year 4, Issue 12 (8-2020)
Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud. 2020, 4(12): 29-48 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Azizi Kharanaghi M H, Jamshidi Yeganeh S, Abe M, Akbari A. (2020). New Evidence of Beveled Rim Bowls from Kale Kub, South Khorasan Province. Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud.. 4(12), 29-48. doi:10.30699/PJAS.4.12.29
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-317-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-317-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Prehistory, Archaeological Research Institute, Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute (ICAR), Tehran, Iran. , m.azizi@richt.ir
2- M.A. in Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Archeology, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Affairs, Tokyo, Japan.
2- M.A. in Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Archeology, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Affairs, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract: (6448 Views)
Abstract
During the fourth millennium BCE similar wares used to produce and use in the extended area in Near East which is so-called Beveled rim bowls. Its importance is for high quantity and similarity in production techniques. Different studies on dating, function, and the main reason for the spread of this pottery style have been done. Although beveled rim bowls were found in many sites in west, south, south-eastern, and central plateau, hereby new finding from Kale Kub seems that this pottery style was spread in the more extended area than what we expect. Kale Kub is located in the eastern part of Iran, Southern Khorasan, and Sarayan county. In 2018, two trenches were opened in order to identify the stratigraphy of the high amount of beveled rim bowls in addition to other pottery styles belong to fourth millennium BCE which are already known in southwestern Iran. The current study would be clarifying the importance of the Kale Kub site for identifying the dispersal zone of Beveled rim bowl pottery style by an endeavor firstly foe the classification and typology of the potteries and then a comparison between the pottery style in this site with other sites related to this period. Also, we attempt to trace the possible routes for this pottery style to the East and the interaction between east and west of Iran. Pottery collection from the excavation in Kale Kub includes a high amount of beveled rim bowls, Banesh tray, and some other pottery styles which are well-known from fourth millennium BCE such as nose handle and spouted wares. Beveled rim bowls are over 15 percent of the pottery collection and other styles have a few quantities in the collection. In term of production techniques and style, Kale Kub finds are similar to those from southwest of Iran.
Keywords: Eastern Iran, Kaleh Kub II, Beveled Rim Bowls, Forth Millennium BCE.
Introduction
The first season of excavation at Kale Kub aimed to identify the stratigraphy sequence of this site, which has revealed the chronological sequence from fifth to late fourth millennium BCE. Cultivation and human activities in recent years resulted in disturbance in most parts of the site. Beveled rim bowls, Banesh tray, and other diagnostic pottery styles of fourth millennium BCE are the most important finds in this site. In addition to beveled rim bowls and Banesh tray, other diagnostic styles such as nose handle, spouted wares were found in Kale Kub that shows all styles belong to this millennium would have seen in the eastern part of the Iranian plateau. In modern Iran, these pottery styles are reported from the southwest, central Zagros, central plateau, and southeast, but from east and northeast just reported from Farhad Gerd which scholars believe that the reported pottery is not beveled rim bowl. Excavation in Kale Kub shows the extension of this culture to the east part of Iran. This site is located far from the well-known sites from this period in the west part of Iran and there are two deserts, Dasht-e Kavir and Lut desert, between this site and other known sites with similar pottery style increase the importance of finding the answer for this question that how this culture found its way to the east.
