[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: year 5, Issue 17 (12-2021) ::
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2021, 5(17): 95-109 Back to browse issues page
Problems of Chronology and Usage of Sealed Potteries: Case of Qal’eh Asrār-e Ghahestān Fragment
Leila Makvandi1, Mohsen Dana2, Seyed Reza Rafae3
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Archeology, Faculty of Architecture and Art, Kashan University, Kashan, Iran. , makvandi.l@kashanu.ac.ir
2- PhD in Archeology, Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts, Tehran, Iran.
3- Master Student, Department of Archeology, Faculty of Arts, Birjand University, Birjand, Iran
Abstract:   (946 Views)
Abstract
Cylinder seals usually were used on clay objects, especially tablets, as a symbol of individual’s identity and administrative centers of the ancient East. While, rare potteries sealed by cylinder seal are a new case for archaeologists. Based on the small number of sealed pottery fragments found, archaeologists are dealing with several main questions: Why cylinder seals used on pot-tery? What is the usage of sealed pottery? And whether it is possible to provide an exact chro-nology for these potteries? A sealed pottery fragment from the site of Qal’eh Asrār in South Khorāsān is an example which is also our subject matter in this present study. The area of Qal’eh Asrār is located 1800 meters southeast of Barandood village and 800 meters northwest of Zarbarandood village of Ghohestān section of Darmiān city. This area is currently located on top of a natural hill at a height of about 200 meters above ground level. Analysis of potteries found on the surface of site shows that the occupation of it belongs to Late Iron Age and Achaemenid period, although there are also small numbers of pottery belonging to the late Is-lamic centuries. In this paper we try to study a fragment of a sealed pottery found from surface of site. Firstly, we deal with the issue of sealed pottery with regard to the context and the prob-lems and challenges of its study, then we try to analyze sample pottery of the Qal’eh Asrār in terms of typology, style and its legend. This study shows that the sealed pottery of Qal’eh Asrār is locally produced and its legend is a local style with the common motifs of first half of the first millennium BC. As this site is probably a garrison, this container could be used for bearing commodities to the construction.
Keywords: Qal’eh Asrār, Sealed Pottery, Iron Age, Achaemenid period, Local Style.

Introduction
In ancient near East, the stamp and cylinder seals have been used on diverse clay objects such as bullae and tablets to sealed administrative documents, but use of seals on pottery is rare. Since 3rd millennium B.C Fragments of sealed pottery have been found in sites from north Iraq and Syria (Collon, 1987: 13; Oates, 2001), Levant (Amiet, 1975: 425-426), west and south western of Iran (Caldwell, 1976), Shahr-e Sukhta in south east of Iran (Baghestani, 1997: 34- 43; Hakemi & Sajjadi, 1989: 145) and central Asia (Sariandi, 1986; Heibert, 1994a). Several fragments back to the Iron Age I and II were found from Bahrain in Persian Gulf (Olijdam, 2008) and Central Plateau of Iran in Tepe Sialk (Malekshahmirzadi 1381: 25) and Gholi Dar-vish in Qom (Sarlak 1386: 193- 194). Most of these sealed potteries are small fragments that have been found mainly as single fragment on the surface of sites. A small number, such as the Gonur Depe fragment in Turkmenistan (Sariandi, 1986: fig.123) or the Tell Brak in Syria (Oates, 1985: 257), have been found from archaeological excavation. 
In archaeological survey of Qal’eh Asrār in South Khorasan, Iran, one fragment of sealed pot-tery with a cylinder seal impression was found in archaeological survey. There are several questions raised here. Is it possible to provide an accurate chronology for the sealed pottery of Qal’eh Asrār? Why the pottery sealed, specifically with cylinder seal? Are these sealed pottery have an administrative function and were used as a kind of administrative-economic object or tool? Or here seals just used as decoration? In this paper, which is a descriptive-comparative and analytical approach, firstly we examine the challenges related to chronology and recogniz-ing the function of sealed potteries in archaeological studies, then we focus on study Qal’eh Asrār fragment and its seal impression.

Chronology and Usage of Sealed Pottery
Archaeologists have two different approaches for chronology of sealed potteries. If these frag-ments are found from excavation, they propose site stratigraphy to date it. But, most of the sealed pottery has been found on surface of sites, so dating will be complicated. In fact, archae-ologists use two methods to date sealed potteries, such as Qal’eh Asrār case; they propose the chronology based on typology of pottery or the style and image of seal impression. 
