[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: year 3, Issue 7 (5-2019) ::
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2019, 3(7): 23-41 Back to browse issues page
The Archaeo-Mineralogy Studying and Comparison of Orange-Red Pottery With Black Core of Elamite Era in Khuzestan, Chahrmahal va Bakhtiyari and Isfahan Provinces
Ali Aarab 1, Mohammad Bonyadi Nezhad2, Seyedeh Iraj Beheshti3, Vahid Azadi4
1- Ph.D. Student of Archaeology, Department of Archaeology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. , aliaarab94@gmail.com
2- Ph.D. Student of Archaeology, Department of Archaeology, Islamic Azad University of Centeral Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.
3- Expert of the Institute for Conservation and Restoration of the Institute for Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran.
4- Ph.D. Student of Archaeology, Department of Archaeology, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.
Abstract:   (7304 Views)
Abstract
The previous studies on the Elamite pottery generally focused on the form and shape of the artifacts. From the perspective of fabric, very few studies have explored the Elamite pottery. The pottery type studied in this paper is orange (ranging from light brown to red) composed of a tempering material, sand and white particles. The core of this no ornamented, wheel-built pottery is black. In an investigation to outline the scope and boundaries of Haft Tapeh ancient city, a number of the Elamite pottery samples were recovered in certain layers dating back to the late ancient Elam (Sukalmah) and the Middle Elamite near the adobe structures of Haft Tapeh. Haft Tapeh refers to a structure belonging to the Elamite Era located in Khuzestan and south of Susa. One major finding in this city is a tomb from the Middle Elamite Era. Since 1965, this building has been investigated by Negahban and later by Mofidi-Nasr abadi. Thus, Haft Tapeh can undoubtedly be considered a city belonging to the Elamite Era. In this light, the pottery type in this geographical scope can be particularly useful for comparison of similar artifacts found in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, both of which could be associated with the Elamite Era. This study focused on Asgaran and Saba as two regions in Isfahan and central part of Ardal in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. A total of 10 pottery samples were randomly selected from these regions. They were then compared in terms of fabric and composition against 4 counterparts found in archaeological layers of Haft Tapeh belonging to the Elamite Era. It should be noted that the two-color body in the pottery sample is not at all associated with the type of compounds or curing temperature, Since the two parts are identical in terms of composition. Moreover, it seems that the main reason for the two-color body lies in the curing conditions and techniques (oxidation and reduction) inside the furnace, leading to two different colors. Apart from that, there is a kind of orientation in the components of pottery samples, potentially indicating they were built on wheels.
Keywords: Elam, Orange-Red Pottery, Petrography, XRD, Ft-IR.

Introduction
One of the surrounding regions cover the north of present-day provinces Fars and Khuzestan as Elamite centres in the ancient era. The noteworthy point about these regions is their potentially rich metal mines. This has been mentioned in the Mesopotamian inscriptions, mainly explaining the link between the Mesopotamian plain and the highlands of Elam. The present-day provinces, Khuzestan and Fars, have small potentials for metal mines. Hence, they only served as surrounding regions supplying the metals. However, little investigation has been done on the archaeological data from the Elamite Era. It is crucial to carry out a historical study on these regions along with the archaeological data to enlighten the dark spots in the Elamite Era, and ultimately provide a toponymy of the Elamite cities. One instance of such archaeological data involves various types of local pottery in Khuzestan (as a central city of Elam), which was compared through petrography against the samples recovered in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari (as two dently the era in surrounding regions). Thus, this paper intends to discuss more con which this type of pottery was built and its origin in order to provide a toponymy of the previously mentioned cities based on historical and archaeological data. In Miankooh, Ardal, more than 76% of Elamite sites have been reported to be nomadic. This is highly important alongside the neighborhood of this province and Isfahan with regard to the toponymy of Zabshali and LU.SU. Meanwhile, there are a considerable number of pottery samples from this region comparable to their counterparts across the Elamite centers. 