Conclusion
Inter-regional interactions had a significant effect on the movement of raw material and production in the extended area. Because of the geographical situation of Kale Kub at the east of Iran and the existence of metal mine in the region, this site possibly appeared as a supplier place in the interaction networks for the southwest of Iran during the fourth millennium BCE. The pottery culture which is prevalent in the southwest in this site shows clearly these interactions. To answer the question of how they were connected, we need more excavations and more information. The nearest sites with similar cultural features to the Kale Kub are Tepe Sofalin in Pishva, Varamin in central plateau; and in the southeast of Iran, Mahtout Abad in Jiroft, that both have about thousand kilometers are away from Kale Kub. This distance shows that there are highly probable some other sites between Sofalin and Kale Kub and also Mahtout Abad and Kale Kub that have not been identified yet. These two-direction routes (first, the southern boundary of Alborz mountain and north of Dasht-e Kavir; second, the southern part of Lut desert to the Sistan region and eastern parts of Iran), are the possible routes that connect the east to the fourth millennium BCE cultures of southwest in purpose of achieving the raw material. In the highlands around Kale Kub, copper mining evidence showing that these mines were used till late Islamic periods in the region as well. Also, this region has various types of opal. Kale Kub location between Afghanistan and inner part of Iranian plateau suggests that this site was formed on the way of lapis-lazuli movement routs from Afghanistan; also, the mines of turquoise at the Neishabur is near to the site. Although, finding the role of this site in the networks of fourth millennium BCE needs more information that will be revealed by more excavations but current evidence shows that this site had an exchange and production function in the trade in this period. It suggests that beveled rim bowls and other material culture from fourth millennium BCE (about 3600-3500 BCE) extended to the east from the central plateau and southern part of Alborz Mountain as well as northern side of Dasht-e Kavir.
During the fourth millennium BCE similar wares used to produce and use in the extended area in Near East which is so-called Beveled rim bowls. Its importance is for high quantity and similarity in production techniques. Different studies on dating, function, and the main reason for the spread of this pottery style have been done. Although beveled rim bowls were found in many sites in west, south, south-eastern, and central plateau, hereby new finding from Kale Kub seems that this pottery style was spread in the more extended area than what we expect. Kale Kub is located in the eastern part of Iran, Southern Khorasan, and Sarayan county. In 2018, two trenches were opened in order to identify the stratigraphy of the high amount of beveled rim bowls in addition to other pottery styles belong to fourth millennium BCE which are already known in southwestern Iran. The current study would be clarifying the importance of the Kale Kub site for identifying the dispersal zone of Beveled rim bowl pottery style by an endeavor firstly foe the classification and typology of the potteries and then a comparison between the pottery style in this site with other sites related to this period. Also, we attempt to trace the possible routes for this pottery style to the East and the interaction between east and west of Iran. Pottery collection from the excavation in Kale Kub includes a high amount of beveled rim bowls, Banesh tray, and some other pottery styles which are well-known from fourth millennium BCE such as nose handle and spouted wares. Beveled rim bowls are over 15 percent of the pottery collection and other styles have a few quantities in the collection. In term of production techniques and style, Kale Kub finds are similar to those from southwest of Iran.
Keywords: Eastern Iran, Kaleh Kub II, Beveled Rim Bowls, Forth Millennium BCE.
Introduction
The first season of excavation at Kale Kub aimed to identify the stratigraphy sequence of this site, which has revealed the chronological sequence from fifth to late fourth millennium BCE. Cultivation and human activities in recent years resulted in disturbance in most parts of the site. Beveled rim bowls, Banesh tray, and other diagnostic pottery styles of fourth millennium BCE are the most important finds in this site. In addition to beveled rim bowls and Banesh tray, other diagnostic styles such as nose handle, spouted wares were found in Kale Kub that shows all styles belong to this millennium would have seen in the eastern part of the Iranian plateau. In modern Iran, these pottery styles are reported from the southwest, central Zagros, central plateau, and southeast, but from east and northeast just reported from Farhad Gerd which scholars believe that the reported pottery is not beveled rim bowl. Excavation in Kale Kub shows the extension of this culture to the east part of Iran. This site is located far from the well-known sites from this period in the west part of Iran and there are two deserts, Dasht-e Kavir and Lut desert, between this site and other known sites with similar pottery style increase the importance of finding the answer for this question that how this culture found its way to the east.
