year 7, Issue 25 (12-2023)
Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud. 2023, 7(25): 85-103 |
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:
Gudarzi A. (2023). Genre of Luristan Ware and its Attribution to Kingdom of Ellipi. Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud.. 7(25), 85-103. doi:10.30699/PJAS.7.25.85
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-731-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-731-en.html
Ph.D. in Archaeology, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran , gudarzi.alireza@gmail.com
Abstract: (2242 Views)
Abstract
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 B.C) to Ashurbanipal (639 B.C.), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah. Over the last two decades, after the attribution of Genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom. The reason of researchers for attribute Genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdon is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi. This study seeks to use the Historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as Genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as Genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic.
Keywords: Pish-Koh, 1st Millennium B.C, Genre of Luristan Ware, Kingdom of Ellipi, Historical Archaeology.
Introduction
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 BC) to Ashurbanipal (639 BC), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah (Fig, 1). According to their studies, Kingdom of Ellipi include original range of Pish-koh, which From the north to the Gareen mountains(Harhar), in the northeast to along the Grien and in the East to Oshtoran-Koh (Media), from the south in the basin of Seymareh(Elam),in the West to Kabir-koh and in the North-West to South Harsin(Bit-Hamban)(Mollazah&Goudarzi,2016:89-92).
Genre of Luristan ware (Chronology, Stylistics& Attribution)
The genre of Luristan ware, which was first emerged in the early first millennium BC, during the Iron Age IIB(950–800BC)& IIIA (800-650BC), was distributed in the settlement and graveyards of Pish-Koh region(Adachi, 2004: 81). The pottery is often called by Roman Ghirshman »Genre Luristan«, that were found from Giyan Tapeh(Contenau&Ghirshman,1935). Although after excavation at Baba Jan tape by Clare Goff, she named them »Baba Jan III painted ware«(Goff, 1978 : 29). Baba Jan III painted wares, decorated with the bow-tie designs, which has called the kite design.
The appearance for about 300 years of genre of Luristan ware or Baba Jan III painted wares, can be divided into two phases old style and new style. Old style of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III) is mostly handmade or thrown on a slow wheel. But the new style of this pottery (Baba Jan IIB) is made entirely by wheel. In addition to the Pish-Koh area, the new style of genre of luristan ware has been obtained in the south of Hersin (Goudarzi, 2017: 226). This phenomenon is the result of the expansion of cultural relations and has led to the evolution of technology and wheel maker genre of Luristan ware (Fig.2&3).
Moorey suggested that genre of Luristan ware in the Iron Age Luristan can be generally attributed to invader from outside of this region(Moorey,1974:19). The invaders have been considered to be Kassites, Cimmerians, Median or Elamite people. Goff thinks that the culture of Baba Jan III was mist probably Median (Goff, 1968: 131). Medvedskaya believes that Baba Jan III painted ware belongs to the Ellipian kingdom (Medvedskaya, 1999:59). She says it cannot be Median, because it is quite different from the pottery found at Nush-I Jan tape.
Discussion
Over the last two decades, after the attribution of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, Iranian researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom(Shishegar, 2006; Molazadeh&goudarzi,2016؛Garavand, 2014). The reason of researchers for attribute genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi (Fig. 4). This study seeks to use the historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue.
But the available resources for reconstruction of historical geography of Ellipian kingdom is limited to historical texts and analysis archaeological data. The historical data, on one hand, are limited to Assyrian inscriptions, which often look and more political sententious zoom describes their version of victories. On the other hand, no writing among on the land of the Babylonians and especially Elamite inscriptions about Ellipi that according to evidence have been good relationship with Ellipian achieved. In addition to according to Assyrian texts, three times by Assyrian army, the territory of Ellipian kingdom has been occupied. Bat yet no data had been obtained about the presence of the Assyrians in Pish-Koh. For example, Assyrian data such as seals and decorations found on the tapeh Giyan, not obtained in Pish-Koh of Luristan(Fig. 5). Also finding a type of pottery in archaeological sites, can be no reason for a special ethnicity. Because the main data that anthropologists emphasize, such as clothing, etymology, language and etc., usually not available to archaeologists.