The surrounding regions of Elamite centers (Susa and Anshan) have so far been rarely explored. One of such surrounding regions stretched across the norther of Elamite centers, covering certain areas of present-day provinces Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. In addition, there are pottery samples from the Elamite Era found in Khuzestan (as one of the central districts of Elamite), even though they have rarely been explored in studies on the Elamite Era. This can be partly associated with the limited number of such pottery samples against their counterparts from the Elamite Era in Khuzestan. Nonetheless, the noteworthy point about this pottery type is the great similarity (discussed later) in Khuzestan to those recovered in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. Therefore, this study attempted to explore these regions from the Elamite Era through an interdisciplinary approach involving archeology, archeometry and history of northern Susa and Anshan. Despite the importance of the regions surrounding Elamite centers (Susa and Anshan) based on the Mesopotamian inscriptions, insufficient effort has so far been made to investigate the Elamite Era in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari as two surrounding regions. Nevertheless, the pottery type studied in this paper has been frequently found in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. In this study, great effort was made to review the geographical locations of the two provinces in Elamite Era according to written sources and archaeological evidence. Moreover, the pottery artifacts were petrographically examined to find out whether or not the samples recovered in Haft Tapeh, as a key central spot in Khuzestan during the Elamite Era, are congruent with the clay artifacts found in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari from the perspective of appearance and textural characteristics. In fact, the discussion revolves around the possible involvement and predominance of the Elamite in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, while providing a toponymy of ancient Elamite regions in those provinces today.

Conclusion
The specific pottery type in this study indicated a remarkable frequency in Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. Moreover, it proved to be similar to counterparts recovered at Haft Tapeh (Khuzestan) in terms of fabric, production technique and curing temperature. It is essential to point out the pottery types across the northern Elamite centers which have been rarely explored so far. The specific pottery type examined in this paper can definitely be considered an Elamite artifact. It should originate from the Zagros Mountains in the north of Khuzestan (Bakhtiari highlands). That is perhaps why this type of pottery is less abundant in Khuzestan as opposed to Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. According to the constituent element of pottery samples, this pottery type does not originate from Khuzestan Plain, but it can rather be traced in Zagros Mountains.  Therefore, it can be argued that the Elamite were involved in dominated Isfahan and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari, while delving into the toponymy of Elamite cities such as Zabshali and Tukrish in certain parts of Isfahan and LU.SU in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari. The regions never explored from that very perspective can set out a new avenue of Elamite research into these Iranian provinces. Finally, it is recommended that future studies focus on northern regions of Elamite centers including the present-day Isfahan, Yazd and Chaharmahal and Bakhtiariti so as to clarify many of the archaeological ambiguities of Elamite Era. After all, an in-depth investigation of Mesopotamian inscriptions can help scholars realize the importance of these regions, while revealing their archaeological capacities.
Keywords: Elam, Orange-Red Pottery, Petrography, XRD, Ft-IR.
Full-Text [PDF 1311 kb]   (620 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special Archeology
Received: 2019/07/23 | Accepted: 2019/07/23 | Published: 2019/07/23
References
1. - اسمعیلی‌جلودار، محمد‌اسماعیل (1386). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان‌شناختی محوطۀ ریگ‌سرای (شهرسبا) ورزنه (باتلاق گاوخونی) اصفهان». تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
2. - اسمعیلی‌جلودار، محمد‌اسماعیل (1390). «گزارش بررسی کوهرنگ، استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری».تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
3. - اسمعیلی‌جلودار، محمد‌اسماعیل (1393). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان‌شناختی کوهرنگ استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری». تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
4. - اسمعیلی‌جلودار، محمد‌اسماعیل (1394). «مدارکی نویافته از تولید مهره در اوایل هزارۀ سوم ق.م. در محوطۀ ریگ‌سرای ورزنه (سبا9)، (ساحل غربی باتلاق گاوخونی)». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی. دورۀ 7. شمارۀ 1. صص: 16-1.
5. - اسمعیلی‌جلودار، محمد‌اسماعیل؛ و اعراب، علی (1395). «پیشنهادی بر جای‌ نام‌‌شناسی محدودۀ زبشلی در دورۀ ایلام براساس داده‌های باستان‌شناختی و کتیبه‌های میان‌رودانی». پژوهش‌های علوم تاریخی. دورۀ 8. شمارۀ 2. صص: 20-1.
6. - اعراب، علی (1396). «حضور و نفوذ ایلامیان در استان‌های اصفهان و چهارمحال‌وبختیاری». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد باستان‌شناسی، دانشگاه تهران.