Conclusion
Inter-regional interactions had a significant effect on the movement of raw material and production in the extended area. Because of the geographical situation of Kale Kub at the east of Iran and the existence of metal mine in the region, this site possibly appeared as a supplier place in the interaction networks for the southwest of Iran during the fourth millennium BCE. The pottery culture which is prevalent in the southwest in this site shows clearly these interactions. To answer the question of how they were connected, we need more excavations and more information. The nearest sites with similar cultural features to the Kale Kub are Tepe Sofalin in Pishva, Varamin in central plateau; and in the southeast of Iran, Mahtout Abad in Jiroft, that both have about thousand kilometers are away from Kale Kub. This distance shows that there are highly probable some other sites between Sofalin and Kale Kub and also Mahtout Abad and Kale Kub that have not been identified yet. These two-direction routes (first, the southern boundary of Alborz mountain and north of Dasht-e Kavir; second, the southern part of Lut desert to the Sistan region and eastern parts of Iran), are the possible routes that connect the east to the fourth millennium BCE cultures of southwest in purpose of achieving the raw material. In the highlands around Kale Kub, copper mining evidence showing that these mines were used till late Islamic periods in the region as well. Also, this region has various types of opal. Kale Kub location between Afghanistan and inner part of Iranian plateau suggests that this site was formed on the way of lapis-lazuli movement routs from Afghanistan; also, the mines of turquoise at the Neishabur is near to the site. Although, finding the role of this site in the networks of fourth millennium BCE needs more information that will be revealed by more excavations but current evidence shows that this site had an exchange and production function in the trade in this period. It suggests that beveled rim bowls and other material culture from fourth millennium BCE (about 3600-3500 BCE) extended to the east from the central plateau and southern part of Alborz Mountain as well as northern side of Dasht-e Kavir.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special Archeology
Received: 2020/04/13 | Accepted: 2020/06/18 | Published: 2020/08/31
Received: 2020/04/13 | Accepted: 2020/06/18 | Published: 2020/08/31
References
1. - آسکالونه، انریکه، (1394). باستانشناسی جوامع ایرانباستان در هزارۀ سوم پیش از میلاد. تهران: سمت.
2. - اکبری، حسن؛ مرادسلطان، محمدشریف؛ حصاری، مرتضی؛ و سرداریزارچی، علیرضا، (1394). «کاوش لایهنگاری و تعیین عرصه و حریم تپۀ باستانی قلعهتل خوزستان». مفاخر میراثفرهنگی ایران. جشننامۀ دکتر صادق ملکشهمیرزادی. بهکوشش: مرتضی حصاری، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری و دانشگاه هنر اصفهان. صص: 58-55.
3. - پاتس، دنیل تی.، (1392). باستانشناسی ایلام. چاپ پنجم. تهران: سمت.
4. - چایچیامیرخیز، احمد، (1383). «پویایی یا پیوستگی فرهنگی: مروری بر نظریۀ سیستم جهانی اوروک در ایران مرکزی براساس مطالعۀ موردی یافتههای ترانشه CI محوطۀ اریسمان». پیامباستانشناس، شمارۀ 2، صص: 103-81.
5. - جمشیدییگانه، سپیده؛ فاضلینشلی، حسن، (در دست انتشار). «کالاهای واسطۀ مبادلات اقتصادی در گِلنوشتههای آغاز ایلامی». فصلنامۀ مطالعات باستانشناسی پارسه.
6. - حبیبی، آیتکین؛ و کرمی، محمد، (1387). «سفال اوروک، بر پایۀ بررسی روشمند نواری تپۀ جنوبی ابوفندا- خوزستان». پیام باستانشناس، شمارۀ 10، صص: 88-63.
7. - حصاری، مرتضی، (1392). شکلگیری و توسعه آغازنگارش در ایران، تهران: سمت.
8. - حصاری، مرتضی؛ اکبری، حسن؛ و سرداریزارچی، علیرضا، (1396). «بَردِ پنیر: ایستگاه یا استقرارگاه آغازنگارشی در شمال خوزستان». مطالعات باستانشناسی پارسه، دورۀ اول، شمارۀ اول، صص: 48-35.
9. - خانیپور، مرتضی؛ و نوروزی، رضا، (1396). «تحلیل نتایج پتروگرافی سفالهای تلگپ کناره». چکیده مقالات همایش بینالمللی باستانشناسان جوان، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری.
