




































CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY 2(5): 42-46, May 2021      
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/history-crjh-02-05-12 
ISSN 2767-472X 
©2021 Master Journals 

   
  Accepted 25th May, 2021 &  Published 30th May, 2021  

 

 
 

 

CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY                           
ISSN – 2767-472X 

42 

   https://masterjournals.com/index.php/CRJH 

 

THE CULTURE OF THE SAK TRIBES OF THE BRONZE AGE 
 

Akhmadjon Shonazarovich Yusupov 

Teacher, Faculty Of History, Urgench State University 

Mohira Saparboy Qizi Abdullayeva 

Student, Faculty Of History, Urgench State University 

 

INTRODUCTION 

It is important to identify aspects of the 
interdependence, harmony, and development of 
cultural traditions that continue on a new basis 
in different cultures of different periods. With 
this in mind, it is expedient to briefly review the 
content of the ancient traditions formed in the 
Aral Sea region. 

Literature review 

As a result of the study of archeological 
monuments of the Bronze Age of the Aral Sea 
region, various objects that make up the material 
culture were obtained. They have been 
adequately reviewed in the scientific literature 
[9].  

During the Tozaboghyob and Amirabad periods, 
most of the settlements were located on the 
banks of the South Akchadarya River, as well as 
in the Jonidarya and Inkardarya oases, where 

seasonal livestock breeding took place. The 
composition of archeological materials consists 
of hand-made ceramic vessels decorated with 
geometric patterns and lines, bronze objects 
(knives, sickles, brass mirrors, bells, bracelets) 
and stone tools - scythes, hammers and sickles. 

According to the main features, the Bronze Age 
population groups of the Aral Sea region have 
been identified as belonging to the steppe tribes. 
This is evidenced by their household items, 
weapons and accommodation. The dwellings 
were built in the form of a rectangular hut with a 
semi-basement, the upper sides and wooden 
columns at the top, covered with reeds at the 
base of lattice, i.e. they formed a system of 
columnar lattice light housing [6]. We see the 
method of construction of such dwellings in the 
repetition of the construction of houses of the 
first Iron Age Kuyisay culture. 

V.M. Masson writes that settlements were 
associated with various aspects of the ancient 

ABSTRACT  
 
In this article is dedicated to the issue of the culture of the Sak tribes of the Bronze Age in Central Asia. The 
main attention is paid to the archeological investigations reflecting the culture of those tribes. At the same 
time, researches of historians on the theme has been analysed either. The expounded informations have 
been proved by the facts at the result of archeological expeditions. 
 
 
KEYWORDS: - Saks, Aral Sea region, tribes, Tozaboghyob, Amirabad. 
 
 



CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY 2(5): 42-46, May 2021      
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/history-crjh-02-05-12 
ISSN 2767-472X 
©2021 Master Journals 

   
  Accepted 25th May, 2021 &  Published 30th May, 2021  

 

 
 

 

CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY                           
ISSN – 2767-472X 

43 

   https://masterjournals.com/index.php/CRJH 

social system. In their construction, along with 
household functions, socio-economic and 
environmental factors, the size of housing, 
building solutions and construction techniques 
found their will. Therefore, the housing system is 
defined by the leading sector of the economy and 
ethnic traditions. H. Matyakubov described 
socio-economic and territorial characteristics of 
the Bronze Age society.  The Bronze Age of the 
Aral Sea region indicates once again that they 
were mainly cattle-breeders, according to the 
degree of reflection of socio-economic 
characteristics in the settlements of the tribes. 
The shepherds who grazed the cattle in the 
pastures used dwellings with a light construction 
structure. They created favorable living 
conditions for the population, who were engaged 
in cultivating the fields, growing fodder and 
stockpiling its reserves, as well as for hunters 
and fishermen. M.A. Itina described lifestyle and 
food culture of Bronze Age communities. 

METHODS 

Comparing the lifestyle, socio-economic and 
territorial characteristics of the Bronze Age 
society, H. Matyakubov distinguished the 
following: the location of various seed 
communities in the region, common housing for 
large patriarchal families, property and food 
resources from existing natural resources in the 
region (water, land, meadows, flora and fauna, 
raw material resources) for development and 
production purposes [7].  

