Symbolic Interpretation of Animal and Hunting Scene Motifs in Persian Carpets from the Safavid Period

Animal and hunting motifs in Safavid carpets (1501-1736) served as complex symbolic systems that communicated religious, political, literary, and cultural significances concurrently. During the early Safavid period (about 1520–1620), religious symbols were very important. For example, in Sufi mysticism, the Simurgh represented the Universal Essence, while dragons symbolized evil. Their fight showed the eternal struggle between good and evil. Politically, chained beasts of prey, especially lions and leopards, symbolized governmental power and magnificence, while hunting scenes positioned the Shah centrally to showcase his symbolic authority in struggling with ferocious animals. By the third quarter of the 16th century (1550s-1570s), the dragon-slayer motif acquired specific diplomatic significance, appearing on textiles that served as gifts related to firearms negotiations and signifying recognition of legitimate kingship. Literary connections to the Shahnameh and Khamseh Nezami provided a mythical backdrop, while snakes exhibited semantic progression from positive functions in pre-Islamic eras to negative connotations in the Islamic setting. The evidence suggests that symbolic meanings were deliberately organized in hierarchical layers to convey distinct messages to court, religious, and popular audiences, utilizing visual puns and compositional arrangements to express nuanced interpretations through colour symbolism, figure placement, and literary references. Temporal evolution is evident: religious-spiritual symbolism prevailed while Shahs pursued Sufi mysticism, while diplomatic-political duties became more significant following the advent of guns about 1570, when designs displayed less dramatic intensity. This research investigates the symbolic architecture of animal and hunting scene motifs typically considered as Shikargah, analyzing their growth from the Safavid "Golden Age”. The studies' diverse geographic and temporal specificity, spanning from comprehensive coverage of the entire period to targeted analyses of 1520–1620, reveal both consistent symbolic frameworks across Safavid territories and context-dependent variations in emphasis and interpretation.