10. - خانیکوف، نیکولای ولادیمیروویچ، (1375). سفرنامۀ خانیکوف. ترجمۀ اقدس یغمایی و ابوالقاسم بیگناه، مشهد: مؤسسۀ چاپ و انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی.
11. - سرداریزارچی، علیرضا؛ و عطارپور، سمیرا، (1397). «مدارک باستانشناسی دوران آغازایلامی و ایلام قدیم در تپهسنجر خوزستان». مطالعات باستانشناسی، شمارۀ 18، صص: 138-119.
12. - سرلک، سیامک، (1390). باستانشناسی و تاریخ قم، نتایج کاوشهای باستانشناختی و لایهنگاری محوطه قلیدرویش و شادقلی خان، گمانهزنی و بررسیهای باستانشناسی در محور تاریخی، فرهنگی و مذهبی قم. قم: اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایع دستی و گردشگری استان قم.
13. - عابدی، اکبر؛ حیدری، رضا؛ و سلیمی، صلاح، (1398). «شواهدی جدید از دوره اوروک در شمالغرب ایران؛ حسنلویVIII و VII و عدم حضور فرهنگ کورا-ارس در جنوب دریاچۀ ارومیه». مطالعات باستانشناسی، شمارۀ 18، صص: 183-167.
14. - عبدی، کامیار، (1378). «کاسه لبهواریخته: کاربرد و پراکندگی آن». باستانشناسی و هنر ایران 32 مقاله در بزرگداشت عزتالله نگهبان. بهکوشش: عباس علیزاده، یوسف مجیدزاده و صادق ملکشهمیرزادی، تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی، صص: 84-64،
15. - عبدی، کامیار، (1380). «پژوهشهای باستانشناختی در دشت اسلامآباد غرب گزارش مقدماتی فصل یکم، 1377 و فصل دوم، 1378». باستانشناسی و تاریخ، شمارههای 26 و 27، صص: 60-47.
16. - عزیزیخرانقی، محمدحسین؛ آبه، ماساشی؛ جمشیدییگانه، سپیده؛ عنانی، بهرام؛ اکبری زرینقبایی، افشین؛ و گودرزی، پگاه، (1397). «گزارش گمانهزنی بهمنظور لایهنگاری محوطۀ کلهکوب آیسک، شهرستان سرایان، استان خراسان جنوبی». تهران: کتابخانۀ پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی (منتشرنشده).
17. - عزیزیخرانقی، محمدحسین؛ آبه، ماساشی؛ جمشیدییگانه، سپیده؛ عنانی، بهرام؛ اکبری زرینقبایی، افشین؛ گودرزی، پگاه؛ و سولتیشاک، آرکادیوش (زیرچاپ). پروژه باستانشناسی پیشازتاریخ شرق ایران؛ نخستین فصل کاوش در محوطۀ کلهکوب، آیسک، استان خراسان جنوبی.
18. - عزیزیخرانقی، محمدحسین؛ آبه، ماساشی؛ جمشیدییگانه، سپیده؛ و اکبری، افشین، (1398). «گمانهزنی بهمنظور لایهنگاری، نخستین فصل کاوش محوطه کله کوب آیسک، شهرستان سرایان، استان خراسان جنوبی». در: گزارشهای هفدهمین گردهمایی سالانه باستانشناسی ایران، جلد دوم، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری. صص: 887-883،
19. - علیزاده، عباس؛ احمدزاده، لقمان؛ و امیدفر، مهدی، (1395). سیستمهای استقراری و فرهنگهای باستانی درشت رامهرمز جنوب غربی ایران (نتایج کاوش در تل گسر و بررسی منطقهای رامهرمز). ترجمۀ ماندانا کرمی و رامین یشمی، تهران: انتشارات پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری.
20. - فرجامی، محمد، (1393). «بررسی باستان شناختی شهرستان سربیشه، خراسان جنوبی». مقالههای کوتاه دوازدهمین گردهمآیی سالانۀ باستان شناسی ایران، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری، صص: 338-335.
