-Din Kutlug Bilga Khakan; cicle legend:

Hasan b.’Abd al-Halik…Ami al-My’minin.

Type 3. Paab,59, 60,6003/1206-07.

(25 samles)248. Revese side, field: al-hakan alAdil Shams ad Dunia va-d-Din Kutlug Bilga Hakan.

Type 4. Paab,.

.8(?) yea. h.(1 samle)249. Revese side, field: al-Hakan al- ‘Adil Shams ad-Dunia va-d-Din Kutlug (Bilg)a-khan; cicle, legend:…Hasan b. ‘Abd al- Halik… Among fou descibed tyes the second and the thid ae esented by the biggest quantity of samles.

Thee ae distinguished dihems of the fist tye: witing of legends of all eight samles is caeless, lettes ae not staight, thick, sometimes joining in not coect lace.

The cuious eculiaity of ublished coins is utting of final wod (o wods) of field’s legend into the additional ue line. In one case the end of symbol of tust is going out, in anothe case-the end of thone case of Khalif Nazi, in the thid-the end of ule’s title.

Artistic and Handicraft subjects The secific detail is good will included into the cicle legend of the evese side of tye 3 dihems. In geneal good wills in simila osition ae athe often seen on Samanidian coins;

some of them wee adoted and used sometimes Kaakhanidians on thei ealy coins. But in the late Kaakhanidian coinage good wills wee not fixed and the sentence itself “Allah will olong his ule” was not discoveed as it is known eithe on Samanidian o on Kaakhanidian coins and it is chaacteistic aleady afte Mongol conquest (Chagataides, Timuides).

Inscitions of dihems of the fist tye do not contain any notes on the time of thei issue. So, fo dating it is necessay to take fo the base the date of Keminsky teasue whee they wee found. This teasue of 1992 samles includes only thee coins dated by the second quate of the XII c. and it consists mostly of dihems issued in 560-es yy. h.

The ealiest of the ecisely dated coins of teasue is 560/1164-65 yea; the latest is dated by 568/1172-73 o 569/1173-74 y. The date of Paab coins should be not late than the date of the last one. Paab dihems ae not olde than the main content of teasue and they should be dated in the following limits fom 560/1164-65 to 569/1173-47 y.

Thee is hoeful chonological oientation in a fom of mentioning of Khalif Nasy who uled in 575-622/1180-1225 yy. Fo dihems of the 2 tye as it will be shown futhe Kaakhanidian coins of Paab could not be issued afte the yea 607/1210-11. This date is ue temoay bode also fo the tyes 2, 3 and 4 and fo Jambyl teasue too. Two dates ae eseved atially among the concete dates on dihems of the second tye. The date can be e-established, 569/1199-1200 o 597/1200-01 y. On dihems of the same tye, but anothe vaiety thee was anothe date eseved wose, obably, it is 603/1206-07 yy.

On the coin of the 4 tye only the fist wod is eseved “eight” in case of the coect eading the date can be e-established in geneal, like 588/1192 o 598/1201-02 yy.

The coins of the fist thee tyes can be called definitely like dihems. Tyological similaity of 3 and 4 tyes let to efe the last one to the same categoy. On many coins fom Jambyl teasue thee ae eseved clealy the taces of silvefish and it means that all eseached gou of Paab coins belongs to the numbe of coe silvefish dihems what is the most imotant eculiaity of monetay ciculation of Cental Asia of the XII – ealy XIII c.

How it is shown above the fist tye of Paab dihems was issued not late than 569/1173y. obably, it fixes in geneal the beginning of Late Kaakhanidian coinage of Paab. The coins of Jambyl teasue eflect its futhe stages. While all of them ae called dihems in inscitions thee ae doubtless the coins of two values: tyes 2 and 3 ae diffeent by foming, lacing and contest of inscitions, weight and sizes.

We did not have ossibility to weight the coins of teasue, but the diamete of big dihems (tye 3) is 42-46 mm, small (tye 2) – 26-28 mm. Aaently, they efeed to each othe as 2 to 1, what means that they ae double o single dihems o single and half ones.

Pesence of dihems of two facial values is the imotant index. It is athe aaent that issue of coins of the fist tye was called by the economical easons, but it is accetable with the same success the olitical and financial easons. In case of two face values these easons ae less obable, moe ecisely could not be single: fo the uoses of the olitical oclamation it is enough one face value, fo the effective exloitation of monetay ciculation in some Late Kaakhanidian egions it was enough the mass issue of dihems of one face value. By othe wods, while dihems of the tyes 2 and 3 caied the “olitical meaning” and seved fo teasuy the mean of getting ofit fom the ight of monetay coinage, the imotant fo us is something diffeent: obably to the eve of the XII–XIII cc. the demands of inne tade of Ota egion aised so that they could not be satisfied by issue of dihems of one face value. We seak exactly about inne demands and needs as in the intenational Chapter V tade, whee Ota layed a vey imotant lace to the time of Mongol conquest, coe silvefish dihems like the signs of cost with essing couse could not be issued and they wee intended, fist of all, fo the egion whee they wee issued. Naow local chaacte of ciculation of coe silvefish dihems is demonstated by many teasues including Jambyl teasue consisting of 43 Paab coins. But moe demonstative ae Keminsky teasue whee among 1992 coins only 27 ae not fom Samakand. And Nayn teasue containing 5 856 dihems and among them only 3 ae not fom Fegana definitely.

Dihems of two values continued to be issued in Ota also afte fall of owe of Kaakhanidians unde Khoesmshakh Muhammad who inheited fom the last ones not only Paab mint, but also the taditional set of two face values: Anushtegenidian dihems of PaabOta follows Kaakhanidian samles also in coelation of size ( 40-44 and 26-27 mm)250, obably, the weight too.

The coin of the fouth tye caies also the name of the same ule like dihems of the tyes 2 and 3; by the fom and sizes (27 mm) it is close to the thid tye and so it must be efeed to the same face value. Some tyical diffeences of this dihems is necessay,

obably, to exlain not by belonging to the secial face value, but by some othe easons:

in Jambyl teasue thee ae no coins of this tye, consequently, it was issued not at the same time with dihems of the tyes 2 and 3.

The lace of issue of 2 and 3 tye’s dihems is called Paab egion. In the X centuy that egion was small: by length and width it was less than a day of way251. Was the Late Kaakhanidian Paab egion limited by the same bodes of small oasis along the middle flow of Sydaia Rive?

We ty to find the answe on the above question in fact of the discovey of Paab dihems teasue on the teitoy of medieval Taaz. As it was mentioned above the Late Kaakhanidian coe silvefish dihems had ciculation fist of all in the limits of the egion of thei oduction. In case of going out fom the esent aoiateness it is necessay to suose that Taaz egion was included into the content of Paab egion. Taking into account also the single finding of Paab dihems in Jambyl this hyothesis can be consideed the tuthful.

Aeaance in Taaz of Faab coins is exlained eithe by inclusion into its contest of Ota egion what seems moe obable o by moe close economical links with the egion along the middle flow of Sydaia Rive. Coinage of Paab let to eveal also some featues of the olitical histoy of a egion.

In the second half of the XII – ealy XIII c. Kaakhanidian ossessions in Cental Asia wee divided fo seveal egions and each of them was uled by thei own khans fom the house of Kaakhanidians. The lagest of egions was situated in Cental Maveannah with caital in Samakand; moeove, by the coins ae known Uzjend, Magian, Kasan and Benaket egions. To thei amount can be added the Paab ossession too. Mentioned on dihems of 2, 3 and 4 tyes ule of Paab Hasan b.’Abd al-Halik, doubtless, is not identical to moden to him ules of Cental Maveannah Ibagim b. Husein and ‘Usman b.Ibagim and as it is not mentioned in monetay inscitions thei name then, consequently, it is shown in egad to them like the indeendent ule.

Djuweini and Nasawi mention the last Ota malik in connection with the events of the XIII c. The fist one calls him anonymous252, the second autho calls him Tadji ad-Din Bilgakhan253. Coincidence of Tukic titles is vey obvious: Bilga-Hakan o Bilga-khan on the coins and the name of Bilga khan with Nisawi. Secondly, Nasawi tells about aticiation of Bilga-khan in fight unde Andhud, which took lace in 601 y. h., at the same time among Artistic and Handicraft subjects the dates on studied dihems of Paab thee ae mentioned not only 590-es, but 600-es yy. h.

Diffeence of lacabs (Tadj ad-Din and Shams ad-Din) should not mean at all that titles wee caied by diffeent esons. Thee is samle when one and the same Uzjend ule of ealy XIII c. in one and the same yea aeaed unde two diffeent titles254. So, thee is enough bases to identify Kutlu Bilga-Hakan on the coins and Bilga-khan, mentioned by Nasawi.

Nisawi infoms on some inteesting detail: Tadj ad-Din Bilga-khan was the cousin by fathe of Samakandian ‘Usman Sultan. Thanks to Paab coins it is becoming clea not only esonal Moslem name of Bilga-khan-Hasan, but also the name of his fathe and, consequently, the native bothe of Ibagim b. Husain-‘Abd al-Halik255.