Conclusion
In this study tried to answer the question that the attribution of genre luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is true and meaningful? So with the comprehensive utilization of historical sources and archaeological data in context of the geographical features of the region, provide a logical analysis. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic. Therefore, we can offer Pish –Koh area, in the historical geography of 1st millennium B.C, for location of Ellipan kingdom. But attribution of archaeological data and putting it on the basis of analysis will be a hasty and unscientific.
Acknowledgment
Spatial thanks to Bill Partt (Royal Ontario Museum) for access to the excavation data of Jame- Shoran site.
Conflict of Interest
This paper is an independent research of the author and has not conflict of interest with any organization.
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 B.C) to Ashurbanipal (639 B.C.), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah. Over the last two decades, after the attribution of Genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom. The reason of researchers for attribute Genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdon is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi. This study seeks to use the Historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as Genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as Genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic.
Keywords: Pish-Koh, 1st Millennium B.C, Genre of Luristan Ware, Kingdom of Ellipi, Historical Archaeology.
Introduction
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 BC) to Ashurbanipal (639 BC), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah (Fig, 1). According to their studies, Kingdom of Ellipi include original range of Pish-koh, which From the north to the Gareen mountains(Harhar), in the northeast to along the Grien and in the East to Oshtoran-Koh (Media), from the south in the basin of Seymareh(Elam),in the West to Kabir-koh and in the North-West to South Harsin(Bit-Hamban)(Mollazah&Goudarzi,2016:89-92).
Genre of Luristan ware (Chronology, Stylistics& Attribution)
The genre of Luristan ware, which was first emerged in the early first millennium BC, during the Iron Age IIB(950–800BC)& IIIA (800-650BC), was distributed in the settlement and graveyards of Pish-Koh region(Adachi, 2004: 81). The pottery is often called by Roman Ghirshman »Genre Luristan«, that were found from Giyan Tapeh(Contenau&Ghirshman,1935). Although after excavation at Baba Jan tape by Clare Goff, she named them »Baba Jan III painted ware«(Goff, 1978 : 29). Baba Jan III painted wares, decorated with the bow-tie designs, which has called the kite design.
The appearance for about 300 years of genre of Luristan ware or Baba Jan III painted wares, can be divided into two phases old style and new style. Old style of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III) is mostly handmade or thrown on a slow wheel. But the new style of this pottery (Baba Jan IIB) is made entirely by wheel. In addition to the Pish-Koh area, the new style of genre of luristan ware has been obtained in the south of Hersin (Goudarzi, 2017: 226). This phenomenon is the result of the expansion of cultural relations and has led to the evolution of technology and wheel maker genre of Luristan ware (Fig.2&3).
Moorey suggested that genre of Luristan ware in the Iron Age Luristan can be generally attributed to invader from outside of this region(Moorey,1974:19). The invaders have been considered to be Kassites, Cimmerians, Median or Elamite people. Goff thinks that the culture of Baba Jan III was mist probably Median (Goff, 1968: 131). Medvedskaya believes that Baba Jan III painted ware belongs to the Ellipian kingdom (Medvedskaya, 1999:59). She says it cannot be Median, because it is quite different from the pottery found at Nush-I Jan tape.
Discussion
Over the last two decades, after the attribution of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, Iranian researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom(Shishegar, 2006; Molazadeh&goudarzi,2016؛Garavand, 2014). The reason of researchers for attribute genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi (Fig. 4). This study seeks to use the historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue.
But the available resources for reconstruction of historical geography of Ellipian kingdom is limited to historical texts and analysis archaeological data. The historical data, on one hand, are limited to Assyrian inscriptions, which often look and more political sententious zoom describes their version of victories. On the other hand, no writing among on the land of the Babylonians and especially Elamite inscriptions about Ellipi that according to evidence have been good relationship with Ellipian achieved. In addition to according to Assyrian texts, three times by Assyrian army, the territory of Ellipian kingdom has been occupied. Bat yet no data had been obtained about the presence of the Assyrians in Pish-Koh. For example, Assyrian data such as seals and decorations found on the tapeh Giyan, not obtained in Pish-Koh of Luristan(Fig. 5). Also finding a type of pottery in archaeological sites, can be no reason for a special ethnicity. Because the main data that anthropologists emphasize, such as clothing, etymology, language and etc., usually not available to archaeologists.