21. - قاسمی، سبحان؛ حصاری، مرتضی؛ و اکبری، حسن، (1397). « زَوارهوَر، مرکزی از دورۀ شهرنشینی (آغازنگارش) دشت ورامین: بررسی شاخصههای سفالی». فصلنامۀ مطالعات باستانشناسی پارسه، دورۀ دوم، شمارۀ چهارم، صص: 68-51.
22. - کرمی، محمد، (1384). «سفال دورۀ اروک در تلبلادیه بر پایۀ کاوشهای کارگاه C6N». مجلۀ پیام باستانشناس، شمارۀ 4، صص: 20-5.
23. - مجیدزاده، یوسف، (1379). «گزارش مقدماتی نخستین فصل حفریات باستانشناختی در محوطۀ ازبکی، شهرستان ساوجبلاغ، پاییز 1377». باستانشناسی و تاریخ، شمارۀ 25، صص: 81-57.
24. - نکوئی، پریسا؛ فاضلینشلی، حسن؛ و جوانمردزاده، اردشیر، (1393). «گاهنگاری مقایسهای سفال دورۀ آغاز شهرنشینی و شهرنشینی دشت مهران؛ براساس مطالعۀ سفالهای تپۀ چغاآهوان». مطالعات باستانشناسی، شمارۀ 10، صص: 184-167.
25. - نیکزاد، میثم؛ صدیقیان، حسین؛ و احمدی، خسرو، (1397). «پژوهشی بر فعالیت های معدن کاوی و ذوب فلز باستان در شهرستان خوسف، خراسان جنوبی». مجموعه مقالات همایش باستانشناسان جوان. بهکوشش: محمدحسین عزیزیخرانقی، مرتضی خانیپور و رضا ناصری، تهران: بنیاد ایرانشناسی، صص: 1072-1028.
26. - نیکنامی، کمالالدین؛ میرقادری، محمدامین؛ و گراوند، مرتضی، (1396). «غار بتخانه: شواهدی نو از جوامع کوچرو در زاگرسمرکزی از نیمۀ هزارۀ چهارم قبلازمیلاد تا پایان عصرمفرغ، کوهدشت، لرستان». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، شمارۀ 15، صص: 47-64.
27. - هاشمیزرجآبادی، حسن؛ و تقوی، عابد، (1391). «پژوهشهای باستان شناسی معادن کهن در خراسان جنوبی، مطالعۀ موردی نویافتههای مراکز کهن ذوب فلز شوسف نهبندان». فصلنامۀ مطالعات فرهنگی اجتماعی خراسان، شمارۀ 25، صص: 170-145.
28. - یوسفیزشک، روحالله؛ ضیغمی، مجید؛ و باقیزاده، سعید، (1397). «گونهشناسی و طبقهبندی فرهنگ سفالی مسوسنگ جدید شمال مرکز فلات ایران در پرتو یافتههای کارگاه شمالی محوطۀ میمنتآباد». مطالعات باستانشناسی، شمارۀ 17، صص: 227-246.
30. - Alden, J. R., (1979). “Regional Economic Organization in Banesh Period Iran". Ph.D thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
31. - Alden, J., (2003). “Appendix D. Excavations at Tal-e Kureh”. In: Early Urban Lile in the Land ofAnshan: Excavations at Tal-E Malyan in the Highlands of Iran, W. M. Sumner (ed.), Philadelphia: University Museum Monograph, 117, Pp: 107-98.
32. - Alden, J., (2013). “The Kur River Basin in the Proto-Elamite era-surface Survey, Settlement Patterns, and the Appearance of full-time Transhumant Pastoral Nomadism”. In: C. Petrie (ed.), Ancient Iran & Its Neighbors, Oxbow Books, Oxford, UK, Pp: 207-232.
33. - Algaze, G., (1989). “The Uruk Expansion: Cross-Cultural Exchange in Early Mesopotamian Civilization”. Current Anthropology, No. 30, Pp: 571-608.