Function of sealed pottery is under debate too; there is no consensus on why sealed potteries are made and how it has been used. In general, the proposed suggestions can be divided into three groups, although, there are many doubts about each of these three views. 
1- The image of seal on pottery was for decoration.
2- The seals are the sign or signature of the potters who identifies the ownership and identity of his handicrafts.
3- Sealed pottery has an administrative function and has been used for storing or moving com-modities.
The style and image of the cylinder seal impression of Qal’eh Asrār sealed pottery
The image of Qal’eh Asrār seal does not show a unified theme and its upper part is broken. In part of the image a human is standing, bending one hand from the elbow and holding a cane, his other hand is not clear, it had stretched body with broad shoulders and arms, the proportion be-tween the upper body and the legs is not observed and the upper body is taller than the legs. It seems he have a dagger in his waist. On both sides of the human image are two birds. On the left side is design of the quadruped (donkey?) and in front of it is a horse, both are upside down. Of course, the horse’s head is broken. Between the two images are a small bird at the top and probably a sitting human at the bottom. The style of Qal’eh Asrār seal is a local style which focusing on the outer lines, not paying attention to the details. 

Conclusion
Studies on sealed potteries in diverse sites, despite different time and cultural periods, shows the following common features can be observed:
1- All fragments of sealed pottery are locally produced.
2- The seals that are used on these potteries also have a local and indigenous style, and this in-dicates the locality of their production.
3- Sealed pottery fragments indicate they should mainly belong to medium and large jars.
 4- In most of fragments seal was mainly used at the area between the neck and body of the ware. 
Given the common features mentioned, it can be argued that these potteries had an administra-tive aspect. However, they used locally which both the pottery type and the seal originate from the local culture of the same region, and there are no examples that show their displacements or dispersion in a wider cultural context.
A comparative study of Qal’eh Asrār sealed pottery shows that this pottery is locally produced and cylinder seal used on it also has local style of the 1st millennium B.C. Due to pottery type and the presence of architectural remains, this area is suggested to be a garrison to protect the road in the late Iron Age - early Achaemenid period, and the style and image of the seal on the pottery also confirms the proposed chronology. 
Article number: 5
Keywords: Qal’eh Asrār, Sealed Pottery, Iron Age, Achaemenid period, Local Style.
Full-Text [PDF 1619 kb]   (113 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special Archeology
Received: 2020/12/4 | Accepted: 2021/04/23 | Published: 2021/12/21
References
1. - دانا، محسن، (1398). «سنت‌های سفالی اواخر عصرآهن و هخامنشی در شرق ایران». در: مجموعه مقالات همایش بین‌المللی عصرآهن در غرب ایران و مناطق همجوار، به‌کوشش: یوسف حسن‌زاده، علی‌اکبر وحدتی و زاهد کریمی، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری، اداره کل استان کردستان و موزۀ ملی ایران، صص: 410- 392.
2. - سرلک، سیامک، (1386). «گزارش مقدماتی چهارمین فصل کاوش در محوطۀ قلی‌درویش جمکران قم». گزارش‌های باستان‌شناسی (7)، مجموعه مقاله‌های نهمین گردهم‌آیی سالانه باستان‌شناسی ایران، جلد دوم، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی، پژوهشگاه سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی، صنایع‌دستی و گردشگری.
3. - سرلک، سیامک، (1390). باستان‌شناسی و تاریخ قم. قم: اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی، گردشگری و صنایع‌دستی قم و نشر شاخص.
4. - علی‌بیگی، سجاد؛ و خسروی، شکوه، (1389). «شواهدی از نهادهای اقتصادی اجتماعی جوامع عصرآهن در مرکز فلات ایران». مجلۀ مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، دورۀ 1، شمارۀ 1، صص: 108-85.
5. - گیرشمن، رومن، (1379). سیلک کاشان. ترجمۀ اصغر کریمی،تهران: انتشارات سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی کشور.
6. - گیرشمن، رومن، (1372). ایران از آغاز تا اسلام. ترجمۀ محمد معین، تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی.
7. - مهرکیان، جعفر، (1374). «افقی نوین در پژوهش‌های فرهنگ سفال خاکستری». میراث‌فرهنگی، شمارۀ 13، صص: 75-74.