Conclusion
In this study tried to answer the question that the attribution of genre luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is true and meaningful? So with the comprehensive utilization of historical sources and archaeological data in context of the geographical features of the region, provide a logical analysis. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic. Therefore, we can offer Pish –Koh area, in the historical geography of 1st millennium B.C, for location of Ellipan kingdom. But attribution of archaeological data and putting it on the basis of analysis will be a hasty and unscientific.
Acknowledgment
Spatial thanks to Bill Partt (Royal Ontario Museum) for access to the excavation data of Jame- Shoran site.
Conflict of Interest
This paper is an independent research of the author and has not conflict of interest with any organization.
Keywords: Pish-Koh, 1st Millennium B.C, Genre of Luristan Ware, Kingdom of Ellipi, Historical Archaeology.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special Archeology
Received: 2022/04/20 | Accepted: 2022/07/13 | Published: 2023/12/3
Received: 2022/04/20 | Accepted: 2022/07/13 | Published: 2023/12/3
References
1. - اورسر، ا. چارلز، (1394). باستانشناسی تاریخی. ترجمۀ اشکان پوریان، تهران: انتشارات سمیر.
2. - بختیاری، ذبیح، (1385). «بررسی، شناسایی و مستندسازی آثار باستانی شهرستان خرمآباد- دهستان رباط نمکی». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
3. - پرویز، احمد، (1385). «گزارش بررسی دشت سیلاخور شهرستان بروجرد، فصل اول». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
4. - حسنپور، عطا، (1387). «گزارش فصل سوم کاوش اضطراری گورستان باباجیلان-دلفان». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
5. - داودی، داود، (1385). «بررسی باستانشناختی شهرستان الشتر»، خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
6. - سجادی، علی، (1393). «گزارش نهایی نخستین فصل کاوش باستانشناختی تپهفرودگاه - خرمآباد». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
7. - سجادی، علی؛ بهرامی، محمد؛ و رجبی، نوروز، (1387). «گزارش دو فصل لایهنگاری محوطۀ قلعۀ فلکالافلاک خرمآباد». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
8. - شیشهگر، آرمان، (1384). گزارش کاوش محوطۀ سرخدم لکی، کوهدشت لرستان (فصل دوم- ششم). تهران: انتشارات پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی کشور.
9. - طلایی، حسن، (1383). باستانشناسی و هنر ایران در هزارۀ اول قبل از میلاد. چاپ سوم، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
10. - عبداللهی، مصطفی؛ و سرداریزارچی، علیرضا، (1385). «گزارش مقدماتی فصل اول بررسی و شناسایی شهرستان ازنا، گزارشهای باستانشناسی (8)». مجموعه مقالات همایش بینالمللی باستانشناسی ایران: حوزۀ غرب، کرمانشاه: انتشارات پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی، گردشگری و صنایعدستی.
11. - عبداللهی، مصطفی، (1386). «بررسی حوضۀ سدخان الیگودرز». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
12. - کرامر، کرول، (1400). «سفال و جوامع انسانی». ترجمۀ مجتبی چرمچیان و حمزه خردمند، ایران ورجاوند، 4 (6): 148-118.
13. - گاراژیان، عمران، (1380). «گزارش بررسی و شناسایی نورآباد لرستان- فصل اول و دوم». خرمآباد: مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراثفرهنگی، صنایعدستی و گردشگری استان لرستان، (منتشرنشده).
14. - گراوند، مرتضی، (1392). «شواهدی احتمالی از حضور الیپیها در غار بتخانه کوهدشت». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی مدرس، 10 و 11: 206-215.