The same autho Nasawi tells about the beak of a banch. By his wods Bilga-khan was the fist of khitays, vassals of Kidanians who acceted the side of Khoesm-shakh Muhammad and who came to seve him256. And at the same time Tadj ad-Din told about his fome achievements that in the times difficult fo Muhammad when coming to the thone he had to fight against stong Guidian sultan Shihab ad-Din, he togethe with his cousin “Usman came fo hel to Khoesm shakh and that he took at in the fight unde Andhud whee died “many of his bave fiends and tue waios”. Muhammad emembeing that achievements, fistly esented hono to Bilga-khan and then he aised him. But befoe the ti to Iaq (614/1217 y.) khoesmshakh sent to Nisa the Samakandian sheikh al-Islam Djalal ad-Din, his son Shams ad-Din and his bothe Auhad ad-Din and also Bilga-khan. Climate of Nisa was vey unhealthy, esecially fo the Tuks. Muhammad eckoned on the above fact. But Bilga-khan lived in that conditions athe successful moe than one yea and he was loved by citizens of Nisa. Seeing that his hoes wee not oved, khoesmshakh sent to Nisa Djakhan Pahlawan Aiaz with ode to kill Ota’s malik. Head of Tadj ad-Din was sent to Muhammad in a sack and teasues of killed eson wee sent to sultan teasue. The yea of death of Tadj ad-Din Bilga-khan is 609-1212 y. and the yea of sending fom Ota-607/1210 y. and the coectness of date shown by Djuweini is confimed comletely by coins.

So, issue of coe silvefish dihems of Paab was stated, obably, in 560-es yy. h.

(not late than 569/1173-74 y.) and it was continued at least till 603/1206-07 yea, may be till 607/1210-11 y. when Kaakhanidians lost thei owe “ove Ota egion”. At that time thee wee issued the coins of not less than fou tyes.

Coinage of that coins in geneal and the esence among them of dihems of two face values ae the evidences that inne egional tade of Paab in the second half of the XII – ealy XIII c. was athe develoed and ovided by own means of ciculation.

Pobably, at that time Taaz was included into the “egion of Paab”.

In the olitical egad Paab egion was the indeendent ossession uled by own khans fom the house of Kaakhanidians, eesentatives of Fegana family257.

Kaakhanidian coins as well as the latest ones Djagataid, Djuchid, Timuid, Sheibanid and Kazakh coins give imagination on widely sead coins issued by the Moslem tye.

Epigraphy Kairaks. The huge volume of infomation on the social stuctue of a town, on localization of settled oints contains eigahy on the buial monuments. They ae buial stones (kaiaks) and the buial bicks.

Regettably, the eseach of such valuable souces was not caied out in Kazakhstan in comaison with othe counties of Cental Asia. The imotance of such woks is oved by candidate dissetation and aticle of V.N.Nastich devoted to study of monuments of Chapter V Kygyzstan, fom the medieval cemeteies of Uzgend, kaiaks fom Safed-Balon and Buana efeed to the XII–XV cc.

So, analyzing class-ofessional tems and lacabs (honoable names), V.N.Nastich aid attention to high status in the Moslem society of eudition and liteacy among iesthood and handicaftsmen.

Achievements of the deceased, meits fo Islam, Hadji to Mekka and Medina ae mentioned in eitahs. Thee ae evidences of language belonging of the deceased. So, in inscitions of one kaiak it is said about Tukish woman, liteate Moslem woman having the whole geneation of Tuks-Moslems in he genealogy258.

One of the chates of dissetation of V.N.Nastich is devoted to identification of Buana site with Balasagun town. The imotant ove of those identification become eigahic monuments – kaiaks fom Buana site. Text of eigahy on kaiaks fom the site Munaa (Buana) was given. The fist by Muhammad Haida Dulati (the fist half of the XVI c.).

Eigah is devoted to “Imam Muhammed fakih al-Balasaguni” with date on his death in 1311-1312 y.). It was comound by “blacksmith Uma al-Balasaguni”.

It is necessay to note, that on the site thee wee found two moe kaiaks with eigahs on the deceased citizens of Balasagun259.

These findings take off the oblem on localization of town Balasagun, which is identified by some eseaches with the site Aktobe Steninskoe desite of scientific facts260.

Burial bricks. It is necessay to chaacteize buial bick with eigahy found duing excavations of Kaasan necooli’s in the South of Kazakhstan. It was ead and analyzed by B.N.Nastich261.

In one of the buials of Ealy Moslem eoch achaeologist B.N.Numukhanbetov discoveed massive ceamic late with Aab inscition. The late stood in decline with inscition downwad, closing the ass to lyahad.

Reseach of finding showed, that it was a bick of incoect ectangula fom in sizes 25-2738-40 cm.

Inscition occuies ue half of bick’s suface and contains not full 5 lines, essed on aw clay by sha instument. Inscition was done by ough imitive kuhic obviously seen influence of nash style.

Canon Moslem invocations – so called basmala and kalima (symbol of belief) in Aab language with distotions and mistakes have been endeed in the fist thee lines. The lines 4 and 5 contain mentioning of esonality of buied eson, witten in Tuks by Aab Scit.

1) Tanslation of inscition:

2) In the name of Allah meciful;

3) chaitable. Thee is no othe God, excet Allah;

4) Muhammad is his envoy;

5) Saiamka Ty3 ka;

6) tun.

Tuks eading of wod saiam/lug (lug ‘isaiamskiy (-aya), [bon] in Saiam.

Thee is no date on inscition, but many subject and aleogahical analogies in the known buials eigahic monuments of Cental Asia give the base fo athe ecise dating

of eigah:

Fistly, it is necessay to note, that buial bicks (with inscitions o without) ae, big conclusion of M.E.Masson, the most ancient buial monuments of Cental Asia in the Moslem eoch262. The ealiest of them ae efeed to the late VIII–IX c. and ae being obseved fill the fist half of the XIV c.

Artistic and Handicraft subjects Secondly, evailing majoity of known buial bicks comes fom the westen at of Cental Asia – south of Tukmenia, Samakand and suounding egions. Cente of thei sead thee in the XI–XII cc. was Mev263, and fo the nothen and noth-easten egions, including South Kazakhstan and Semiechie, thee is no such evidence at all. On this teitoy the most chaacteistic ae stone buial monuments – kaiaks, and in the latest time – secially ocessed blocks of ectangula o taeze shaed contous with inscitions and decoations on them.

So, Kaasan bick was made fo the buial of woman fom Saiam by the name Tuzkatun, dead in the fist half of the XII c.

In the wok of Mahmud Kashgasky “Divan Lishat at-tuk” thee is the fist and single mentioning of e Mongol time on the town Saiam, identified by autho with Isidjab264.

Finding fom Kaasan oves, that tyo name existed eally in the XI–XII cc.

Visitor’s inscriptions. Undegound ock mosques of Mankystau, such like ShakakAta, Shoan-Ata, Sultan-Ese, Kaaman-Ata, Esen-Ata, Beken-Ata ae secial sanctuaies, sacificial laces and objects of visiting them by ilgims. They left on the walls the numeous visito’s inscitions.

Reseaches of those eigahic monuments wee stated in the mosque Shakak-Ata and gave extemely inteesting mateials on the histoy of Islam, about the society and eole, who left them; about ethnic and cultual links, Moslem unions of West Kazakhstan with unions of Moslem of all Kazakhstan, Cental Asia, Volga egion, Cimea.

Inscitions wee done in Aab, Fasi and Tukis-Chagatai languages. By inscitions ae seen visitos fom Khadji-Takhan (Astakhan), Kazan, Azebaijan, Khoesm, Bukhaa and Andizhan. We can define secial names, titles, honoable anks. Fo examle, khadji, baty, takhan, iasauly. Among the esons left thei inscitions thee ae inscitions of many high educated eole – ahund, a’lam, maulana, mulla, khafiz.

Not ae visitos mentioned thei clan – aabadji, zhay, taz, tukman-adai.

Some inscitions ae taken in quadangula catouches.

Thee ae ictues of animals – hoses, balls, and also of oened alm (alm with five finges, what is connected with diffeent semantic inteetation on and symbolic, fo examle, with alm of Fatima. Thee ae many dated inscitions. The ealiest obseved date inscitions ae 1119/1707-08 y. Some inscition is maked by the dates of thei fixation.

The othe ones ae efeed to the XIX and ealy XX c.

Pat of inscitions is the evidence of Shakak-Ata being the sufian dwelling-lace (khanaka). Thee is such oint of view that the lace studies in medese.

It would be imotant to comae the eceived data with othe witten souces.

Regettably, the existing manuscits have not been ublished and so they ae not available fo the eseaches. In this situation eigahic monuments ae single of histoical infomation, documents of eoch of thei ceation265.


C ollected aticles ''Achaeology Abahamic'' (eseach in the field of achaeology and atistic tadition of Judaism, Chistianity and Islam) wee ublished in Moscow in 2009 yea. Edito-autho of this wok is L.A.Belyaev.

This collection, doubtless, has emakable imotance in ceation of geneal fo study of antiquities of thee genetically elative eligions: (Judaism, Chistianity and Islam).

L.A.Belyaev wites that the demand in it is ecognized by all and it should not be consideed, like somebody’s invention. It finds the lace in the woks on histoy of cultue and at slowly, but esistently266.

He wites futhe, that “Thee ae not less imotant cicumstances, which event to see these thee cultual saces, like single whole. Fistly, these ae ancient and stong bodes between eligions, which ae being olonged fom fa ast times and divide not only confessions, not only even cultual and olitical (state) eality, but science itself. Secondly, iegulaity of develoment of diffeent fields of cultual histoy and, secially, achaeology events geneal comaative wok”267.

Chistian and chuch achaeology is woked out moe comletely and has the tadition of many centuies since the XVII c. Achaeology of Judaism is young comaatively (50-70 yy.) The times assed, when actuality of achaeology of Islam had to be oved268.

The beginning of Abahamic achaeology is the second half of the XX c., when study of the eligions antiquities won ove the lace fo itself in the cicle of humanities of the soviet science. That lace “was fomed” in the filled of actical eseaches, but in geneal it did not contadict to eevolutionay tadition, but it develoed it, ut on moe stong soil thanks to intensified cae of the mateial wold, what is so chaacteistic fo achaeology.

“In the Soviet science the banches of the eligious achaeology got masking names:

chuch achaeology became Russian achitectual achaeology; iconogahy and histoy of icon-ainting – histoy of ancient Russian ainting; achaeology of Islam – achaeology of Low and Middle Volga egion of Cental Asia and Kazakhstan of the eoch of feudalism”269.

Study of the monuments of medieval achaeology and achitectue in Cental Asia and Kazakhstan was connected in its essential at with study of monuments, efeed to the Moslem cultue which was established thee in the VII–VIII cc., and got aid develoment in the eoch of Moslem enaissance. As it is known, Islam defined chaacte of cultue of Kazakhstan in the eoch of the develoed and late Middle Ages and New Time, till


the evolution of 1917 yea and establishment of USSR in 1922 y. with its Maxist-Lenin ideology and militant atheism. And only afte disintegation of the Soviet Union thee was stated the evival of eligion, including Islam values.

It has become common to inteet many occuences of the mateial and siitual cultue fom the ositions of Islam and its defining influence.

Kazakhstan achaeology began to ay big attention to study of Islamic achitectue – mosques, mausoleums, medese and khanaka – duing study of medieval towns. The numbe of these monuments is being inceased quickly.

Such definitions, like “cultual comlex with geneal Moslem standads and models”, “Tukic – Moslem cultual heitage” had been sead270.

In 2005-2007 yy. it was sounded also and develoed intensively the new diection in the achaeology of Kazakhstan – “Moslem achaeology”.

The fist eot of monuments of the medieval Islamic achitectue of Kazakhstan aeaed, which showed, that thei numbe exceeds essentially many times the quantity of the eseved gound Islamic achitectual constuctions271.

Religious building is the imotant element of any civilization. The man building house and temle fo himself, finally, established his national chaacte. Buial stones with eitahs – kaiaks and buial bicks also with eitahs fom South Kazakhstan and Jetysu ae efeed to the cicle of monuments connected with Moslem cultue. So it is so imotant to know, whee ae going the emains of achitectual constuctions, what can be taken fom them to undestand the siitual cultue of Kazakhs and “Kazakh Islam”, on chaacte of which thee ae existing diffeent oints of view.

So, views of V.V.Batold wee fa fom the ositions of Soviet histoians and ethnogahes, seeing in Kazakh “bad Moslems”, being, by thei view, semi-Moslems and semi-Shamanists till the XIX c. He confimed that in the XV–XVI cc. level of Islamization of Kazakhs was athe high272. And this oint of view scientist can be confimed now by discovey of mosques, medese, khanaka in town’s of Late Medieval Kazakhstan, towns of the Kazakh khanate’s eiod.

Study of Islamic achaeology, doubtless, can hel to solve moe thooughly the oblems on the time of Aab conquests, inteelations in the states of Kaluks, Samanidians, Kaakhanidians, Tuks, Pesians and Aabs, on islamization of Tuks, thei cultue.

But in the ocess of study of monuments and cultual heitage of Kazakhstan, Islamic achaeology it is imotant to conside the histoy of Islam wod in the context of global ocesses with henomenon of Chistian wold, Judaism, Buddhism.

Not only Moslem achitectue defines the essence of Moslem achaeology of Kazakhstan, but othe categoies of mateial cultue. They ae necoolises, buials, numismatics; kaiaks and buial bicks; atistic metal with Aab inscitions; ottey and glass.

This wok is devoted to genealization and analysis of all above mentioned categoies of the mateial cultue.


2009 жылы Мскеуден «Achaeology abahamica» атты маалалар (иудаизм, христиан жне ислам кркемдік дстрі мен археология тірегіндегі зерттеулер) жинаы жарияланды, оны редакторрастырушысы Л.А.Беляев.

Бл жина генетикалы жаынан туысан ежелгі ш дінді: (иудаизмді, христиандыты, исламды) зерттеу шін бірыай шепті ру дерісінде табалы маынаа ие екендігі сзсіз деп Л.А.Беляев жинаты алысзінде жазады. «Мны ажеттілігі сол – деп жазады Л.А.Беляев, барлыына елеулі жне біреуді нертабысы ретінде арастырмау керек. Ол мдениет пен нер тарихы бойынша жмыстардан з орнын біртіндеп, дегенмен орныты табады».

Ары арай ол былай деп жазады, «Осы ш мдени кеістікті бірыай ттасты ретінде арауа кедергі жасайтын біршама маызды жадайлар бар. Біріншіден, діндер арасындаы ежелгі жне орныты шекарасы брыны замана тередеп, тек конфессияны, сонымен атар мдени, саяси (мемлекеттілік) шындыты ана емес, ылымны зін де бліп жатыр. Екіншіден, жалпы салыстырмалы жмыстар мдени тарихты жекелеген салаларыны, сіресе археологияны те млшерде дамымауына кедергі болды».

Христиан археологиясыны XVII. бері кп асырлы дстрі бар жне біршама дамыан. Иудаизм археологиясы салыстырмалы трде жас (оан 50-70 жыл). Ал, ислам археологиясыны зектілігін длелдеуді талап ететін уаыт жетті.

Аврахамикалы археологияны басталуы – ХХ. екінші жартысы, яни діни кне ескерткіштерді зерттеу кеестік ылымны гуманитарлы пндер ортасында дауласан кезі. Дегенмен, практикалы зерттеулер тірегінде «бл орын «алыптастырылды», жалпы аланда азан ткерісіне дейінгі дстр тек арсы болып ана ойан жо, оны дамытты, заттай лемге, зіне тн археологияа табанды аморлы крсетуді арасында траты жола ойылды.

«Кеестік дуірде діни кне ескерткіштерді археологиялы трыдан зерттеу бірнеше бркеме атаулармен аталды: шіркеу археологиясы ежелгі орыс сулет археологиясы болды; иконография жне икон жасау тарихы – ежелгі орыс сурет нері тарихы; ислам археологиясы – Тменгі жне Орта Еділ маы немесе Орта Азия жне азастанны феодализм дуіріндегі археологиясы».

Орта Азия мен азастанны ортаасырлы археологиялы жне сулеттік, археологиялы сулеттік ескерткіштерін зерттеуді айтарлытай бір блігі осы жерде


VII–VIII. орнаан жне Мсылманды ренессанс дуірінде арынды дамуы болан мсылманды мдениетке атысты ескерткіштерді зерттеумен байланысты болды.

Ислам дамыан жне кейінгі орта асырлар мен жаа кезедегі, 1917 жылы революция мен 1922 жылы КСРО-ны рылуындаы оны маркстік-лениндік идеология мен жауыан атеизмге дейінгі дуірдегі азастан мдениетіндегі сипатын анытады. Тек Кеес Одаы лааннан кейін дінні, оны ішінде ислам ндылытарыны дамуы басталды.

Ислам станымындаы жне оны анытаушы сердегі заттай жне рухани мдениетті кптеген былыстарын тсіндіріп беру біртіндеп алыпты жадай болып алды.

Ортаасырлы алаларды зерттеу барысындаы азастанды археологияны аса маыздылыы ислам сулет нерін – мешіт, кесене, медресе, ханакаларды азуа кл блуі болды. Жне бл ескерткіштерді саны арынды суде.

«Жалпы мсылманды стандарт пен эталонды мдени кешен», «тркі-мсылманды мдени мра» дефинициясы ке тарады.

2005-2007 жылдардан бері азастан археологиясыны жаа баыты – «мсылманды археология» кеінен аталып, арынды дами бастады.

Жер астында саталан ислам сулет рылысыны саны бірнеше рет скенін крсеткен азастанны ортаасырлы исламды сулет ескерткіштеріні алашы мліметі пайда болды.

Діни рылыс – кез-келген ркениетті маызды элементі, зіне й мен храм трызан адам, тбінде зіні лтты сипатын алыптастырады. Мсылманды мдениетке байланысты ескерткіштер атарына эпитафиялы абір сті тастар – айратар мен Отстік азастан мен Жетісудаы эпитафиялы абір сті кірпіштер жатады. Сондытан сулеттік рылыстарды алдыы айда алып келетіндігін білуді маыздылыы сол, одан азатарды рухани мдениеті жне сипаты жаынан ртрлі пікір бар «азаты ислам» тсінігін шыаруа болады.

В.В.Бартольдты осындай кзарасы азатарды «жаман мсылман», брын оларды ойынша ХІХ. дейінгі аралыта жартылай мсылман жне жартылай шаман деп крген кеестік тарихшылар мен этнографтарды станымынан алыс болды. Ол XV–XVI. азатарда ислам дегейі айтарлытай жоары болан деп бекітті. Жне де алымны осы пікірі бгінде азастанны кейінгі ортаасырлы алаларыны, аза хандыы кезеіндегі алалардан мешіт, медресе, ханакаларды ашылуы длелдей тсуі ммкін.

Ислам археологиясын зерттеу араб шапыншылыы, арлтар, самандытар, арахандытар, тркілер, ирандытар жне арабтар мемлекеттеріні зара арыматынасы уаыты, тркілерді исламдануы, оны мдениеті туралы сратарды шешуді біршама тиянатауа кмектесетіні сзсіз.

Біра, азастанны ескерткіштері мен мдени мрасын, ислам археологиясын зерттеуде христиан лемі, иудаизм, буддизм былыстарымен глобальды деріс контекстінде ислам леміні тарихын арастыру маызды.

азастанны мсылман археологиясыны маызын тек мсылманды сулет нері ана емес, заттай мдениетті баса да категориялары анытайды. Олар зираттар, жерлеу орны, нумизматика; айратар жне абір сті кірпіштері; арабша жазуы бар кркемдік металдар; керамика мен шыны.

Заттай мдениетті жоарыда аталан барлы категорияларын талдау мен орытындылауа сынылып отыран ебек арналады.

Литература Literature Раппопорт П.А. Архитектура Древней Руси и археология // КСИА. Москва, 1982. № 172. С.3-9.

Пугаченкова Г.А. К проблеме архитектурной археологии в изучении зодчества Средней Азии // КСИА. Москва, 1982. № 172. С.24-30.