34. - Algaze, G., (2005). The Uruk World System. 2nd Edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35. - Alizadeh, A., (2008). Chogha Mish II. University of Chicago.
36. - Beale, T. W., (1978). “Bevelled Rim Bowls and Their Implications for Change and Economic Organization in the Later Fourth Millennium B. C.”. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 37, No. 4, (Oct., 1978), Pp: 289-313.
37. - Besenval, R., (1994). “Le peuplement de l’ancienne Gedrosie, de la protohistoire a la periode islamique: Travaux archeologiques recents dans le Makran pakistanais”. Comptes rendus de l’Academie des inscriptions et belleslettres 1994, Pp: 513-35.
38. - Besenval R., (1997). “Chronology of the ancient occupation in Makran: results of the 1994 season at Miri Qalat (Pakistani Makran)”. In: Allchin B (ed) South Asian Archaeology 1995, Cambridge, Pp: 265–283.
39. - Blackman, M. J., (1981). “The Mineralogical and Chemical Analysis of Banesh Period Ceramics from Tal-i Malyan, Iran”. In: Scientiec Studies in Ancient Ceramics, M. J. Hughes (ed.), London: British Museum Occasional Studies, No. 19, Pp: 7-20.
40. - Burton-Brown, T., (1946). Studies in Hurd Millennium History. London: Luzac.
41. - Caldwell, J. R., & Shahmirzadi, S. M., (1966). Tal-i-Iblis, the Kerman Range and the Beginnings of Smelting. Springfield: Illinois State Museum Preliminary Reports 7.
42. - Caldwell, J. R., (1967). “The Setting and Results of the Kerman Project”. In: Investigations at Tal-i-Iblis, J. R. Caldwell (ed.), Springfield: Illinois State Museum Preliminary Reports, No 9, Pp: 21-40.
43. - Chegini, N. N.; Helwing, B. Parzinger, H. & Vatandoust, A., (2004). “Eine prahistorische Industriesiedlung auf dem iranischen Plateau: Forschungen in Arisman”. In: Persiens antike Pracht, Vol. 1, T. Stollner; R. Slotta, & A. Vatandoust (eds.), Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau Museum, Pp: 210-16.
44. - Delogaz, P. & Kantor H., (1996). Chogha Mish The First five Seasons of excavation. 1961-1971, Vol. I, ed. Abbas Alizadeh. University of Chicago. OIP 101.
45. - Desset, F.; Vidale, M. & Alidadi-Soleimani, N., (2013). “Mahtoutabad III (Province of Kerman, Iran). An “Uruk-Related” Material Assemblage in Eastern Iran”. IRAN, No. 51. Pp: 17-54.
46. - Dyson, R. H., (1965). “Problems of protohistoric Iran as seen from Hasanlu”. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, No. 24, Pp: 193–217.
47. - Englnud, R. K., (1998). “Texts from the Late Uruk Period”. In: Mesopotarmen: Spaturuk-Zeit und Fruhdynastische Zeit, P. Attinger & M. Wahner (eds.), OBO 160/1, Freiburg/ Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Pp: 15-233.
48. - Ghirshman, R., (1938). Fouilles de Tepe Sialkpres de Kashan. 1933, 1934, 1937, Paris: Geuthner.
49. - Goff, C. L., (1971). “Luristan before the Iron Age”. IRAN, No. 9, Pp: 131-51.
50. - Gropp, G., (1995). Archaologische Forschungen in Khorasan, Iran. Wiesbaden: Beihefte zum TAVO B 84.
51. - Hashemi Zarjabad, H.; Zareie, A.; Beige Harchegani, T. & Farjami, M., (2015). “Archaeological investigation of metal smelting in Eastren Iran, Case study: Mesgaran area, one of the most ancient metal smelting plants in south Khorasan”. International journal of review of life sciences, No. 5(8), Pp: 1092-1104.