7. - افشاری‌نژاد، حکیمه؛ آجورلو، بهرام؛ جهانگیری، احمد؛ رازانی، مهدی؛ و علیزاده، کریم (1396). «ساختارشناسی سفال‌های دورۀ پایانی عصرمفرغ قدیم، محوطۀ باستانی کهنه‌شهر آذربایجان غربی». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی. دورۀ 9. شمارۀ 1. صص: 17-1.
8. - امامی، سیدمحمدامین؛ و نوغانی سمیه، (1393). «بررسی روند کربناتیزاسیون مجدد و شکل‌گیری کلسیت ثانویه در سفال‌های باستانی براساس مطالعات پتروگرافیک». مجلۀ مرمت و معماری ایران. دورۀ 3. شمارۀ 5. صص: 67-55.
9. - ایوبی، شمس‌الله؛ جلالیان، احمد؛ کریمیان‌اقبال، مصطفی؛ خادمی، حسین؛ و روزی‌طلب، محمدحسن (1381). «شناسایی و بررسی چگونگی تشکیل کانی‌های رسی در دو پارینه‌خاک منطقۀ سپاهان‌شهر اصفهان و امام‌قیس چهارمحال‌وبختیاری». بلورشناسی و کانی‌شناسی ایران. دورۀ 10. شمارۀ 2. صص: 178-157.
10. - جاوری، محسن (1383). «محوطۀ باستانی گورتان». نامۀ پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی. دورۀ 2. شمارۀ 6. صص: 45-35.
11. - جعفری، سیروس؛ باقرنژاد، مجید؛ و جی‌هک، ریچارد (1384). «مطالعۀ تحول کانی‌های رسی در خاک‌های تحت‌کشت استان خوزستان ایران». نهمین کنگره علوم خاک ایران. پژوهشکدۀ حفاظت خاک و آبخیزداری.
12. - خسروزاده علیرضا (1392). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان‌شناختی فارسان استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
13. - خسروزاده علیرضا (1394). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان‌شناختی اردل و میانکوه استان چهارمحال‌و‌بختیاری، فصل اول»، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
14. - خسروزاده علیرضا (1395). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان شناختی اردل و میانکوه استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری، فصل دوم»، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
15. - خسروزاده علیرضا (1396). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی باستان شناختی اردل و میانکوه استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری، فصل سوم»، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی (گزارش منتشرنشده).
16. - خطیب‌شهیدی، حمید؛ طاووسی، محمود؛ آیت‌الله‌زاده شیرازی، باقر؛ و صالحی‌کاخکی، احمد (1386). «نظری اجمالی به محوطه‌های باستانی بخش چنار‌رود شمالی چادگان در حوضۀ زاینده‌رود». مجلۀ دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم‌انسانی دانشگاه اصفهان. دورۀ 48. شمارۀ 2. صص: 57-27.
17. - سعیدی‌انارکی، فریبا (1388). «تبیین و بررسی ارتباطات منطقه‌ای و فرا‌منطقه‌ای عصرمفرغ اصفهان براساس حفاری و گمانه‌زنی تپۀ باستانی کپنده». رسالۀ دکتری باستان‌شناسی. دانشگاه تهران.
18. - نورزهی، زینب؛ آجورلو، بهرام؛ باقر‌زاده کثیری، مسعود؛ و ابراهیمی، قادر (1395). «باستان کانی‌شناسی سفالینه‌های عصرمفرغ کول‌تپۀ عجب‌شیر، شرق دریاچۀ ارومیه». پژوهه باستان‌سنجی. سال 2. شمارۀ 2. صص: 17-1.
19. - نوروزی، علی‌اصغر (1388). «مطالعات باستان‌شناسی حوضۀ آبخیز کارون شمالی (استان چهارمحال‌وبختیاری)». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی. دورۀ 1. شمارۀ 2. صص: 175-161.
20. - نیکنامی، کمال‌الدین؛ و رفیعی‌علوی، بابک (1388). «چرا جای نام شیماشکی احتمالاً نمی‌تواند در کرمان قرار داشته باشد». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی. دورۀ 1. شمارۀ 1. صص: 215-199.
22. - Alizadeh. A., (2016). Ancient settlement systems and cultures in the Ram hormoz plain, Southwestern Iran. Oriental Institute Publications, Chicago.
23. - Bertolino, S. R., Galván Josa, V., Carreras, A. C., Laguens, A., de la Fuente, G., & Riveros, J. A., (2008). “Xray techniques applied to surface paintings of ceramic pottery pieces from Aguada Culture (Catamarca, Argentina)”. X Ray Spectrometry. 38(2). pp: 95-102.
24. - Broekmans, T., Adriaens, A., & Pantos, E., (2004). “Analytical investigations of cooking pottery from Tell Beydar (NE-Syria)”. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 226(1-2). pp: 92-97.‌
25. - Carter, E., (1978). “Susa: Ville Royal”. Paléorient. Vol.4. pp: 197-212.
26. - Carter, E., (1978). (1996). Excavations at Anshan (Tal-e Malyan): The Midle Elamite period, Malyan excavation reports. Universitu Museun Monoghraphs 82, Philadelphia.
27. - De Miroschedji, P., (1981). “Fouilles du chantier Ville Royal II a Suse (1975- 1977): I. Neveaux Elamite”. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologie Francaise en Iran (DAFI) 12. pp: 9-216.
28. - Djuric, M. Zivanovic, B. Stojkanovic L. P. & Ranogajec, J., (1992). “Computerized thermodynamic analysis of reactions during sintering of CaO-Al2O3-SiO2 system”. Cement and Concrete Research. 22, pp:139-148.
29. - Hester, T. R., Harry J. S. & Kenneth L. F., (1997). Field Methods in Archaeology. Seventh Edition. Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.
30. - Mackenzie, R. C. Rahman A. A. &. Moir, H., M. (1987). “Interaction of kaolinite with calcite on heating”. Thermochimica Acta. vol. 121. pp: 51-69.
31. - Nickerson, J. L., (1983). “Intrasite variability during the Kaftari Period at Tale Malyan (Anshan), Iran”. Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University.
32. - Sarhaddi-Dadian, H., Ramli, Z., Rahman, A., & Mehrafarin, R., (2015). “X-ray diffraction and X-ray fluorescence analysis of pottery shards from new archaeological survey in south region of Sistan, Iran”. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry. 15(3). pp: 45-56.‌
33. - Steinkeller, P., (1988). “On the Identity of the Toponym Lu.Su (. A)”. Journal of the American Oriental Society 108(2). pp: 197-202.
34. - Steinkeller, P. (2007). “New light on Šimaški and its rulers”. Zeitschrift für Assyrologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 97(2). pp: 215-232.
35. - Stępień, M., (2009). From the history of state system in Mesopotamia: the kingdom of the Third Dynasty of Ur.‌ Akme. Studia historica 3/2009.
36. - Stuart, B. H., (2007). Analytical techniques in materials conservation. John Wiley & Sons.
37. - Vallat, F., (1971). “Les documents épigraphiques de l'Acropole (1969- 1970)”. Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française 1. pp: 235-245.
38. - Vallat, F., (1991). “La Geographie de IElam d’Apres Quelques Textes Mesopotamies, Mesopotamie et Elam”. Mesopotamian History and Environment. Occasional Publications I, Published by University of Ghent. pp: 11-21.
39. - Vallat, F., (1993). Les noms géographiques des sources suso-élamites (Vol. 11). Reichert.
40. - Velraj, G., Tamilarasu, S., & Ramya, R. (2015). “FTIR, XRD and SEM-EDS studies of archaeological pottery samples from recently excavated site in Tamil Nadu, India”. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2(3). pp: 934-942.‌
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:

Aarab A, Bonyadi Nezhad M, Beheshti S I, Vahid Azadi. The Archaeo-Mineralogy Studying and Comparison of Orange-Red Pottery With Black Core of Elamite Era in Khuzestan, Chahrmahal va Bakhtiyari and Isfahan Provinces. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 2019; 3 (7) :23-41
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-158-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
year 3, Issue 7 (5-2019) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه مطالعات باستان شناسی پارسه Parseh Journal of Archaeological Studies
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.14 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4361