Байпаков К.М., Шарденова З.Ш., Перегудова С.Я. Раннесредневековая архитектура Семиречья и Южного Казахстана. Алматы, 2001; Байпаков К.М. Великий Шелковый путь на территории Казахстана. Алматы, 2007. С.305-393.

Мец А. Мусульманский ренессанс. Москва, 1960.

Массон В.М. Экономика и социальный строй древних обществ. Ленинград, 1976. С.110-112.

Большаков О.Г. История Халифата / Между двух гражданских войн (656-696). Москва, 1998.


Большаков О.Г. К истории Таласской битвы (751 г.) // Страны и народы Востока. Москва, 1980.

Вып.22. С.132-136; Беленицкий A.M., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город Средней Азии. Ленинград, 1973. С.132-133.

Бартольд В.В. История культурной жизни Туркестана // Сочинения. Москва, 1963. Т.II. Ч.1.

С.244; Нуртазина Н.Д. Вклад В.В.Бартольда в историю исламизации тюрков // Проблемы востоковедения. Уфа, 2010. № 1. С.58-64.

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия // Сочинения. Москва, 1963. Т.I.


Бартольд В.В. История культурной жизни Туркестана. С.238; Камолиддинов Ш.К. «Ктай алКанди» Абу Хафоса ан-Насафи и его сведения по истории распространения ислама в Бухаре // Древняя и средневековая культура Бухарского оазиса / Материалы конференции по результатам совместных Узбекско-итальянских исследований в археологии и востоковедении. Бухара 26сентября 2003. Самарканд-Рим, 2006. С.55-59.

Асадов Ф.М. Арабские источники о тюрках в раннее средневековье. Баку, 1993. С.21-22.

Большаков О.Г. Город в конце VIII – начале XIII в. // Беленицкий А.М., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город Средней Азии. Ленинград, 1973. С.132.

Бартольд В.В. История культурной жизни Туркестана. С.240.

Филанович М.И. Ташкент. Зарождение и развитие городской культуры. Ташкент, 1983. Т.4.

С.187-188, 210.

Филанович М.И. Ташкент. Зарождение и развитие городской культуры. С.187.

Буряков Ю.Ф. Генезис и этапы развития городской культуры Ташкентского оазиса. Ташкент,

1982. С.180.

Смагулов Е.А. Арабское нашествие в Южном Казахстане. // Мобилизованный археологией. Алматы, 2004. С.105.

Смагулов Е.А. Арабское нашествие в Южном Казахстане. С.109.

Смагулов Е.А., Туякбаев М.Х. Археологические исследования на городище Сидак // Известия Министерства образования РК, Национальной Академии наук РК / Серия общественных наук.

Алматы, 2003. № 1. С.83-98.

Смагулов Е.А. Арабское нашествие в Южном Казахстане. С.30.

21 Исламизация и сакральные родословные в Центральной Азии: наследие Исхак-Баба в нормативной и генеалогических традициях // Генеалогические грамоты и сакральные семейства


XIX–XXI вв.: Насиб-Наме и группа ходжей, связанных с сакральным сказанием об Исхак-Бабе.

Алматы-Берн-Ташкент-Блумингтон, 2008. Т.II.

Кожа М. О начальном этапе исламизации юга Казахстана на основании данных родословных и археологии // Научный мир Казахстана. Шымкент, 2008. № 3. С.164-169.

Михайлова А.И. Новые эпиграфические данные для истории Средней. Азии IX в. // Эпиграфика Востока (ЭВ). Москва, 1954. Т.V. С.11-12.

Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья (VI – начало XIII в.). Алма-Ата, 1986. С.48-59.

25 Кандия Малая. Перевод В.Вяткина. Справочная книжка Самаркандской области. 1906. Вып.

VIII. С. 242; А.Ю. Якубовский датирует поход концом IX в.: Якубовский А.Ю. Об одном раннесаманидском фельсе // КСИА. Москва, 1946. Вып.XII. С.111.

Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья. С. 58-59.

Бурнашева Р.З. Монеты раннего средневековья с городища Отрартобе и Отрарского оазиса // Древности Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1975. С.60-65; История Казахстана. Алматы, 1996. Т.1.


Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.250.

Муминов А.К. Казахские ходжи // Shygys. Восток. Oient. Алматы, 2004. № 1. С.230.

Большаков О.Г. Город в конце VIII – начале XIII в. // Беленицкий А.М., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город Средней Азии. Ленинград, 1973. С.132.

Большаков О.Г. Город в конце VIII – начале XIII в. С.132.

Гафуров Б.Г. Таджики. Древнейшая, древняя и средневековая история. Москва, 1972. С.322Мец Адам. Мусульманский Ренессанс. Москва, 1966.

Конрад Н.И. Предисловие к книге В.К.Чалоян. Армянский Ренессанс. Москва, 1963. С.161.

Кляшторный С.Г. Древнетюркские рунические памятники. Москва, 1964. С.154-155.

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.253-254; История Казахстана. Алматы, 1996. Т.I. С.338-341.

Волин С.Л. Сведения арабских источников о долине р. Талас и смежных районах // Новые материалы по древней и средневековой истории Казахстана / Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии АН КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1960. Т.8. С.75.

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.268.

Бартольд В.В. Очерк истории Семиречья // Сочинения. Москва, 1963. Т.II. Ч.1. С.268.

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.315-316, 318.

41 Материалы по истории туркмен и Туркмении / Арабские и персидские источники VII–XV вв.

Под ред. С.Л.Волина, А.А.Ромаскевича и А.Ю.Якубовского. Москва-Ленинград, 1939. Т.I. С.44.

42 Материалы по истории туркмен и Туркмении. С.184.

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.234.

Волин С.Л. Сведения арабских источников IX-XVI вв. о долине р. Талас и смежных районах.


Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.235.

Бартольд В.В. История культурной жизни Туркестана. С.129, 256.

Бартольд В.В. История турецко-монгольских народов // Сочинения. Москва, 1968. Т.5. С.213.

Baipakov K. Cultua e eligioni in Kazakhstan Sciamani I devisci dall stee del Pete Gianni Religiosita del Kazakhstan e ecezione del fantastico a Venezia. Venezia, 2000. P.17-36.

Бартольд В.В. История турецко-монгольских народов. С.213.

Гийассадин Али. Дневник похода Тимура в Индию. Москва, 1958. С.189.

Маньковская Л.Ю. Типологические основы зодчества Средней Азии (IX – начало XX в.). ТашIX кент, 1980. С.102-119; Хмельницкий С. Между Саманидами и Монголами. Архитектура Средней Азии XI-XIII вв. Берлин-Рига, 1996. С.69-127.

Байпаков К.М., Нортхедж А. Новые данные об Акыртасе // Известия министерства науки и Академии наук Республики Казахстан / Серия общественных наук. Алматы, 1997. № 1. С.88-89;

Baypakov Karl M., Northeedge Alister // Mission fance-kazakh d’ Akytash // Etudes Kaahanides.

Caie d’Azia Centale Tashkent – Aix-en Povennce. 2000. № 9. P.344-345.

53 Городище Баласагун находится на территории Кыргызской Pеспублики/ Горячева В.Д. Городская культура тюркских каганатов на Тянь-Шане (середина VI – начало XIII в.). Бишкек, 2010. С.138-139.


Горячева В.Д. Городская культура тюркских каганатов на Тянь-Шане (середина VI – начало XIII). Бишкек, 2010. С.136-137.

Шалекенов У.Х., Акымбек Е.Ш. Ортаасырлы Атбе аласындаы мнара. // Казахстан и Евразия сквозь века / История, археология, культурное наследие. Алматы, 2010. С.225-230.

Байпаков К.М. Великий Шелковый путь на территории Казахстана. Алматы, 2007. С.344-345.

Байпаков К.М. Средневековые города Казахстана на Великом Шелковом пути. Алматы, 1998.

С.110-112; Байпаков К.М., Нортхедж А. От ставки к городу // Новости археологии / Международный казахско-турецкий университет им. Х.А. Яссави. Туркестан, 1997. Вып.1. С.54-55.

Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья. Алма-Ата,

1986. С.25-26; Байпаков К.М. Городище Куйрыктобе – город Кедер. Алматы, 2005. (на каз., рус., англ. яз.).

Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. Москва, 1963. Т.I. С.233-234.

Байпаков К.М., Терновая Г.А. Религии и культы средневекового Казахстана. Алматы, 2005.


Байпаков К. М., Воякин Д.А. Средневековый город Каялык. Алматы, 2007.

Егоров В.Л., Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Исследование мечети на Водянском городище // Средневековые памятники Поволжья. Москва, 1976. С.108-167.

Байпаков К.М., Воякин Д.А. Средневековый город Каялык. С.71-79.

Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Позднесредневековый Отрар. Алма-Ата, 1972.

С.164-165; Байпаков К.М., Воякин Д.А. Отрар // Свод памятников истории и культуры ЮжноКазахстанской области. Отрарский оазис. Алматы, 2007. С.208-213.

Пугаченкова Г. А. Пути развития архитектуры Южного Туркестана поры рабовладения и феодализма // Труды ЮТАКЭ. Москва, 1958. Т.VI. С.317-318; Она же. Зодчество Центральной Азии XV века. Ташкент, 1976. С.16; Кочнев Б.Д. Средневековые загородные культовые сооружения Средней Азии. Ташкент, 1976. С.49-50.

Маньковская Л.Ю. Типологические основы зодчества Средней Азии (IX – начало XX в.). Ташкент, 1980. С.108-112.

Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья (VI – начало XIII в.). Алма-Ата, 1986. С.139.

Пищулина К.А. Присырдарьинские города и их значение в истории казахских ханств в XV– XVII веках // Казахстан в XV-XVIII веках. Алма-Ата, 1969. С.8.

Акишев К. А., Байпаков К. М., Ерзакович Л. Б. Древний Отрар. Алма-Ата, 1972. С.38-40.

Байпаков К. М., Воякин Д.А. Городище Отрар // Свод памятников истории и культуры ЮжноКазахстанской области. Отрарский район. Алматы, 2007. С. 211.

72 Свод памятников истории и культуры Южно-Казахстанской области. Отрарский район. Алматы, 2007. С.213.

Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Позднесредневековый Отрар (XVI–XVIII вв.).

Алма-Ата, 1981. С.107-109.

Смагулов Е. Город Сауран: перспективы исследования, консервации и музеефикации // «Отан тарихы». Алматы, 2000. № 1,2. С.100-109; Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А. Средневековый город Сауран. Алматы, 2005.

Смагулов Е.А. Архитектура Саурана // «Промышленность Казахстана». Алматы, 2006. № С.96Смагулов Е.А., Туякбаев М.К., Ержигитова А.А. Жума мечеть на регистане Саурана // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» 2006 г.

Алматы, 2007. С.171-175 (на каз., рус. яз.).

Талеев Д. Результаты раскопок на Айт мечети // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» 2006 г. Алматы, 2007. С.178 (на каз., рус. яз.).

Толстов С.П. Города гузов // Советская этнография. Москва, 1947. № 3. С.55-102; Бартольд В.В.

Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия // Сочинения. Москва-Ленинград, 1963. Т.I. С.235.

Ахатов Г.А., Смагулов Т.Н., Ганиева А.С., Амиргалина Г.Т. Археологические исследования древнего городища Жанкент // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» 2006 г. Алматы, 2007. С.144-145 (на каз., рус. яз.).

Волин С.Л. Сведения арабских источников X–XVI вв. о долине р. Талас и смежных районах // Новые материалы по древней и средневековой истории Казахстана / Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии АН КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1960. Т.VIII. С.80.


81 Массон М.Е. Старый Сайрам // Известия Средазкомстариса. Ташкент, 1928. Вып. III. С.27-31.

82 Байтанаев Б.А., Богомолов Г.И., Ергешев А. Мечеть Хазыр-Пайгамбар в селе Сайрам // Известия Национальной Академии наук Республики Казахстан (НАН) / Серия общественных наук.

Алматы, 2008. № 1. С.129-140.

83 Гейнс А.К. Путешествие в Туркестан: Дневник 1866 года // Собрание сочинений в 3-х томах.

Санкт-Петербург, 1898. Т.I. С.380 84 Массон М.Е. Старый Сайрам. С.27-28.

85 Свод памятников истории и культуры Южного Казахстана. Южно-Казахстанская область. Алматы, 1994. С.206.

86 Байпаков К.М., Воякин Д.А. Города Приаралья: Дженд, Асакас, Барчкент // Вестник Международного Института Центрально-азиатских исследований (МИЦАИ). Самарканд, 2009. № 10.


87 Хмельницкий С. Между саманидами и монголами // Архитектура Средней Азии XI–XIII вв.

Берлин-Рига, 1996. С.69-127.

88 Байпаков К. М., Воякин Д.А. Средневековый город Каялык. C.80-87.

89 Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А. Средневековый город Сауран. Алматы, 2005. С.93-95.

90 Сборник материалов по истории Золотой Орды. Москва-Ленинград, 1941. Т.II. С.129; Кун А.Л.

Туркестанский Альбом. 1871-1872. Алматы, 2005. С.126.

91 Болдырев А.Л. Зайнаддин Васифи. Таджикский писатель XIV в. Сталинабад, 1957. С.160-161.

92 Пугаченкова Г.А. Сауранские башни // Туды Среднеазитского государственного университета.

Ташкент, 1954. Вып. LVII. С.163-167.

93 Байпаков К.М., Акылбек С.Ш. Медресе средневекового Саурана // Археология степной Евразии.

Кемерово-Алматы, 2008. С.56-79.

94 Байпаков К.М., Акылбек С.Ш. Медресе средневекового Саурана. С.56-73.

95 Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Позднесредневековый Отрар (XVI–XVIII вв.).

Алма-Ата, 1981. С.162-166.

96 Орбели И.О. Баня и скоморох. XII в. // Памятники эпохи Ш.Руставели. Ленинград, 1938. С.159Большаков О.Г. Ислам запрещает // Наука и религия. Москва, 1967. № 7. С.41.

98 Кабус-намэ. Москва, 1958. С.113-114; Болдырев А.М. Очерки из жизни гератского общества на рубеже XV-XVI вв. // Труды Отд. Востока Гос. Эрмитажа. Ленинград, 1947. Т.IV. С.336; Вамбери Г. Очерки жизни и нравов Востока. Санкт-Петербург, 1887. С.120-130.

99 Халпахчьян О.Х. Средневековые бани Армении // Советская археология. Москва, 1960. № 1.


100 Абу Али ибн Сина. Канон врачебной науки. Ташкент, 1954. Кн.1. С.198.

101 Эссад Дж. Константинополь: от Византии до Стамбула. Москва, 1919. С.267.

102 Мец А. Мусульманский Ренессанс. Москва, 1973. С.311.

103 Большаков О.Г. Город в конце VIII – начале XIII в. // Беленицкий А.М., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековые города Средней Азии. Ленинград, 1973. С.309.

104 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях // Советская этнография. Москва, 1951. № 1. С.41.

105 Байпаков К.М. Средневековые города Южного Казахстана и Семиречья. Алма-Ата, 1986. С.141Хмельницкий С.Г. Между саманидами и монголами. Берлин-Рига, 1997. Ч.II. С.188-200.

107 Бернштам А.Н. Баня древнего Тараза и ее датировка // Труды Отдела Востока Государственного Эрмитажа. Ленинград, 1940. Т.II. С.177-183; Хмельницкий С.Г. Между саманидами и монголами. С.190-191.

108 Шалекенов У.Х. (Баласагуни). Город Баласагун в V-VIII веках. Алматы, 2009. С.116-118.

109 Байтанаев Б.А., Богомолов Г.И. Средневековая баня из Екпенды // Материалы международной научной конференции «Кадырбаевские чтения». 2007 г. Актобе, 2007. С.287-293.

110 Байпаков К.М. По следам древних городов Казахстана. Отрарский оазис. Алма-Ата, 1990. С.83Грошев В.А. Водохранилище средневекового Отрара // Прошлое Казахстана по археологическим источникам. Алма-Ата, 1976. С.37.

112 Характеристика бани дается по плану второго строительного горизонта.

113 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.119.

114 Абу Али Ибн Сина. Канон врачебной науки. С.196, 198.


115 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.120.

116 Шишкина Г.В. Городской квартала VIII–IX вв. на северо-западе Афрасиаба // Афрасиаб. Ташкент, 1973. С.133; Пугаченкова Г.А. Архитектурные памятники Нисы // ТЮТАКЭ. Ашхабад,

1949. Т.1. С.243-244.

117 Якобсон А.Л. Средневековые бани Херсонеса // Советская археология. Москва, 1946. Вып. VIII.

С.264, 296.

118 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.120.

119 Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Древний Отрар. Алма-Ата, 1972. С.104-110.

120 Чтение и перевод выполнены В. Шуховцовым.

121 Воронина В.Л. Бани-хамам у народов Советского Союза и стран зарубежного Востока // Архитектурное наследство. Москва, 1983. Вып.31. С.142.

122 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.119.

123 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.120.

124 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.123.

125 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.118.

126 Воронина В.Л. Об узбекских банях. С.118.

127 Витрувий. Десять книг об архитектуре. Москва, 1936. С.107.

128 Халпахчьян О.Х. Средневековые бани Армении // Советская археология. Москва, 1960. № 1.


129 Байпаков К.М., Воякин Д.А. Средневековый город Каялык. Алматы, 2007. С.71-79.

130 Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А., Ахатов Г.А. Средневековое городище Жайык. Алматы, 2005.


131 Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Золотоордынские города Поволжья. Москва, 2001. С.194.

132 Зиливинская Э.Д. Средневековые бани Нижнего Поволжья // Сокровища сарматских вождей и древние города Поволжья. Москва, 1989. С.251.

133 Смирнов А.П. Волжские булгары. Москва, 1951. С.216.

134 Кожа М., Самашев 3. Новые материалы изучения бань золотоордынского времени // Вестник Казахского государственного университета / Серия историческая. Алматы, 2006. № 2.


135 Хмельницкий С.Г. Между саманидами и монголами. Берлин-Рига, 1996. Ч.1. С.152-153.

136 Маньковская Л.Ю. О типологии мемориального зодчества Средней Азии. Мавзолеи Фудины и Касби // Культура и искусство народов Средней Азии в древности и средневековье.

Москва, 1975. С.97; Маньковская Л.Ю. Мемориальное зодчество Средней Азии // Художественная культура Средней Азии 9-13 вв. Ташкент, 1983. С.32-38. Хмельницкий С.Г. Архитектура Средней Азии XI–XIII вв. // Между Саманидами и монголами. Берлин-Рига, 1996. Ч.1.


137 Васильев Д.В. Мавзолеи Золотой Орды: географический обзор и опыт типологизации // Ученые записки Астраханского государственного университета. Астрахань, 2003. С.119.

138 Бернштам А.Н. Архитектурные памятники Киргизии. Москва-Ленинград, 1950. С.46-86.

139 Васильев Д.В.. Мавзолеи Золотой Орды: географический обзор и опыт типологизации. С.110.

140 Байпаков К.М., Терновая Г.А. Религия и культы средневекового Казахстана. Алматы, 2005.


141 Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Отрар в XIII–XV вв. Алма-Ата, 1987. С.124-126.

142 Байпаков К.М. Городище Куйрыктобе – город Кедер. Алматы, 2005. С.74.

143 Нурмуханбетов Б.Н. Раннемусульманское кладбище близ городища Куйрыктобе // По следам древних культур Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1974. С.85-94.

144 Кожа М. Мавзолей Арыстанбаба. Шымкент, 2009. С.7-9.

145 Свод памятников истории и культуры Казахстана. Южно-казахстанская область. Алматы,

1994. С.33-134; Воронина В.Л. Колонны из Отрара // Древности Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1975.


146 Акылбек С.Ш. Мавзолей Арыстанбаба в свете новых данных // Известия НАН РК / Серия общественных наук. Алматы, 2009. № 1. С.87-92.

147 Массон М.Е. Мавзолей Ходжа Ахмеда Ясеви. Ташкент, 1930; Маньковская Л.Ю. К изучению приемов среднеазиатского общества конца XIV в. // Мавзолей Ходжа Ахмеда Ясави – искусство зодчих Узбекистана. Ташкент, 1962. Т.1. С.93-142; Хмельницкий С. Между саманидами и монголами. С.258-259; Смагулов Е.А. Первый мавзолей Ходжа Ахмеда Ясави // «Промыш



ленность Казпахстана». Алматы, 2004. № 2. С.94-98; Проскурин А.Н. Ханака Ахмеда Ясави // Свод памятников истории и культуры Казахстана. Южно-Казахстанская область. Алматы,

1994. С.273-277.

Проскурин А.Н. Мавзолей Есим-хана // Свод памятников истории и культуры Казахстана.

Южно-Казахстанская область. Алматы, 1994. С.278.

Герасимов П.Г. Памятники архитектуры долины реки Кара-Кенгир в Центральном Казахстане.

Алма-Ата, 1957. С.23-28.; Хорош Е.Х. К вопросу о строительной истории мавзолея Жоши-хана // Научные чтения памяти Н.Э.Масанова / Сборник материалов научно-практической конференции. Алматы, 25-26 апреля 2008 г. Алматы, 2009. С.101-108. Рис.1-4, А.

Смагулов Е.А. Под водами Аральского моря // «Промышленность Казахстана». Алматы, 2003.

№ 5. С.94-98.

Байпаков К., Воякин Д., Айдосов А., Мамиев Т. Города на дне Арала // «Промышленность Казахстана». Алматы, 2004. № 6. С.94-97; Байпаков К., Воякин Д., Айдосов А., Нурзаринов А., Баштанник С., Сорокин Д. Археологические исследования памятников на дне Аральского моря // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» в 2007-2008 гг. Алматы, 2008. С.238-247.

152 Топография Оренбургская, т.е. обязательное описание Оренбургской губернии, сочиненное коллежским советником Имп. Академии наук корреспондентом П.Рычковым. Санкт-Петербург,

1762. Ч.1. С.515.

Кастанье И.А. Древности киргизской степи и Оренбургского края. Алматы, 2007. С.149-153.

Табл.2. Рис.1.

Мендикулов М. Памятники народного зодчества Западного Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1987. С.46.

155 По нашим опросным данным южная часть мавзолея была разрушена в начале 40-х гг. прошлого века.

Мендикулов М. Памятники народного зодчества Западного Казахстана. С.46.

Аджигалиев С.М., Турганбаева Л.Р. Абат-Байтак – жемчужина Казахской степи. Алматы, 2004.

Аджигалиев С.М. Абат-Байтак – выдающийся комплекс памятников народного зодчества // Известия Академии наук КазССР / Серия археологическая. Алматы, 1983. № 2. С.59.

Боталов С.Г., Маламуд Г.Я. Погребальный комплекс Кесене // Уфимский археологический сборник. Уфа, 2001. Вып.3. С.162.

Смагулов Е.А. Мавзолей Абат-Байтак: некоторые итоги археологических исследований // Известия НАН РК / Серия общественных наук. Алматы, 2006. № 1. С.126-135.

Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Кочевники Восточной Европы под властью золотоордынских ханов. Москва, 1966. С.32; Степи Евразии в эпоху средневековья. Москва, 1981.

Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Золотоордынские города Поволжья. Керамика. Торговля. Москва, 2001.


Аджигалиев С.И. Генезис традиционной погребально-культовой архитектуры Западного Казахстана. Алматы, 1994. С.54-56.

Боталов С.Г., Маламуд Г.Я. Погребальный комплекс Кесене. С.162-167.

Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А., Ахатов Г.А. Некрополь Уральского городища // Вопросы истории и археологии Западного Казахстана. Уральск, 2002. С.168-184; Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А., Ахатов Г.А. Исследования «Большого мавзолея» на некрополе Уральского городища // Вопросы истории и археологии Западного Казахстана. Уральск, 2003. С.142-162; Смагулов Е.А.

Мавзолеи на берегу Жайика // «Кумбез»., Алматы, 2004. 4.03-1.04. С.49-51.

Смаилов Ж.Е., Ошанов О.Ж. Мавзолей Кобланды батыра. Алматы, 2007. С.128-145.

Маньковская Л.Ю. О типологии мемориального зодчества Средней Азии мавзолея Фудины и Касби // Культура и искусство народов Средней Азии в древности и средневековье. Москва,

1979. С.102.

Егоров В.Л., Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Исследование мечети на Водянском городище // Средневековые памятники Поволжья. Москва, 1976. С.139-158.

169 Ширину дверного проема и здесь выявить не удалось по упоминавшейся выше причине.

Байпаков К.М., Смагулов Е.А., Ахатов Г.А. Некрополь Уральского городища. С.179, рис. 11-13.

171 Как известно, в XVII–XIX вв. при колонизации Поволжья и Приуралья российское правительXIX XIX ство рекомендовало при строительстве городов-укреплений «ломать ханские палаты» и использовать полученный таким путем строительный материал. На этот счет издавались специальные указы, а разрушение древних городищ и некрополей как весьма прибыльное дело было хорошо


поставлено. «Поразительны варварство и ненависть, проявленные московским правительством в отношении татарских сооружений в области Нижнего Поволжья» – писал один из пионеров «золотоордынской археологии» (Баллод Ф. Поволжские Помпеи. Москва-Петроград, 1923.

С.20-21). Не приходится сомневаться, что и на берегах р. Урал эта практика была широко развита. Естественно, что при разрушении мавзолеев вскрывались и находившиеся в них погребения. Отсюда, надо полагать, и те средневековые кирпичи и изразцы, иногда находящиеся под куренями г. Уральска, о которых упоминает Г.А.Кушаев (Кушаев Г.А. Этюды древней истории степного Приуралья. Уральск, 1993. С.134).

Стеблюк Ю.В. Погребальные сооружения Южного Хорезма XVII–XIX вв. // Полевые исследования Хорезмской экспедиции в 1956-1961 гг. Москва, 1963. С.99.

Хмельницкий С.Г. Между саманидами и монголами. Архитектура Средней Азии XI – начала XIII в. Берлин-Рига, 1996. Ч.I. С.152-153.

Егоров В.Л., Федоров-Давыдов Г.А. Исследование мечети на Водянском городище // Средневековые памятники Поволжья. Москва, 1976. С.108-166.

Яблонский Л.Т. Типы погребального обряда на мусульманских городских некрополях Золотой Орды // Вестник МГУ / Серия IX. История. Москва,1975. № 2. С.75-84.

Щербина Ф. Объяснительная записка к данным об излишних землях, находившихся в пользовании киргиз Павлодарского уезда // Павлодарский уезд. Воронеж, 1903. С.37а.

Букейханов А. Список обам на реке Слеты Коржункульской волости Акмолинского уезда // Записки Семипалатинского подотдела Западно-Сибирского отдела ИРГО. Семипалатинск, 1907;

Маргулан А.Х. Остатки оседлых поселений в Центральном Казахстане // Археологические памятники Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1978. С.18-19. Коншин Н. О памятниках старины в Семипалатинской области // Записки Семипалатинского п/о Зап. Сиб отделения Русского географического общества. Семипалатинск, 1903. Вып.1. С.11; Археологическая карта Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1960. № 1177. С.92.

Юдин В.П. Орды: Белая, Синяя, Золотая // Чингиз-наме. Алма-Ата, 1992. С.22.

179 Хозяйство казахов на рубеже XIX-XX вв.: материалы к историко-географическому атласу. АлмаАта, 1980. С.65-67.

Смагулов Т.Н. Археологические исследования на некрополе Аулиеколь // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» 2007 г. Алматы,

2009. С.223-229; Смагулов Т.Н., Женисов А.Т., Казизов Е.С. Исследования на археологическом комплексе Аулиеколь // Отчет об археологических исследованиях по государственной программе «Культурное наследие» 2008. Алматы, 2008. С.228-231.

Хабдулина М.К. Мавзолеи средневекового городища Бозок (река Ишим). Археология Нижнего Поволжья: проблемы, поиски открытия. Материалы III Международной Поволжской археологической конференции (Астрахань, 18-21 октября 2010г.). Астрахань, 2010. С. 384-391.

Хабдулина М.К., Кожамжаров Т.К., Ярыкин С.А., Калдыбаев М.С. Сакенов С.К., Свиридов А.Н.

Культовые памятники Тенгиз-Коргальджинской впадины. Астана, 2011. С. 693-699.

Агеева Е.И. Некрополь // Археологические исследования на северных склонах Каратау / Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии Академии наук КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1962. Т.14.


184 Бронзовый фельс, чеканенный в Усрушане от имени Исмаила ибн-Ахмеда. Год обломан, но упоминание в поле оборотной стороны имени правителя характерно для усрушанского чекана 280 г.х. (843-844 г.г.). Определение В.Н.Настича.

Нурмуханбетов Б.Н. Раннемусульманское кладбище близ городища Куйрыктобе // В глубь веков. Алма-Ата, 1974. С.85-94.

186 Байпаков К.М. Исследование некрополя Джамуката в Таласской долине // Вестник Казахского Государственного университета, посвященный 75-летию У.Х.Шалекенова / Серия историческая. Алматы, 1999. № 12. С.39.

Настич В.Н. Поясная накладка из Отрара // Древности Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1975. С.98-105.

Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Древний Отрар (Топография, стратиграфия, перспективы). Алма-Ата, 1972. С.60-61.

Настич В.Н. Поясная накладка из Отрара. С.99 Там же. С.99-102.

Там же. С.103.

Там же. С.104.


193 Бернштам А.Н. Историко-археологические очерки Центрального Тянь-Шаня и Памиро-Алая // Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР. Москва-Ленинград, 1952. № 26. С.150.

194 Волин С.Л. Сведения арабских источников IX–XVI вв. о долине реки Талас и смежных районах // Новые материалы по древней и средневековой истории Казахстана / Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии Академии наук КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1960. Т.8. С.82-83.

195 Байпаков К.М., Терновая Г.А., Горячева В.Д. Художественный металл городища Красная Речка (VI – начало XIII в.). Алматы, 2007.

196 Сарианиди В.И. Мой ответ К.Ламберг-Карловскому (В.Сарианиди htm).

197 Труды Семиреченской археологической экспедиции «Чуйская долина» / Составлена под руководством А.Н.Бернштама // Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР. Москва-Ленинград, 1950. № 14. Табл.XCI; Бернштам А.Н. Историко-археологические очерки Центрального ТяньШаня и Памиро-Алая. С.168, рис. 69, 74, 75; Байпаков К.М., Савельева Т.В., Чанг К. Средневековые города и поселения Северо-восточного Жетысу. Алматы, 2005. С.106-112. Табл.XI–XII;

Байпаков К.М., Савельева Т.В. Древние сокровища Алматы. Алматы, 2004. С.107-111, 115-119;

Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья (VI – начаVI ло XIII в.). Алма-Ата, 1986. С.175-177, рис.76-78; Байпаков К.М., Алдабергенов Н.О. Отрарский оазис. Алматы, 2005. С.76-90.

198 Иванов А.А. О бронзовых изделиях конца XIV в. из мавзолея Ходжа Ахмеда Ясеви // Средняя Азия и ее соседи в древности и средневековье / История и культура. Москва, 1981. С.68-84, 179-181.

199 Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья. Рис.106.

200 Байпаков К.М., Алдабергенов Н.О. Отрарский оазис. С.146.

201 Агеева Е.И. Новые эпиграфические находки // Новые материалы по древней и средневековой истории Казахстана / Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии Академии наук КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1960. Т.8. С.177, рис.1.

202 Байпаков К.М., Савельева Т.В., Чанг К. Средневековые города и поселения Северо-восточного Жетысу. С.125, рис.131,132.

203 Байпаков К., Байбосынов К. Сокровища древнего Тараза. Алматы, 2008. С.113,154,155.

204 Самашев З., Кузнецова О., Плахов В. Керамика Сарайчика. Алматы, 2008. С.118,119,151,158, 159,188, 192-193, 219.

205 Байпаков К.М., Савельева Т.В., Чанг К. Средневековые города и поселения Северо-восточного Жетысу. С.82, рис.86; табл.IX; рис.150; Сенигова Т.Н. Средневековый Тараз. Алма-Ата, 1972.

Табл.XI; Рис.105-115; Байпаков К.М., Алдабергенов Н.О. Отрарский оазис. С.156-157; Байпаков К.М. Городище Куйрыктобе – город Кедер. Алматы, 2005. С.118-119, 172-175.

206 Байпаков К.М., Алдабергенов Н.О. Отрарский оазис. С.104.

207 Бернштам А.Н. Историко-археологические очерки Центрального Тянь-Шаня и Памиро-Алая.

С.162-164, рис.71.

208 Большаков О.Г. Поливная керамика Мавераннахра как историко-культурный памятник (исследование собрания «Государственный Эрмитаж») // Автореферат дисс. канд. исторических наук.

Ленинград, 1954. С.12-14.; Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. // Беленицкий А.М., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город Средней Азии. Ленинград, 1973.


209 Ахраров И.Е. К истории появления поливной керамики в Средней Азии // История материальной культуры Узбекистана (ИМКУ). Ташкент, 1965. № 6. С.150.

210 Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. С.275.

211 Там же. С.276.

212 Байпаков К.М. Средневековая городская культура Южного Казахстана и Семиречья. С.106-107, рис.35; 118.

213 Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. С.279.

214 Там же. С.279-280.

215 Ташходжаев Ш. Художественная поливная керамика Самарканда. Ташкент, 1967. С.75.

216 Энгельс Ф. Анти-Дюринг // Маркс К. и Энгельс Ф. Сочинения. Москва, 1961. Т.20. С.314.

217 Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. С.281.

218 Цит.: Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. С.276.

219 Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город VIII – начала XIII в. С.282.

220 Акишев К.А., Байпаков К.М., Ерзакович Л.Б. Отрар в XIII-XV вв. Алма-Ата, 1987. С.121-122, рис. 43. Чтение, перевод и датировка надписи принадлежит В.Шуховцову.


221 Тасмагамбетов И.Н., Самашев З.С. Сарайчик. Алматы, 2001. С.65, 243.

222 Камышев А. Раннесредневековый монетный комплекс Семиречья. Бишкек, 2002. С.132-134.

223 Настич В.Н. Монетные находки с городища Красная Речка (1978-1983 гг.) // Красная Речка и Бурана. Фрунзе, 1989. С.102-117.

224 Караев О. История Караханидского каганата (IX – начало XIII в.). Бишкек, 1983. С.100-101.

225 Камышев А. Раннесредневековый монетный комплекс Семиречья. С.65.

226 Сенигова Т.Н. Средневековый Тараз. С.104.

227 Настич В.Н. Монетные находки из Казахстана и Киргизии // Вторая Всесоюзная нумизматическая конференция / Тезисы докладов и сообщений. Москва, 1987. С.52-53.

228 Бурнашева Р.З. Монеты раннего средневековья с городища Отрартобе и Отрарского оазиса (1969-1972 гг.) // Древности Казахстана. Алма-Ата, 1975. С.60-66.

229 Байпаков К.М., Настич В.Н. Новые данные по истории Отрара X–XIII вв. // Известия Академии наук КазССР / Серия общественных наук. Алма-Ата, 1978. № 2. С.44-45.

230 Нурмуханбетов Б.Н. Раннемусульманское кладбище близ городища Куйрык-тобе // В глубь веков. Алма-Ата, 1974. С.87, примечание 10; Бурнашева Р.З. Монеты раннего средневековья с городища Отрар-тобе и Отрарского оазиса (1969-1972 гг.) // Древности Казахстана. Алма-Ата,

1975. С.67-68.

231 Давидович Е.А. Новые данные по истории Саманидов (клад медных монет IX–X вв. из СамарX X канда) // Средняя Азия в древности и средневековье. Москва, 1977. С.112-115, 124.

232 Бараб и Фараб – две графические формы одного и того же топонима, отражающие арабскую передачу начального n, знак для которого отсутствует в арабском алфавите. Оригинальное произношение этого слова — Параб. См.: Бартольд В.В. Фараб // Сочинения. Mосква, 1965. Т.III.

С.525; Волин С. Сведения арабских источников IX–XIV вв. о долине реки Талас и смежных районах. С.78, прим.38.

233 Давидович Е.А. Бараб – новый среднеазиатский монетный двор саманидов и Ануштенизов // Письменные памятники Востока. Москва, 1977. С.124-126.

234 Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия // Сочинения. Москва, 1963. Т.I.


235 Бартольд В.В. Очерк истории туркменского народа // Сочинения. Москва, 1963. Т.II. Ч.1. С.562Волин С. Сведения арабских источников IX-XIV вв. о долине реки Талас и смежных районах.


237 Беленицкий А.М., Бентович И.Б., Большаков О.Г. Средневековый город Средней Азии. С.133.

238 Кочнев Б.Д. Будухкет – новый монетный двор (XI в.) // Известия Академии наук Казахской ССР / Серия обществ. наук. Алма-Ата, 1986. № 1. С.49-54.

239 Ал-Истахри. «Китаб масалик» / Пер. с перс. З.Н.Ворожейкиной // Материалы по истории киргизов и Киргизии. Москва, 1973. Вып.1. С.29.

240 Бартольд В.В. Отчет о командировке в Среднюю Азию с научной целью 1893-1894 г. // Сочинения. Москва, 1966. Т.IV. С.28, примеч.8.

241 Там же. С.98.

242 Агеева Е.И., Пацевич Г.И. Из истории оседлых поселений и городов Южного Казахстана // Труды Института истории, археологии и этнографии Академии наук КазССР. Алма-Ата, 1958. Т.5.


243 Байтанаев Б.А. Древний Испиджаб. Шымкент-Алматы, 2003. С.41-61.

244 Давидович Е.А. Бараб – новый среднеазиатский монетный двор Саманидов и Ануштегинидов.


245 Кочнев Б.Д. Новые нумизматические данные к истории Караханидов второй половины XII – начала XIII в. // Киргизия при Караханидах. Фрунзе, 1983.

246 Все монеты происходят из обработанного и подготовленного к изданию клада, который найден в 1976 г. близ мавзолея Мир Сайид Бахрам в п. Кермине (Бухарская обл.).

247 Из описанных 19 монет 18 оказались в составе клада, найденного в 1958 г. при земляных работах в г. Джамбуле на территории средневекового Тараза. В настоящее время клад хранится в Жамбылском историко-краеведческом музее (инв. № 886). Один дирхем того же типа осмотрен Б.Д.Кочневым в частной коллекции К.Амиркулова. Он тоже найден на территории Тараза.

248 Все монеты данного типа оказались в составе того же Жамбылского клада.


249 Хранится в отделе нумизматики Государственного Эрмитажа, инв. № 14138.

250 Байпаков К.М., Настич В.Н. Новые данные по истории Отрара Х–XIII вв. // Известия АН КазССР / Серия общественных наук. Алма-Ата, 1978. № 2. С.48.

251 Бартольд В.В. Фараб. С.525.

252 The Histoy of the Wold-Conqueo by Ala-ad-Din Ata-Malik Juvaini. Tansl. fom the text of Miza Muhammad Qazvini by J.A. Boyle. Mancheste, 1958. Vol.I. P.347-348.

253 Шихаб ад-Дин Мухаммад ан-Насави. Жизнеописания султана Джалал ад-Дина Манкбурны / Перевод с араб., предисловие, комментарии, примечания и указатели З.М.Буниятова. Баку, 1973.


254 Давидович Е.А. Вопросы хронологии и генеалогии Караханидов второй половины XII в. // Средняя Азия в древности и средневековье. Москва, 1977. С.185-186.

255 Кочнев Б.Д. Новые нумизматические данные к истории Караханидов второй половины XII – начала XIII в. // Киргизия при Караханидах. Фрунзе, 1983. С.97-102, рис.3.

256 Бартольд В.В. Туркестан в эпоху монгольского нашествия. С.429.

257 Кочнев Б.Д. Караханидский чекан Параба (Отрара) // Средневековая городская культура Казахстана и Средней Азии. Алма-Ата, 1983. С.109-120.

258 Настич В.Н. Средневековая эпиграфика Ферганы и Семиречья: (исторический анализ арабографических эпиграфий XII-XV вв. с территории Киргизии) // Автореферат диссертации на соискание ученой степени кандидата филологических наук. Фрунзе, 1989; Настич В.Н. Погребальная эпиграфика арабского письма как источник по средневековой истории Киргизии и Южного Казахстана // Источниковедение и текстология средневекового Ближнего и Среднего Востока. Москва, 1984. С.161-177; Настич В.Н. К эпиграфической истории Баласагуна (анализ изданных надписей и новые находки) // Красная Речка и Бурана. Фрунзе, 1989. С.158-176.

259 Настич В.Н. Арабские и персидские надписи на кайраках с городища Бурана // Киргизия при караханидах. Фрунзе, 1983. С.227-228; Горячева В.Д. Городская культура тюркских каганатов на Тянь-Шане (VI – начало XIII в.). Бишкек, 2010. С.175-177.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 4 | 5 || 7 |
Похожие работы:

«2 1. ВИД ПРАКТИКИ, СПОСОБ И ФОРМА ЕЕ ПРОВЕДЕНИЯ Б2.У.1. Ботаника Шифр и наименование Учебная Вид Практика по получению первичных профессиональных умений и навыков Тип Стационарная Способ проведения дискрет...»

«Сергей Косенко Калейдоскоп незримого, или Об источнике и получении жизненной энергии "ПЦ Александра Гриценко" УДК 821.161.1 ББК 84(2Рос=Рус)6 Косенко С. Калейдоскоп незримого, или Об источнике и получении жизненной энергии / С. Косенко — "ПЦ Александра Гриценко", 2015 ISBN 978-5-457-9...»

«Содержание 1. Цели и задачи дисциплины 2 2. Место дисциплины в структуре ОПОП 2 3. Требования к результатам освоения дисциплины 2 4. Объем дисциплины и виды учебной работы 2 5. Содержание дисциплины 3 5.1 Содержание разд...»

«УДК 615.47; 004.9 НОВЫЕ ВОЗМОЖНОСТИ ВОССТАНОВЛЕНИЯ ДВИГАТЕЛЬНЫХ И РЕЧЕВЫХ ФУНКЦИЙ М.И. Вовк Международный научно-учебный центр информационных технологий и систем НАН Украины и МОН Украины Рассмотрены теоретические предпосылки активации резервов организма на восстановление двигательных и речевы...»

«В.Т. Плахин Алтайский государственный университет, г. Барнаул "Счастливы вместе" (о внесистемных синтезах рекламного телеэфира) "Ну а я ангажирую угол у тети" Очевидно, что реклама обречена эксплуатировать привлекательность информационно-публицистического и развлекательного контекста массмедиа. Поэтом...»

«Збигнев Войцеховский Раневская, что вы себе позволяете?! Серия "Биографии великих. Неожиданный ракурс" Текст предоставлен издательством http://www.litres.ru/pages/biblio_book/?art=4567895 Раневская, что...»

«МКОУ Новорычанская ООШ ДО Конспект НОД по речевому развитию Путешествие в мир насекомых Подготовила: воспитатель Нурманова А.К. 2013г.Цели: образовательные: продолжать знакомить детей с разнообразным миром насеком...»

«Продолжая традиции, мы рады представить вам новый номер "Ромашки" школьного журнала о природе. Мы хотим поделиться с вами интересными фактами о нашем мире, что не перестат удивлять, новост...»

«КОРПОРАТИВНЫЕ НОВОГОДНИЕ ВЕЧЕРА Декабрь 2013 МЕНЮ ТОРЖЕСТВЕННОГО УЖИНА 2400 РУБЛЕЙ НА ЧЕЛОВЕКА Закуски Хрустящие листья салатов с шариками Моцареллы Греческий салат: томаты, огурцы, сладкий перец, оливки, красный лук и сыр Фета Салат из копченого лосося и дикого р...»

«Новокузнецкий радиоклуб Местное отделение Союза Радиолюбителей России. г. Новокузнецк, пр. Строителей 12, 654007, Россия. Тел. 960-916-5430. E-mail:nrc-srr@rambler.ru. www.qrx.ru 24.10.2015 г. г. Новокузнецк ПРОТОКОЛ общего отчетно-перевыборного собрания Новокузнецкого радиоклуба – местного отделения СРР.Присутствовало: член...»

«М ее ж д у н а р о д н ы й сс о ю з ээ л е к т р о с в я з и М ждународный оюз лектросвязи Безопасность в электросвязи и информационных технологиях Обзор содержания и применения действующих Рекомендаций МСЭ-Т для обеспечения защищенной электросвязи МС...»

«Инструкция настройка nat windows2003 2-04-2016 1 Всем известно, что углеродное нерестилище это в дальнейшем обоснованная манипула, после этого нагреваемый пятиборец взвихривает. Житель чрезвычайно сызмальства вешает. Безнадежная при участии предстательного это т...»

«лче -й. s В Ы Х О Д Я Т Ъ Д В А Р А З А ВЪ М Ћ С Я Ц Ъ. i ^ н а г о д о в о м у и з д а н i ю 4 р у б. 50 к о п, * i, _ _ : ОТДЛЪ ОФФИЦIАЛЬНЫЙ УКАЗЪ СВЯТЙШ У ПРАВИТЕЛЬСТВУЮ ЕМУ ЕМ Щ СИНОДУ. Архiепископу херсонскому П а о у Всемилостивейш е повелт н iваемъ быть митрополитомъ кiевскимъ и галицкимъ, ^спенскiн Кiево-I1ечерскiн лавры священно архимандритомъ i члеиомъ Святйшаго Синода. Н а п о д тн н о ы г Собст...»

«General psychology, personality psychology, history of psychology 45 УДК 159.9.07 Publishing House ANALITIKA RODIS ( analitikarodis@yandex.ru ) http://publishing-vak.ru/ Развитие модели привязанности в контексте различных теоретических подходов Волкова Екатерина Евгеньевна Аспиран...»

«"В защиту науки" Бюллетень № 6 Савинов А.Б. Дарвин и "нечистая сила" Почему в канун 200-летия со дня рождения Ч. Дарвина и 150-летия выхода его знаменитой книги "Происхождение видов" в универс...»

«0314142 Габариты Д х Ш х В в см. (в сложенном положении) Регулировка высоты седла по горизонтали* •I Регулировка высоты седла по вертикали ti Регулировка угла наклона руля * Сенсор пульса t Магнитная система нагружения t Нагрудный датчик Максималь...»

«412 Липецкая область Досье дела  Регион: Дело по иску главного редактора Николая Соколова к мэру г. Ельца Виктору Соковых о защите чести, достоинства, деловой репутации и компенсации морального вреда и встречному иску мэра Виктора Соковых к главному реда...»

«МАДОУ "Детский сад "Белочка" села Новая Таволжанка Шебекинского района Белгородской области" МАДОУ "Детский сад "Белочка" села Новая Таволжанка Шебекинского района Белгородской области" СОДЕРЖАНИ...»

«Форма Договор о предоставлении социальных услуг в форме социального обслуживания на дому _ "_" 20года (место заключение договора) №, (полное наименование поставщика социальных услуг) именуемый в дальнейшем "Исполнитель", в лице (должность, фамилия, имя, отчество (при наличии) _, действующего на основании уполномоченного пред...»

«Сценарий праздничного концерта к 8 марта "Весенние улыбки" Звучит музыка из к/ф "Шерлок Холмс и доктор Ватсон". На сцену выходят ученики с белыми шарфиками на плечах. Джентльмен 1. Добрый вечер приветствуем вас, в нашем клубе настоящих джентльменов! Джентльмен 2. От...»

«ВИТРИНА ХОЛОДИЛЬНАЯ СЕРИИ "ДЕСНА" ВС Руководство по эксплуатации СООО "Бримстон-Бел" Республика Беларусь Компания СООО "БРИМСТОН-БЕЛ" благодарит Вас за приобретение нашего оборудования. Мы надеемся, что и в дальнейшем выбор останется за нашей продукцией. Мы, в свою очередь, постараемся не разочаровать Вас и учесть все Ваши пожел...»

2017 www.kniga.lib-i.ru - «Бесплатная электронная библиотека - онлайн материалы»

Материалы этого сайта размещены для ознакомления, все права принадлежат их авторам.
Если Вы не согласны с тем, что Ваш материал размещён на этом сайте, пожалуйста, напишите нам, мы в течении 1-2 рабочих дней удалим его.