In our opinion, it is expedient to expand the data 
in this place a little. During this period, every 
large family owned a pet. Meadows and pastures 
were probably used on a community basis. In 
addition to breeding small livestock and cattle, 
horse breeding and camel breeding became 
important branch of animal husbandry. Horses 
and camels played an important role in farm 
work and as means of hunting during the 

seasonal migration of shepherds. According to 
M.A. Itina, camel meat was almost never 
consumed in the diet of Bronze Age communities. 
Because the ability of this pet in the field of 
transportation and transport is appreciated. It is 
difficult to imagine the daily life of ancient steppe 
herders without domesticated animals such as 
camels, horses, and donkeys. Based on the 
traditions described above, we will consider 
aspects of the development of the material 
culture of the Early Iron Age in the Aral Sea 
region. 

Livestock breeding provided shepherds with 
meat and dairy products, and played an 
important role in the trade of wool and leather, 
as well as in the manufacture of clothing, 
footwear, carpets, and household goods. 

Analysis and results 

As a result of the development of bronze 
metallurgy in the Aral Sea region during the 
Tozaboghyob culture, the demand for metals 
such as copper and tin gradually increased. As 
mentioned in the previous pages of the study, 
copper and tin deposits are located in the Kyzyl-
Kum, adjacent to the Southern Urals, Central 
Kazakhstan and the Aral Sea region. According to 
the scientific literature, in the Bronze Age, 
copper and tin deposits were developed by 
steppe cattle-breeding tribes, and the raw 
materials obtained from them were smelted in 
special workshops around the ore deposits and 
cast metal pieces (ingots) were produced [8]. 
Those works was also carried out during the first 
Saks. 

According to the materials of the tombs of 
Southern Tagisken, Uygarak, and Sakarchaga, the 
first Saks made extensive use of bronze knives, 
daggers, military axes, arrowheads, sickles, 
needles, and horseshoes. From the 9th-8th 
centuries, the importance of leafy double-edged 
bronze arrowheads in the composition of 
weapons increased. Stone molds for making bow 



CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY 2(5): 42-46, May 2021      
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/history-crjh-02-05-12 
ISSN 2767-472X 
©2021 Master Journals 

   
  Accepted 25th May, 2021 &  Published 30th May, 2021  

 

 
 

 

CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY                           
ISSN – 2767-472X 

44 

   https://masterjournals.com/index.php/CRJH 

tips were found at Yakkaparson [4]. This 
evidence testifies to the activity of bronze 
casters, the work of degreasing. 

Remains of ammunition with hooks made of 
stone, bone, bronze and wood were found in the 
tombs of Sakarchaga in the 7th century BC [14]. 
More than 50 bronze bullets were found at 
Kuyisoy 2. Such a bow axis is called the 
arrowhead of the Scythian or Sak tribes. They are 
widespread in the monuments of cattle breeders 
living in the steppes and steppe-forest areas of 
the Volga, Southern Urals, Kazakhstan, Western 
Siberia [2]. 

Daggers and long knives were made of iron. Iron 
tools played an important role in the processing 
of stone, bone and wood. The data found in this 
regard indicate the prevalence of iron products 
in the economic and military spheres of the early 
Saks. Aware of this, Herodotus wrote that 
ironware was not used in the household of the 
Massagets because the metal was “not found at 
all” in their country [3]. In fact, this conclusion 
did not correspond to historical vocabulary. 

The presence of weapons and horse equipment 
among the burial equipment in the tombs of the 
Saxon men is a special feature. Horse equipment 
was also found in the graves of women riders 
[10]. They consist of bronze domes adorning 
buckle, and horse harness. The bronze buckles 
and domes feature images of birds of prey, deer, 
tigers, and pigs. They consist of images of a 
mythical bird-headed creature typical of the fine 
arts of steppe cattle-breeders, such as the griffin 
and the tortoise tearing off the hooves of wild 
animals such as a tiger, in a style known as 
Scythian-Siberian [1].  

Burial equipment in the tombs of Sak women 
includes jewelry. They consist of bracelets, 
earings and necklaces. Bronze, silver, gold, semi-
precious and precious gemstones were used in 
the jewelry art of the steppe tribes. Most of the 
finds are necklaces of different colors. 

They are made of turquoise, lapis lazuli, sardines 
and limestone. The necklaces are geometric 
(cylindrical, rhombic) in shape, made of sardine 
stone with a dazzling, light red-orange color, 
turquoise beads are blue, lapis lazuli necklaces 
are blue [11].  

Traces of processing of turquoise mineral stone 
in the conditions of domestic handicrafts were 
found at the settlement of Kuyisay 2. This is 
evidenced by insufficiently processed necklaces 
and their fragments [12].  

Turqoise deposits are located in the Sultan Uvays 
Mountains and Kyzyl-Kum [13]. This mineral 
rock was used only in the jewelry industry. For 
example, the palaces of ancient Persian kings 
were decorated with gold and precious stones. 
According to records of the construction of the 
palace of Darius I in Suza, gold was delivered 
from Bactria to decorate the doors and walls of 
the palace, glittering stones from Sogdiana – 
lapis lazuli and sardines, and turquoise from 
Khorezm [5]. However, the calligrapher who 
wrote these inscriptions made a mistake 
somewhere. In fact, the deposits of lapis lazuli 
are not in Sogdiana, they are located in the 
Badakhshan mountains of Bactria. 

CONCLUSION 

As a conclusion of the above mentioned ideas, 
the following should be stated: 

I. The transition to a form of production farming 
in the Aral Sea region began much later than in 
the southern regions of Central Asia. This 
phenomenon is marked by the uneven socio-
economic development of the tribes located in 
different natural-geographical regions. 

From the earliest times of history, the abundance 
of food products assimilated in the Lower Amu 
Darya and Lower Syr Darya regions, that is, the 
products available in nature, have met the needs 
of hunters and fishermen communities. Thus, the 



CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY 2(5): 42-46, May 2021      
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/history-crjh-02-05-12 
ISSN 2767-472X 
©2021 Master Journals 

   
  Accepted 25th May, 2021 &  Published 30th May, 2021  

 

 
 

 

CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY                           
ISSN – 2767-472X 

45 

   https://masterjournals.com/index.php/CRJH 

productive forces and inventions in the economic 
and cultural spheres are underdeveloped. These 
circumstances determined the period of 
formation of the production economy. 

II. During the Bronze Age, as a result of the 
development of the social division of labor in 
different regions of Central Asia and the cultural 
influence of the primary centers of economic and 
technological progress, various innovations in 
the life and lifestyle of the Aral Sea population 
were revealed. Therefore, during this period, the 
communities of the Southern Aral Sea region 
consisted of “cattle-farmers” or “shepherds-
farmers”, and the tribes of the Eastern Aral Sea 
region consisted of groups of cattle-breeders. 
According to the results of new research, the 
views on the leadership of the form of 
agriculture and animal husbandry in the 
Southern Aral Sea region have not been proven 
and the agricultural sector formed an auxiliary 
branch of the economy until the 6th century BC. 

III. The following economic and cultural types 
have been developed in the Aral Sea region since 
the Bronze Age: 

1. Approximately 16th-20th centuries BC, cattle-
breeding and agriculture (lower Amu Darya, 
Southern Aral Sea), cattle-breeding (lower Syr 
Darya, Eastern Aral Sea). 

2. The 10th-8th (or 9th-8th) centuries BC, 
Amirabad livestock-farming culture of the 
Southern Aral Sea region, North Tagisken steppe 
cattle breeders of the Eastern Aral Sea. 

3. The 7th-6th centuries BC, Sariqamish region 
settled cattle breeders, Kuyisay culture and 
Sakarchaga first Sak nomads, the emergence of 
the Kozalikir culture of settled herders and 
peasants at the turn of the 7th-6th centuries BC. 

The first seasonal migratory Saks culture in the 
Lower Syr Darya Basin. 

4. The 5th-4th centuries BC, the predominance of 
crop culture in the Southern Aral Sea, the 

settlement of Saks in the Eastern Aral Sea. 

The system of chronology mentioned above is 
based on data from archeology and early written 
sources and reflects the historical reality in 
evidence. 

REFERENCES 

 

1. Artamanov M.I. Skifo-sibirskoe iskusstvo 
zverinnogo stilya (osnovnie etapy i 
napravleniya) // Problemy skifskoy 
arkheologii. MIA. №177. – M., 1971. 

2. Akishev K.A. Saki aziatskie i skifi 
yevropeyskie: obshee i osobennoe v kulture 
// Arkheologicheskie issledovaniya v 
Kazakhstane. Alma-Ata, 1973. – P. 49; 
Avanesova N.A. K voprosu o bronzovukh 
strelax plemen epokhi bronzy // Materialy 
po arkheologii Uzbekistana. Tr. 
Samarkandskogo gosuniversiteta.  Vip. 270. 
– Samarkand, 1975. – P. 38. 

3. Herodotus. Book. I, 215. 

4. Itina M.A. Poselenie Yakke-Parsan 2 
(raskopki 1958-1959 y.) // MXE. – M., 1963. 
– P. 118-119. 

5. Khrestomatiya po istorii Drevnego Vostoka. 
Nadpis Dariya I o soorujenii d vorsa v 
Suzakh // Perevod V.I. Abaeva. – M.: 
Vysshaya shkola, 1980. Part II. – P. 38-39. 

6. Matyakubov H. Khorazm vohasi bronza asri 
va ilk temir davri tarixi. – Tashkent, 2017. – 
P. 23. 

7. Matyakubov H. The above mentioned 
source. ¬– P. 120.   

8. Matyakubov H. Khorazm vohasi bronza asri 
... P. 111. 

9. Tolstov S.P. Raboty Khrezmskoy arxeologo-
etnograficheskoy ekspedisii 1951-1954 gg. 
// Voprosy istorii. – M., 1955. №3. – P. 173-



CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY 2(5): 42-46, May 2021      
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/history-crjh-02-05-12 
ISSN 2767-472X 
©2021 Master Journals 

   
  Accepted 25th May, 2021 &  Published 30th May, 2021  

 

 
 

 

CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF HISTORY                           
ISSN – 2767-472X 

46 

   https://masterjournals.com/index.php/CRJH 

180; Itina M.A. Raskopki stoyanki 
Tazabaghyabskoy kultury v 1957 g. // MXE. 
– M., 1960. Vip. 4. – P. 82-103; the same 
author. Raskopki mogilnika 
tazabaghyabskoy kultury Kokcha 3 // MXE. 
– M., 1961. Vip. 5. – P. 3-96; the same author. 
O meste tazabaghyabskoy kultury sredi 
kultur stepnoy bronzi // SE. – M., 1967. №2. 
– P. 62-74. 

10. Vishnevskaya O.A. Kultura sakskikh plemen 
nizovev Sirdari v VII – V vv. do n. e. // Tr. 
XAEE. Volume 8. – M., 1973. – P. 72-73; 
Yablonskiy L.T. Saki Yujnogo Priaralya 
(arkheologiya i antropologiya mogilnikov). – 
M.: Institute of archeology RAN, 1996. – P. 
100. 

11. Vishnevskaya O.A. Kultura sakskikh plemen 
… P. 82-84. 

12. Vaynberg B.I. Kuyusayskaya kultura rannego 
jeleznogo veka v Prisarikamishskoy delte 
Amudari // Uspekhi sredneaziatskoy 
arkheologii. – L.: Nauka, 1975. – P. 45-46. 

13. Vinogradov A.V., Lopatin S.V., Mamedov E.D. 
Kizilkumskaya biryuza // SE. – M., 1965. 
№2. 

14. Yablonskiy L.T. Saki Yujnogo Priaralya 
(arxeology and anthropology mogolnikov). – 
M.: Institute arxeology, 1996. – P. 34. 

15. Shomirzaev M.Kh. National handicrafts of 
Uzbekistan and its social – economic 
significance. (2020). European Journal of 
Research and Reflection in Educational 
Sciences, 8 (8), Part III. 129-138. 