15. - گودرزی، علیرضا، (1396). «باستانشناسی، تاریخ سیاسی و جغرافیای تاریخی پادشاهی الیپی». رسالۀ دوره دکتری رشتۀ باستانشناسی (گرایش دوران تاریخی)، دانشکدۀ هنر و معماری دانشگاه بوعلیسینا (منتشرنشده).
16. - گودرزی، علیرضا، (1400). «گونهشناسی سفال نوع لرستان: در پرتو بررسیهای باستانشناختی جدید در لرستان». مطالعات باستانشناسی، 13 (2): 160-141. Doi: 10.22059/jarcs.2019.282333.142723
17. - لوین، د. لوییس، (1381). «عصرآهن». در: باستانشناسی غرب ایران، بهکوشش فرانک: هول، ترجمۀ زهرا باستی، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
18. - ملازاده، کاظم، (1393). باستانشناسی ماد. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
19. - ملازاده، کاظم؛ و گودرزی، علیرضا، (1394). «تاریخ سیاسی پادشاهی الیپی». پژوهشهای علوم تاریخی، 1 (7): 172-153. https://doi.org/10.22059/jhss.2015.57836
20. - ملازاده، کاظم؛ و گودرزی، علیرضا، (1395). «جغرافیای تاریخی پادشاهی الیپی». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، 6 (10): 118-101. Doi: 10.22084/NBSH.2016.1548
21. - موسویحاجی، سیدرسول؛ بهرامی، محمد؛ و سجادی، علی، (1393). «شواهدی از وجود دژی مربوط به ایالت الیپی در لایههای زیرین قلعۀ فلکالافلاک خرمآباد-لرستان». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، 4 (7): 94-81.
22. - یانگ، تامس. کایلر، (1373). «بازنگری عصر آهن ایران: نظریاتی مقدماتی برای ارزیابی عقاید پیشین». ترجمۀ کامیار عبدی، میراثفرهنگی، 12 (ویژهنامه نخستین گردهمایی باستانشناسی ایران): 249-237.
24. - Adachi, T., (2004). “Tentative Chronological Sequence of Bow-Tie Designs in Baba Jan III Painted Ware”. Orien : Report of society for near eastern studies in japan, 39: 79-95.
25. - Alibaigi, S.; Shanbehzadeh, A. & Alibaigi, H., (2012). “The discovery of a Neo-Assyrian rock-relief at Mishkhas, Ilam province (Iran)”. Iranica Antiqua, 47: 29-40.
26. - Bahrami, M.; Sajadi, A. & Rajabi, N., (2015). “Report of two season of stratigraphy of Tape Falak-Aflak-e Khorramabad, Luristan”. The 2nd National Conference on Archaeology of Iran, University of Birjand, In date 2015,[In Persian].
27. - Clark, L., (1987). “Gravestones: Reflections of Ethnicity of Class?”. In: Consumer Choice In Historical Archaeology, Suzanne M. Spencer-Wood(Ed): 383-395, New york, Plenum Press.
28. - Contenau, J. & Ghirshman, R., (1935). Fouilles de Tepe Gian. Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, Paris.
29. - Dyson, R. H., (1989). “Rediscovering Hasanlu”. Expedition, 31: 2-3 (East of Assiria, The Highland Settelment of Hasanlu), Eds by: R.H. Dyson & M. M. Viogt.
30. - Garavand, M., (2014). “Possible Evidence of Ellipian in the Cave of Bot-khaneh, Kouh-Dasht”. Modares Archaeological Research, 5 & 6 (10- 11): 206-216, [In Persian].
31. - Ghirshman, R., (1964). Persia, From the origins to Alexander the great. Published by: Thames and Hudson, London.
32. - Goff, C., (1968). “Luristan in the first half of the first millennium B.C , A preliminary report on the first season's excavations at Baba Jan, and associated surveys in the Eastern Pish-i-Kuh”. Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, VI: 105- 135.
33. - Goff, C., (1977). “Excavation at Baba Jan: The Architecture of the East Mound, Levels II and III, Iran”. Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, XV: 103- 140.