8. - نوروززاده چگینی، ناصر، (1381). «آجرهای با نقش اثر مهر». زیگورات سیلک، گزارش فصل یکم، طرح بازنگری سیلک، به‌کوشش: دکتر صادق ملک شهمیرزادی، سلسله گزارش‌های باستان‌شناسی 2، سازمان میراث فرهنگی کشور (پژوهشگاه)، تهران، 1381: 175 -171.
9. - یوسفی‌زشک روح‌الله؛ و باقی‌زاده، سعید، (1396). «سفال مهرزدۀ تپه چالتاسیان ورامین، مدلولی جدید از نهادهای اقتصادی- اجتماعی عصر آهن مرکز فلات». سومین همایش ملی باستان‌شناسی ایران.
11. - Alibaigi, S. & Khosravi, Sh., (2009). “Some Evidence on Social and Economic Institution of Iron Age Societies in the Center of the Iranian Plateau”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, Vol. 1, Issur. 1, Pp: 85- 108, (In Persian).
12. - Amiet, P., (1975). “A cylinder seal impression found at Umm an-Nar”. East & West, No. 25, Pp: 425-426.
13. - Baghestani, S., (1997). Metallene Compartimentsiegel aus Ost-Iran, Zentralasien und Nord-China. (Archäologie in Iran und Turan, Bd. 1). Rahden.
14. - Bielinski, P., (2008). “Some Cylinder Seal Impressions on Pottery from Tell Arbid”. In: Here and There: Across the Ancient Near East. Studies In Honour of Krystyna Łyczkowska, O. Drewnowska (eds.), Warsaw, Pp: 1-8.
15. - Caldwell, D., (1976). “The Early Glyptic of Gawra, Giyan and Susa, and the Development of Long Distance Trade”. Orientalia, NOVA SERIES, Vol. 45, Pp: 227-250.
16. - Calvet, Y., (1996). “Une empreinte de cylindre-sceau de Failaka (Koweit)”. In: H. Gasche & B. Hrouda (eds) Collectanea Orientalia: Histoire, arts de l’espace et industrie de la terre. Études offertes en homage à Agnès Spycket. (Civilisations du Proche-Orient I/3). Neuchâtel & Paris, Pp: 57-64
17. - Collon, D., (1987). First Impressions. Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East. London.
18. - Dana, M., (2019). “The Late Iron Age and Achaemenid Pottery Traditions in Eastern Iran”. In: Procedings of the International Conference on the Iron Age in Western Iran and Neighbouring Regions, Yousef Hassanzadeh, Ali Akbar Vahdati and Zahed Hosseini (eds.), RICHT, National Museum of Iran and Kurdestan ICHHTO Publication, Pp: 392- 410, (In Persian).
19. - Frankfort, H. P., (2011). “Some Aspect of Horse Presentation in the Petroglyphs of Inner Asia from Earliest Periods to the 1st Millennium BCE”. Археология Южной Сибири. К 80-летию Я. А. Шера. Вып. 25. – Кемерово, 2011, Pp: 54- 64.
20. - Garrison, M. B., & Root, M. C., (2001), Seals on the Persepolis Fortification Tablets. Part 1: Images of Heroic Encounter, 2 Vols. Chicago.
21. - Ghrishman, R., (1994). “Irān az Aghāz ta Islam”. Translated by: Mohammad Moein, Elmi va Farhangi Publication, (In Persian).
22. - Ghrishman, R., (2000). Sialk Kashan. Translated by: Asghar Karimi, Miras Farhangi Publication, (In Persian).
23. Hakemi, A. & Sajjadi, S. M. S., (1989). “Shahdad excavations in the context of the Oasis Civilization”. Pp: 141-156 in G. Ligabue & S. Salvatori (eds) Bactria: an ancient oasis civilization from the sands of Afghanistan. Venice.
24. - Hiebert, F. T., (1994a). “Production Evidence for the Origin of the Oxus Civilization”. Antiquity, No. LXVIII, Pp: 374-387.
25. - Hiebert, F. T., (1994b). Origins of the Bronze Age Oasis Civilization in Central Asia. (American School of Prehistoric Research, Bulletin 42). Cambridge.
26. - Lopez, G. A., (2010). “Sealing Pots in Upper Mesopotamia in the Late Third Millennium BC”. No. 13, Pp: 119- 124.
27. - Lopez, G. A., (2018). “A Seal Impression from Tell Brak and its Matching Cylinder Seal”. Isimu, No. 20-21 (2017-2018), Pp: 197-203.
28. - Marcus, M. I., (1996). Emblems of Identity and Prestige: The Seals and Sealings from Hasanlu, Iran. University Museum Monograph 84, University of Pennsylvania.
29. - Mehrkian, J., (1996). “Ofoghi Novin dar Pajouhesh hāy Fahang Sofāl Khākestari”.Miras Farhangi, Vol. 13, Pp: 74- 75, (In Persian).
30. - Nourozzadeh Cheghini, N., (2003). “ājorhāy ba Naghsh Asar Mohr”. Ziggurat Sialk, Primary reports of first season, Tarh Bāznegari Sialk, Sadegh Malekshahmirzadi (eds.), Center of Cultural Heritage Publication, Pp: 171- 175, (In Persian).
31. - Oates, J., (1987), “A note on ‘Ubaid and Mitanni pottery from Tell Brak”. Iraq, No. 47, Pp: 193-198.
32. - Oates, J., (2001). “The Evidence of the Sealings”. In: Excavations at Tell Brak, Vol. 2: Nagar in the Third Millennium B.C. D. Oates, J. Oates, H. McDonald (eds.), Cambridge, Pp: 121-150.
33. - Olijdam, E., (2008). “A Possible Central Asian Origin for the Seal-Impressed Jar from the‘Temple Tower’at Failaka”. In: Intercultural Relations between South and Southwest Asia, Studies in Commemoration of E.C.L. During Caspers (1934-1996), E. Olijdam & R.H. Spoor (eds., BAR International Series 1826 (2008), Pp: 268-287.
34. - Porada, E., (1969). The Art of Ancient Iran. New York.
35. - Rova, E., (2006). “Seal Impressions on Pottery in the Khabour Region in the 3rd Millennium B.C.: Some New Evidence from Tell Beydar”. BaM, No. 37, Pp: 295-312.
36. - Salvatori, S., (2000). “Bactria and Margiana Seals: A New Assessment of their Chronological Position and a Typological Survey”. East and West, No. 50, Pp: 97-145.
37. - Sarianidi, V., (1981). “Seal-amulets of the Murghab style”. In: The Bronze Age Civilization of Central Asia, Recent Soviet Discoveries, Ph. L. Kohl (eds.). New York. Pp: 221- 225.
38. - Sarianidi, V., (1986). “Le complexe cèltèel de Togolok 21 en Margiane”. Arts Asiatiques, No. XLI, Pp: 5-21.
39. - Sarianidi, V., (1993). “Excavations at Southern Gonur”. IRAN, No. XXXI, Pp: 25-37, Pl. IV-X.
40. - Sarlak, S., (2007). “Preliminary report on the 4th season of excavation at Qoli Darvish in Jamkaran-Qom”. The Archaeological reports(7), Vol. II, Symposium of the 9th annual congress of the archaeology of Iran, Iranian center of Archaeological Research, Tehran: 187-208, (In Persian).
41. - Sarlak, S., (2011). Archaeology and History of Qom. ICHHTO Publication, (In Persian).
42. - Winter, I., (1977). Perspective on the “Local Style” of Hasanlu IV B: A Study in Receptivity, Mountains and Lowlands: Essays in the Archaeology of Greater Mesopotamia. eds. L.D. Levine and T.C. Young, Jr., Undena 1977, Pp: 371- 386.
43. - Yousefi Zoshk, R. & Baghizadeh, S., (2018). “Sofal Mohrzadeh Tape Chāltasiyān varāmin, Madloli Jaded az Nahādhāy Eghtesadi- Ejtemae Asr āhan Markaz Falāt”. 3rd National archaeology conference of Iran, (In Persian).
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Makvandi L, Dana M, Rafae S R. Problems of Chronology and Usage of Sealed Potteries: Case of Qal’eh Asrār-e Ghahestān Fragment. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 2021; 5 (17) :95-109
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-456-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
year 5, Issue 17 (12-2021) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه مطالعات باستان شناسی پارسه Parseh Journal of Archaeological Studies
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.21 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4419