52. - Helwing, B., (2005). “An Early Complexity in Highland Iran: Recent Research into the Chalcolithic of Iran”. TUBA-AR [Tiirkiye Bilimler Akademisi Arkeoloji Dergisi/ Turkish Academy of Sciences Journal of Archaeology], No. 8, Pp: 39-60.
53. - Herrmann, G., (1968). “Lapis Lazuli: The Early Phases of Its Trade”. Iraq, No. 30, Pp: 21–57.
54. - Homans, G. C., (1958). “Social Behavior as Exchange”. American Journal of Sociology, No. 63, Pp: 597-606.
55. - Johnson, G. A., (1973). Local Exchange and Early State Development in Southwestern Iran. Ann Arbor: Anthropological Papers of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology 51.
56. - Kohl, Ph. L., (1974). “Seeds of Upheaval : The Production of Chlorite at Tepe Yahya and an Analysis of Commodity Production and Trade in Southwest Asia in the Mid-Third Millenium”. Ph. D. Dissertation, Harvard University.
57. - Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., (1968). “Survey and Excavations in the Kirman Area”.IRAN, No. 6, Pp: 167-68.
58. - Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., (1972). “Tepe Yahya 1971: Mesopotamia and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands”. IRAN, No. 10, Pp: 89–100.
59. - Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C., (1986). “Third Millennium Structure and Process: from he Euphrates and the Oxus to the Indian Ocean”. Oriens Antiquus, Pp: 189-219.
60. - Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. & Potts, D., (2001). Excavations at tape Yahya, Iran 1967-1975. Harvard University.
61. - Le Brun, A., (1971). “Recherches stratigraphiques a l’Acropole de Suse (1969-1971)”. DAFI, No l. Pp: 163-216.
62. - Levine, L. D. & Young, T. C. Jr., (1986). “A Summary of the Ceramic Assemblages of the Central Western Zagros from the Middle Neolithic to The Late Third Millennium B.C.”. In: Prehistoire de la Mesopotamie, J. L. Huot (ed.), Paris: CNRS, Pp: 15-53.
63. - Majidzadeh, Y., (1976). “The Early Prehistoric Cultures of the Central Plateau of Iran: An Archaeological History of Its Development During the Fifth and Fourth Millennia B.C.”. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago.
64. - Miller, N. & Sumner, W., (2003). “The Banesh-Kaftari Interface The View From Operation H5, Malyan”. IRAN, No. 41, Pp: 91-102.
65. - Miroschedji, P., (1976). “Un four de potier du IVe millenaire surle tell de l’apadana”.DAFI, No. 6, Pp: 13-45.
66. - Moorey, P. R. S., (1999). Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence. Winona Lake, IA: Eisenbrauns.
67. - Morgan, J. De, (1900). Recherches archeologiques, ler serie. Fouilles a Suse en 1897-1898 et 1898-1899, Paris: Leroux.
68. - Mutin, B., (2013). “Ceramic Traditions And Interactions On The South-Eastern Iranian Plateau During The Fourth Millennium B.C.”. In: Ancient Iran And Its Neighbours: Local Developments And Long-Range Interaction In The Fourth Millennium B.C., edited by Cameron A Petrie, Pp: 253–85. Oxford: Oxbow books.
69. - Mutin, B.; Minc, L. D.; Lamberg-karlovsky, C. C. & Maurizio, Tosi., (2017). “Regional and Long-Distance Exchange of an Emblematic Prestige Ceramic in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands. Results of Neutron Activation Analysis”. Paléorient, No. 43 (1), Pp: 141–62.
70. - Nickolas, I. M., (1990). The Proto-Elamite Settlement at TUV. Philadelphia: University Museum Monograph 69.
71. - Nissen, H. J., (1970). “Grabung in den Quadraten K/L XU in Uruk-Warka”. BaM, No. 5, Pp: 101-91.
72. - Petrie, C. A.; Asgari Chaverdi, A. & Seyedin, M., (2006). “Excavations at Tol-e Spid”. In: The Mamasani Archaeological Project Stage One: A Report on the First Two Seasons of the ICAR, University of Sydney Expedition to the Mamasani District, Fars Province, Iran, D. T. Potts & K. Roustaei (eds.), Tehran: Archaeological Report Monograph Series, No. 10, Pp: 89-134.
73. - Potts, D., (2001). Excavations at Tepe Yahya, 1967–1975: The Third Millennium. Bulletin of the American School of Prehistoric Research 45. Cambridge: Peabody Museum Press.
74. - Potts, D., (2009). “Bevel-Rim Bowls and Bakeries: Evidence and Explanations from Iran and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands”. Journal of Cuneiform Studies, No. 61, Pp: 1-23.
75. - Renfrew, C., (1975). “Trade as Action at a Distance: Questions of Integration and communication”. In: Ancient Civilization and Trade, by: C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky Jeremy A. Sabloff. Pp: 3-59. New Mexico: university of New Mexico.
76. - Stöllner, T.; Doll, M.; Eskanderi, M. M.; Momenzadeh, M.; Pasternak, R. & Steffens, G., (2004). “Bronzezeitliche Kupferezgewinnung in Veshnaveh [Bronze Age Copper Exploitation at Veshnovah]”. In: Persiens Antike Pracht, edited by T. Stöllner, R. Slotta, and A. Vatandoust, Katalog de. Pp: 240–57. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbau-Museum.
77. - Stöllner, T.; Mireskandari, M.; Roustaie, K.; Momenzadeh, M.; Riese, T.; Steffens, G.; Weisgerber, G.; Doll, M.; Pasternak, R. & Dörfler, W. (2011). “Mining Archaeology in Iran: Investigations at Vešnāve and a Survey on the Western Central Iranian Plateau”. In: Early Mining and Metallurgy on the Western Central Iranian Plateau: The First Five Years of Work, edited by Abdolrasool Vatandoust, Hermann Parzinger, and Barbara Helwing, Pp: 535–608, Mainz: Philipp von Zabern.
78. - Sumner, W. M., (2003). Early Urban Life in the Land of Ansban: Excavations at Tal-e Malyan in the Highlands of Iran. Philadelphia: University Museum Monograph 117.
79. - Weeks, L. R.; Alizadeh, K. S.; Niakan, L.; Alamdari K.; Khosrowzadeh, A. & Zeidi, M., (2006). “Excavations at Tol-e Nurabad”. In: The Mamasani Archaeological Project Stage One: A Report on the First Two Seasons of the ICAR, University of Sydney Expedition to the Mamasani District, FarsProvince, Iran, D. T. Potts & K. Roustaei (eds.), Tehran: Archaeological Report Monograph Series, NO. 10, Pp: 31-88.
80. - Weiss, H. & Young, T. C. Jr., (1975). “The Merchants of Susa: Godin V and Plateau-Lowland Relations in the Late Fourth Millennium B.C.”. IRAN, No. 13, Pp: 1-17.
81. - Whitcomb, D., (1971). “The Proto-Elamite Period at tall-iGazir”. Unpublished M.A Thesis University of Georgia.
82. - Wilkinson, T. C., (2014). Tying the Threads of Eurasia; Trans-Regional Routes and Material Flows in Transcaucasia, Eastern Anatolia and Western Central Asia, c.3000-1500BC. Sidestone Press. Leiden.
83. - Wright, H. T., (1981). An Early Town on the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad. Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology Memoir 13.
84. - Wright, H.; Miller, N. & Redding, R., (1980). “Time and process in an Uruk rural center”. In: lárcheologie de líraq du debut, barrelet (ed.). Pp: 265-284. Paris CNRS.
85. - Wright, H. T & Johnson, G. A., (1985). “Regional Perspectives on Southwest Iranian State development”. Paléorient, 1985, Vol. 11, No. 2, Pp: 25-30.
86. - Wright, R. P., (1984). “Technology, Style and Craft Specialization: Spheres of Interaction and Exchange in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, Third Millennium B.C.”. Ph. D. Dissertation. Harvard University, Harvard University and University Microfilms.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |