logo
year 8, Issue 28 (8-2024)                   Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud. 2024, 8(28): 95-114 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


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

Anani B, Gholinezhad M. (2024). New Findings from GKC (BMAC) in South of Khorasan Based on Evidence of Sartakhteh Baraz Site of Qaen. Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud.. 8(28), 95-114. doi:10.22034/PJAS.8.28.95
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-695-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Conservation and Restoration, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran (Corresponding Author). , Bahrambastan2006@gmail.com
2- PhD Candidate, Archaeology, University of Paris 1 Pantheon-Sorbonne, ArScAn, UMR 7041, Paris, France.
Abstract:   (3392 Views)
Abstract
In recent years Archaeologist have taken a special attention at south of Khorasan, especially the Qaen region. Recent archaeological surveys have provided valuable findings for researchers. Specific geographical location and the connection as a natural corridor among central Asia, North of Khorasan, southeast of Iran, and central plateau of Iran, which was made by central desert, can be a great cause in different periods, especially in the early second millennium B.C. The expansion of “GKC” (BMAC) in the Eastern half of Iran is one of the most important developments of the second millennium B.C. New findings show that this culture has spread to parts of South of Khorasan, for example, findings of the Razeh, Gavand and Bekanda previously studied. Sartakhteh Baraz site in Qaen is one of the significant sites in Southern Khorasan in which many evidences of the BMAC have been observed, which is less studied and, in this research, we attempt to introduce this site and identify the expansion of GKC. This site located in a mountainous region in Qaen area in North of Southern Khorasan. This site is much destroyed because it is located near a rural area. The main sources of this research have been chosen from the library sources and survey of Sartakhteh Baraz of Qaen area in 2016. The research method is descriptive-analytical. Then these findings were analyzed and interpreted in theoretical studies. This paper intends to introduce and describing BMAC at the South of Khorasan of Iran Based on evidence of Sartakhteh Baraz site of Qaen; furthermore, its results can demonstrate different aspects of this culture. It seems this culture has expanded in South of Khorasan in the first half of the second millennium B.C. 
Keywords: South of Khorasan, Qaen, GKC (BMAC), Sartakhteh Baraz Site.

Introduction
South Khorasan is located in the east of Iran from a geographical point of view. This region has received less attention in terms of archaeological studies than other regions of the Iranian Plateau. Although these studies have greatly increased in the last decade and have attracted some attention, they are still far from reaching favorable point. South Khorasan, or the current South Khorasan province, geologically has two deserts and mountainous parts. Qaen region, which includes more the mountainous part of the region, is considered one of the cold and rainy regions of the province, so that the average annual rainfall in the city is 180 mm. The pattern of placement of Qaen region is in the form of sometimes continuous mountain ranges in the direction of northwest to Southeast, where Baraz, shaskouh, Ahangaran and Qaen mountains are among the main mountain ranges in the region. Qaen, together with Sarayan and Ferdows covers the northern half of the province, and archaeologically, it is one of the richest areas of Southern Khorasan. Many important settlements of South Khorasan in different periods are scattered in this areas. Strategically, this region forms a link between North Khorasan and Central Asia with the central Plateau and even the southeast. This factor has made the basic and important issues of archaeology in different periods to be tied with archaeology studies in South Khorasan. The studies of BMAC culture in this area are important in the sense that specializes studies and surveys have not been done for this area, and most of the studies include surveys with the purpose of identification. The purpose of the current research is to identify and introduce new evidences is of BMAC culture and explain the spread of this culture in parts of South Khorasan. This research, by using the descriptive-analytical method as well as using field research based on the findings obtained from the archaeological surveys of the central part of Qaen city, tried to analyze and introduce the new evidences obtained from the BMAC culture in the South of Khorasan.
Research questions and Hypotheses: The most important question raised in this research is how to analyze the spread of Great Khorasan culture in South Khorasan? It seems that by identifying new evidences in South Khorasan region, it is possible to discuss this culture more precisely in this region in such a way that it is very likely that the Great Khorasan culture spread in this region in its final stages.

Discussion
The Great Khorasan culture refers to a collection of settlement sites of the late Bronze Age (simultaneous with the V and VI Bronze age) that was formed in a cultured range beyond political borders. This area includes parts of Southern Turkmenistan, Northern Afghanistan, Northeastern Iran, southwestern Tajikistan and Southern Uzbekistan. Among the prominent features of this culture are the presence of distinctive types of pottery, the abundant use of bronze metal and precious metals such as gold and silver, the presence of a variety of prestigious and everyday goods that are made of imported and local stones, including: turquoise, agate, chlorite and marble. In addition to that, collections of unique and possibly ritual objects such as scepters of power, miniature columns, stone weights, mixed stone figurines of seated women in woolen clothes, marble vessels and collections of silver and gold vessels with special reliefs, all it shows specialized industry and exchange economy in this culture (Vahdati, 2015:42-43). 
  In general, the beginning of archaeological activities in the area of GKC (BMAC) in the central east of Iran in recent years, has led to the identification of new settlements and cemeteries of this culture. The new archaeological data and documents obtained from the settlements in the northeast and east of Iran (Khorasan) show the new areas of expansion and influence of GKC. The site of Sartakhteh Baraz of Qaen is one of the most important sites in South Khorasan, where the evidences of GKC has been observed. Sartakhteh Baraz site was first identified during archaeological investigation by Gholinezhad (Gholinezhad, 2016). This area includes large mound with an area of approximately 120×300 meters, which, due to agricultural activities, cultural data are removed from the original context and placed on the slopes and lands prepared for agriculture (fig 2). Therefore, the distribution of cultural materials can be seen on a large scale. The surveys conducted show that the data and evidence obtained include pottery (fig 4), dagger (fig 5), and a wand head (fig 6) vessel of kohl with a rod (fig 7). The pottery data in the area includes samples that belong to the third to second millennium BC according to the forms and types of pottery (Anani 1400: 113). Among these, there are 6 pieces related to the BMAC culture except for the two pieces that have pea paste and cover, the other pieces have orange paste and cover (Table 1). Some of these pottery are very similar to examples of the final stages of the BMAC culture such as Bustan and Molali in the first half of the second millennium BC (Ionesov, 2002). Based on this, it can be concluded that the layers of the BMAC culture in this area belong to the final stage of this culture. In addition to these, bronze tools and artifacts have been found in abundance in the graves related to the BMAC culture with we witness in the prominent sites of this culture such as Gonur Depe (Sarianidi, 2007:90-93).

Conclusion
In recent years the expansion of archaeological activities and surveys in South Khorasan has increased the identification of settlements and sites of different periods. However we are still far from the desired point and it is necessary that many areas of South Khorasan be investigated systematically and of course specialized. During the surveys, 4 sites belonging to the Great Khorasan culture have been identified in the South of Khorasan. However, if we consider Gonabad as part of this region regardless of the current political boundaries, the number of sites will increase. The new findings obtained from the Sartakhteh Baraz site in the Qaen region show the importance of this region in the late Bronze Age. As mentioned in this research, these findings belong to a new culture that appears in this region. The Great Khorasan culture has spread over a wide area from Central Asia to the Iranian plateau. In the meantime, South Khorasan has acted as a communication route and passage. In such a way that it connects the north-east and south of Turkmenistan to the south-east and the center of the Iranian plateau. Accordingly, it is obvious that we are facing the remains of this culture in this region. But the important question raised here is why most of the areas obtained in this region are cemeteries? Although the answer to this question is not the goal of the present study, before answering this question, it should be noted that all these sites have been archaeologically investigated and none of them have been stratified. The sites that have been explored have only been speculated and demarcated. However during these speculations, it has been almost determined that some of these areas are cemeteries. In the meantime, considering the difference that Sartakhte Baraz site has with other contemporaneous sites and has evidence from earlier periods, it creates the possibility that we may be facing a settlement here. Accordingly, in order to reach a reasonable answer, it is necessary to carry out a stratigraphy excavation in this area in order to be able to answer this question and of course many questions related to this culture in South Khorasan. Another important point that was mentioned and raised as a hypothesis is that the settlements in South Khorasan probably belong to the final stages (first half of the second millennium BC) of the GKC. of course, this assumption also needs more studies in the entire eastern region of Iran. It is hoped that more ambiguities can be answered in the future.
Full-Text [PDF 2314 kb]   (4491 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special Archeology
Received: 2022/02/6 | Accepted: 2022/06/1 | Published: 2024/08/31

References
1. - باصفا، حسن؛ و رحمتی، مهدیه، (1391). «گزارش مقدماتی کاوش باستان‌شناختی در محوطۀ شهرک فیروزه نیشابور». مزدک‌نامه 5، به‌کوشش :جمشید کیانفر و پروین استخری، 5: 623-613. https://www.mazdaknameh.ir/Publish/PublishID/ArticleId/323
2. - حبیبی، سید‌خلیل؛ و حصاری، مرتضی، (1399). «بررسی و مطالعه بقایای تمدن خراسان بزرگ در حوضۀ آبریز رودخانه کشف‌رود مشهد»، پژوهشنامه خراسان بزرگ، 40: 18-1. https://doi.org/10.22034/JGK.2020.137970
3. - حیدری، رضا؛ و بابازاده، سامان، (1395)، «محوطه چوپان بردسکن، نویافته‌هایی از فرهنگ بلخی-مروی». اولین کنگره استانی و چهارمین کنگره تاریخ معماری و شهرسازی ایران (خراسان رضوی)، به‌اهتمام: محمود طغرایی، مشهد: پشتیبان. https://www.academia.edu/35063399/
4. - دانا، محسن، (1399). «فرهنگ عصرمفرغ خراسان بزرگ، شکل‌گیری یک مفهوم: خراسان». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی پارسه، 14(12): 98-75. https://doi.org10.30699/PJAS.4.12.75
5. - سروش، محمدرضا؛ و یوسفی، صاحب، (1393). «محوطه رزه، شاهدی از استقرارهای هزارۀ‌ سوم تا دوران تاریخی در خراسان جنوبی». دوازدهمین گردهم‌آیی سالانه‌ باستان‌شناسی ایران، ویراستار: کوروش روستایی و مهران غلامی، تهران: پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی: 273-271.
6. - شیخ، محمد، (1393)، «بررسی سیستماتیک یاریم‌تپه درگز (بررسی استقرار پیش‌از‌تاریخی یاریم‌تپه درگز و تدوین گاهنگاری با استناد به یافته‌های سفالی)». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد باستان‌شناسی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، (منتشرنشده).
7. - صبوری، هادی؛ طلایی، حسن؛ و گاراژیان، عمران، (1393). «بررسی فرآیندهای پس از نهشت شدن: نمونه مورد مطالعه، تپه‌‍فریزی در دشت سبزوار». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 6 (2): 111-91. https://doi.org/10.22059/jarcs.2015.54176
8. - طهماسبی‌زاوه، حامد، (1398). «منشایابی فرهنگ بلخی - مروی و گسترش آن در نیمۀ شرقی ایران». رسالۀ دکتری در رشتۀ باستان‌شناسی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان، (منتشر‌نشده).
9. - عنانی، بهرام، (1395). «گزارش بررسی باستان‌شناسی بخش نیمبلوک شهرستان قاینات». بیرجند: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی خراسان جنوبی، (منتشرنشده).
10. - عنانی، بهرام، (1400). «تحلیل پراکنش استقرارهای جنوب خراسان (شرق مرکزی) از پارینه‌سنگی تا پایان مفرغ براساس مدل‌های استقراری باتوجه به بررسی‌های باستان‌شناختی منطقه». رسالۀ دکتری رشتۀ باستان‌شناسی، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان، (منتشرنشده).
11. - عنانی، بهرام؛ و ایروانی‌قدیم، فرشید، (1400). «شواهدی از فرهنگ خراسان بزرگ (فرهنگ بلخی-مروی) در شرق کویر مرکزی، با استناد به محوطۀ بکندا-طبس». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 13 (3): 213-191. DOI: 10.22059/jarcs.2020.302631.142875
12. - عنانی، بهرام؛ شیرازی، روح‌الله؛ و یوسفی، صاحب، (1393). «ارتباطات فرهنگی سرایان در هزاره‌های چهارم و سوم پیش‌ازمیلاد، نتایج کاوش در محوطۀ کله‌کوب سرایان، خراسان جنوبی». پژوهشنامه خراسان بزرگ، 5 (17): 67-59. DOI: 20.1001.1.22516131.1393.4.17.4.0
13. - فرجامی، محمد، (1394). «نویافته‌های عصرمفرغ در خراسان جنوبی (مطالعه موردی: محوطۀ گوند باغستان فردوس)». مجموعه مقالات دومین همایش باستان‌شناسی ایران، به‌اهتمام: حسن هاشمی‌زرج‌آباد، بیرجند: نشر چهاردرخت.
14. - قلی‌نژاد، مستنصر، (1394). «گزارش بررسی باستان‌شناسی بخش مرکزی شهرستان قاینات».بیرجند: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی خراسان جنوبی، (منتشرنشده).
15. - قلی‌نژاد، مستنصر، (1395). «گزارش بررسی باستان‌شناسی بخش سده شهرستان قاینات». بیرجند: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی خراسان جنوبی، (منتشرنشده).
16. - محمودی‌نسب، علی‌اصغر؛ و فرجامی، محمد، (1403). «معرفی محوطه‌های مفرغ متأخر (BMAC) در خراسان جنوبی». مجلۀ باستان‌شناخت (ویژه‌نامه خراسان). 8 (12): 114-96.
17. - وحدتی، علی‌اکبر، (1394). «عصرمفرغ و آهن در خراسان (3000 تا 500 پ.م.)». گذری بر باستان‌شناسی خراسان/ گزیده‌ای از یافته‌های باستان‌شناختی و نفایس تاریخی فرهنگی خراسان، به‌کوشش: میثم لباف‌خانیکی، تهران: سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی، صنایع‌دستی و گردشگری: 47-37.
18. - وحدتی، علی‌اکبر؛ و بیشونه، رافائل، (1394). «فصل سوم کاوش‌های مشترک ایران و ایتالیا در تپه‌چلو جاجرم، خراسان شمالی». چهاردهمین گردهمایی سالانه باستان‌شناسی ایران، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری: 49-43.
19. - وحدتی، علی‌اکبر؛ و فرانکفورت، هانری پال، (1389). «گزارش مقدماتی گمانه‌زنی در تپه‌دامغانی سبزوار». باستان‌شناسی و تاریخ، 24 (48): 36-17.
21. - Anani, B. & Iravani Gh, F., (2021). “Evidences of Great Khorasan Culture1 (BMAC) at the Eastern Part of Central Desert of Iran, Based on Findings from Bekanda (Archaeological Site) in Tabas”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, 3 (13: 27): 191-213. DOI: 10.22059/JARCS.2020.302631.142875 [In Persian].
22. - Anani, B., (2016). “The unpublished reports of Archaeological Survey of Nimbolook county of Qaen”. Cultural heritage, tourism and handicrafts of South Khorasan province. [In Persian].
23. - Anani, B., (2021). “Analysis of Prehistoric Settlements of South Khorasan (Central East) Via Settlement Models “based on Archaeological Surveys of The Region”. PhD Thesis in Archaeology, Supervisor: Iravani Gh, F., Art University of Isfahan. [In Persian].
24. - Anani, B., Shirazi, R. & Yousefi, S., (2014). “Cultural interactions in Sarayan region of Third and Forth millenniums B.C; Excavation results of Kalleh Koub, Sarayan,South Khorasan”. Journal of Great Khorasan, 5 (17): 59-67. DOR: 20.1001.1.22516131.1393.4.17.4.0 [In Persian].
25. - Basafa, H. & Rahmati, M., (2012). “Archaeological reports of Shahrak Firoozeh in Neyshabour”. Mazdaknameh, By Kianfar, J & Estakhri, P., 5: 613-623. https://www.mazdaknameh.ir/Publish/PublishID/ArticleId/323 [In Persian].
26. - Biscione, R. & Vahdati, A., (2011). “Excavations at Tepe Chalow, Northern Khorasan Iran”. Studi Micenei Ed Egeo-Anatolici, 53: 236-241. DOI: 10.4000/books.momeditions.8086
27. - Biscione, R. & Vahdati, A. A., (2020). “The BMAC Presence in Eastern Iran: State of Affairs in December 2018. Towards the Greater Khorasan Civilization?”. In: The World of the Oxus Civilization, B. Lyonnet & Dubova (eds.), New York: Routledge: 527-550.
28. - Cattani, M.; Cerasetti, B.; Salvatori, S. & Tosi, M., (2008). “The Murghab Delta in Central Asia 1990-2001: The GIS from Research Resource to a Reasoning Tool for the Study of Settlement Change in Long-Term Fluctuations”. In: Salvatori.S & Tosi.M (Eds.), The Bronze Age and early Iron age in the Margiana lowlands: facts and methodological proposal for a redefinition of the research strategies. The Archaeological map of the Murghab Delta studies and reports, II: 39-45, Oxford: Archaeopress.
29. - Dana, M., (2020), “The Bronze Age culture of Great Khorasan, The formation of a concept: Khorasan”. Parseh Journal of Archaeological Studies, 4 (12): 75-98. https://doi.org10.30699/PJAS.4.12.75 [In Persian].
30. - Farjami, M., (2015), “New Findings of Bronze age in South Khorasan (Case study: Gavand-e- Baghestan site in Ferdows)”. 2th national conference on Archaeology of Iran, By Hashemi Zarjabad, H. Birjand: Chahar derakht. [In Persian].
31. - Francfort, H. P., (2007). “L’art de la Civilisation de l’Oxus à l’Âge du Bronze (2300-1700 av. J.-C. env.) ET SES relations avec les régions voisines”. In: Sulla Via delle Oasi, Tesori dell’Oriente Antico, G. Ligabue ET Rossi-Osmida. G (Dir.), Padoue, Il Punto Edizioni: 102-127.
32. - Francfort. H. P., (1994). Fondations de Bactriane et de Margiane protohistoriques: Nuove fondazioni nel vicino oriente antico. Realta e ideologia. A cura di: Mazzoni, S. Published in Pisa by Giardini: 269-297.
33. - Gholinezhad, M., (2015). “The unpublished reports of Archaeological survey of Central district of Qaen city”. Cultural Heritage of South Khorasan, Iran. [In Persian].
34. - Gholinezhad, M., (2016), “The unpublished reports of Archaeological survey of Sedeh district of Qaen city”. Cultural Heritage of South Khorasan, Iran. [In Persian].
35. - Habibi, S. Kh. & Hessari, M., (2020). “Investigation and study the cultural sites of the Great Khorasan civilization in the watershed of Kashafrood”. Journal of Great Khorasan, 40: 1-18. https://doi.org/10.22034/JGK.2020.137970 [In Persian].
36. - Heidari, R. & Babazadeh, S., (2016). “The site of Choopan in Bardaskan; New findings of BMAC culture”. The first provincial congress and the fourth congress of the history of architecture and urban planning of Iran (Khorasan Razavi). By Mahmoud Toghraei. Mashhad: Poshtiban publications. https://www.academia.edu/35063399/ [In Persian].
37. - Hiebert, F. & Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., (1992). “Central Asia and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands”. IRAN, XXX: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299865
38. - Hiebert. F., (1994). Origins of the Bronze Age Oasis Civilization in Central Asia. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology Harvard University, Cambridge.
39. - Ionesov. V., (2002). “The struggle between life and death in Proto-Bactrian culture: ritual and conflict”. Mellen studies in anthropology 5.
40. - Kohl. P., (1984). “Central Asia: Palaeolithic Beginnings to the Iron Age (L’Asie Centrale des origines’a l’Âge du Fer)”. Synthese, 14, Paris (Ed) Recherché Sur les Civilizations.
41. - Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., (2013). “The Oxus Civilization”. Cupauam, 39: 21-63. https://doi.org/10.15366/cupauam2013.39.002
42. - Luneau. E., (2015). “A New Assessment of the End of the Oxus Civilization (Southern Central Asia, CA.1750-1500/1400 BCE): Overview of the Transformations of the Society”. Broadening Horizons 4, BAR Int. Series 2698: 303-308.
43. - Mahmoudi-nasab, A. A. & Farjami, M., (2024). “Introduction of Late Bronze Age (BMAC) Sites in Southern Khorasan”. Bastanshenakht (Specil Issue on Khorasan), 8 (12): 96-114. [In Persian].
44. - Rossi-Osmida, G., (2002). “Margiana Gonur-depe necropolis, (10 years of excavation by igabue study and research centre)”. Consideration on the necropolis at Gonur depe, In: Rossi-Osmida. Gabriele, II Punto Edizioni: 69-131.
45. - Saboori, H., Talaie, H. & Garazhian, O., (2014). “Investigation of post-deposition processes: Case Study; Ferizi site in Sabzevar plain”. Journal of Archaeological Studies (JARCS), 6 (2): 91-111. https://doi.org/10.22059/jarcs.2015.54176 [In Persian].
46. - Salvatori, S., (2016). “Bactria-Margiana Archaeological complex: how terminology hides historical processes. Transactions of Margiana Archaeological Expedition”. To the memory of professor victor sarianidi, Ed Dubova. Moscow, 6: 449-460.
47. - Sarianidi, V. I., (1977). “Ancient Horasan and Bactria”. Le Plateau Iranien et l’Asie Centrale des Origines à la Conquête Islamique. Paris: 129-154.
48. - Sarianidi, V. I., (1990). Drevnosti Strani Margush. Ashkhabad
49. - Sarianidi, V. & Dubova, N., (2010). “Nouvelles sepultures sur le territoire de la “Necropole royale” de Gonur depe”. Arts Asiatiques, 65: 5-26. https://doi.org/10.3406/arasi.2010.1698
50. - Sarianidi. V., (2007). Necropolis of Gonur. 23-27 Makriyanni Str, Athens 117 42.
51. - Sarianidi. V., (2008). “Margus, Mystery and Truth of the Great Culture”. 341 (3): Prof, Illus. Sm. 4to, Boards, Parallel texts in Turkoman, Ashgabat :Türkmendöwlethabarlary.
52. - Shaikh, M., (2014). “Systematic survey of Yarim Tepe of Daregaz (Investigating the prehistoric settlement of Yarim Tepe of Daregaz and condification of chronology based on pottery findings)”. Unpublished Master’s thesis in Archaeology, University of Sistan & Baloochestan. [In Persian].
53. - Soroosh, M. & Yoosefi, S., (2014). “Razeh site; Evidence of the settlements of the third millennium to the historical period in South Khorasan”. 12th annual symposium of the Iranian archaeology, Editors: Roostaie, K & Gholami, M. Tehran: ICAR, Pp: 271-273. [In Persian].
54. - Tahmasbi zaveh, H., (2019). “Origin of BMAC culture and its extension in the eastern half of Iran”. Unpublished Ph.D thesis in Archaeology, Art University of Isfahan. [In Persian].
55. - Vahdati, A. A., (2015), “Bronze and Iron Ages in Khorasan (3000- 500 BC)”. In: A review on the archeology of Khorasan/ Selected from archaeological findings and historical-cultural treasures of Khorasan, By Labbaf Khaniki, M. Tehran: Cultural Heritage Publications. [In Persian].
56. - Vahdati, A. A. & Francfort, H. P., (2010). “Preliminary report on excavation in Damghani site in Sabzevar”. Bastanshenasi va Tarikh, 24 (48): 17-36. [In Persian].
57. - Vahdati, A. A., (2014). “A BMAC Grave from Bojnord. Northeastern Iran”. IRAN, LII: 19-27. DOI: 10.1080/05786967.2014.11834735
58. - Vahdati, A. A.; Biscione, R.; La Farina, R.; Mashkour, M.; Tengberg, M.; Fathi, H. & Azadeh M. F., (2019). “Preliminary report on the first season of excavations Tepe Chalow. New GKC (BMAC) finds in the plain of Jajarm, NE Iran”. The Iranian Plateau During The Bronze Age/Development of urbanisation, production and trade, Edited by Meyer. J.W, Vila. E, Mashkour. M, Casanova. M, Vallet. R, Lyon, Maison de l’Orient et de la Mediterranee- Jean Pouilloux, (Archaeologie(s); 1): 179-200. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.momeditions.8086
59. - WWW.Googleearth.com

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.