34. - Goff, C., (1978). “Excavation at Baba Jan: the Pottery and Metal form levels III”. Iran, Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, XVI: 29-67.
35. - Goudarzi, A., (2017). “The Archaeology, political history and historical geography of Ellipian kingdom”. Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Historical, Faculty of Art Architecture Department of Archaeology, Bu-Ali Sina University, unpublished, [In Persian].
36. - Goudarzi, A., (2022). “A Typology of Genre of Luristan Ware, Based on New Archaeological Survays in Luristan”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, 13(4): 141-160. doi: 10.22059/jarcs.2019.282333.142723, [In Persian].
37. - Hasanpur, A., (2008). “The unpublished archaeological reports of three seasons excavation in the BABA-JILAN graveyard”. centre of Cultural Heritage Organization of Luristan, [In Persian].
38. - Karlovsky, L. C. C., (2002). “Archaeology and languages”. Current Anthropology, 43 (I): 63-88.
39. - Kramer, C., (1977). Pots and Peoples, Mountains and Lowlands: Essays in the Archaeology of Greater Mesopotamia, edited by L.D. Levine and T.C. Young, .jr. Malibu, Undena Publications: 91-112.
40. - Levine, L. D., (1974), “Geographical Studies in the Neo-Assyrian Zagros II”. IRAN: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, XII: 99-124.
41. - Levine, L. D., (1987). “The Iron Age”. In: F. Hole (eds): The Archaeology of Western Iran, Settlement and society from prehistory to the Islamic conquest, Washington: 229-250.
42. - Medvedskaya, I. N., (1999). “Media and its neighbors I: The localization of ELLIPI”. Iranica Anitiqua, XXXIV: 53–70.
43. - Molazadeh, K. & Goudarzi, A., (2016). “Historical Geography of Ellipian Kingdom”. Journal of Pazhohesh-ha-ye Bastanshenasi Iran, 6 (10): 83-100, DOI: 10.22084/NBSH.2016.1548 [In Persian].
44. - Moorey, P. R., (1974). Ancient bronzes from Luristan. Publisher: British Museum, London.
45. - Overlaet, B., (2004). “Luristan Metalwork in the Iron Age”. In: Stöllner T., Slotta R. & Vatandoust A. (eds.), Persia s Ancient Splendour, Mining, Handicraft and Archaeology, Deutsches Bergbau –Museum, Bochum: 328-338.
46. - Overlaet, B., (2013). “Luristan during the Iron age”. The Oxford handbook of ancient Iran, Ed. By D.T. Potts, part IV: The Iron Age: 377-392.
47. - Parpola, S. & Porter, M., (2001). The Helsinky Atlas of the Near East in the Neo Assyrian period. Finland: The Casco Bay Assyrological Institute and the Neo Assyrian Text Corpus project.
48. - Reade, J. E., (1995). “Iran in the Neo-Assyrians period”. in: Neo-Assyrian Geography, Edited by Mario Liverani, Uniiversità di Roma, Roma: 31-44.
49. - Reade, J. E., (1978). “Kassites and Assyrians in Iran”. Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies, XVI: 137-143.
50. - Russell, M. J., (1991). Sennacherib palace without rival at Nineveh. The University of Chicago press, Chicago and London.
51. - Sajadi, A., (2015). “The final report of the first season of the archaeological excavation of the Tape Forood-gah–Khorramabad”. Centre of Cultural Heritage Organization of Luristan, unpublished, [In Persian].
52. - Sajadi, A.; Bahrami, M. & Rajabi, N., (2008). “Unpublished Report of two season of stratigraphy of Tape Falak-Aflak-e Khorramabad, Luristan”. Centre of Cultural Heritage Organization of Luristan, [In Persian].
53. - Shishegar, A., (2006). Archaeological report of excavation at Sorkh Dom-e Laki, Kuhdasht, Lorestan: 2nd-6th seasons 2001-2004. Archaeological reports monograph series(9), [In Persian].
54. - Young, T. C., (1966). “Survey in western Iran 1961”. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 25: 228-239.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |