logo
year 7, Issue 23 (5-2023)                   Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud. 2023, 7(23): 105-129 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


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

Heydari Mehr P, Iravani Ghadim F, Aliyari A. (2023). Typology and Proposing a Model for the Spatial Distribution and Temporal Dimension of Megalithic Graves in Kermanshah Province (Case Study: Gilan-e Gharb and Sarpol-e Zahab Towns). Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud.. 7(23), 105-129. doi:10.30699/PJAS.7.23.105
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-736-en.html
1- PhD Student in Archaeology, Prehistoric orientation, Art University of Isfahan, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran , iravanline@yahoo.com
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (2663 Views)
Abstract
The Kermanshah Province is one of the significant regions studied by archaeologists, where numerous studies have been conducted so far. This research focuses on the examination of megalithic graves in the towns of Gilan-e Gharb and Sarpol-e Zahab in Kermanshah Province. Megalithic graves are among the burials that possess unique structures and architecture, which have been less explored and researched in Iran, particularly in the studied region. By studying these graves, it is possible to gain some limited knowledge about the culture, beliefs, and way of life of the people who owned these graves. The most important questions of this research are: What have been the architectural features of these graves’ structures? How has the distribution of these graves been and what pattern can be defined for this distribution? The research method is considered to be applied-historical in terms of its objective. The categorization of the form and structure of graves has been carried out descriptively. In this regard, while conducting field research in the area, an initial comparison of the typological data and relative chronology of graves was performed. Subsequently, using GIS software, an analysis and identification of the burial distribution pattern in the region were carried out considering various geographical factors. Based on these, variables such as elevation, slope, and rivers were analyzed. In general, the identified graves in this study are divided into two main groups: Cist graves and Cromlech ones, the latter encompassing various subtypes. Finally, studies and excavations have been conducted on these graves in the Caucasus, Anatolia, and northwestern Iran, which demonstrate the migratory lifestyle of the tomb owners. In this article, a portion of the cultural materials collected from the 2015 archaeological survey in the western towns of Gilan-e-Gharb and Sarpol-e Zahab in Kermanshah province is presented.
Keywords: Megalithic, Cist Graves, Cromlech Graves, Distribution Pattern, Typology, GIS.چ

Introduction
The word ‘megalithic’ refers to large stones, derived from the Greek word ‘Mega’ meaning ‘large’ and ‘lithos’ meaning ‘stone’ (Midgely, 2008: 23). In Persian and Iranian archaeology, it is referred to as a ‘large stone’. Megalithic graves are large, uncut stones that are sometimes formed with wood, soil, and other small stones (Shaw, 1999: 390). Studying the structure of Megalithic graves can play an important role in identifying the tribes that constructed them and is effective in dating these tombs, given the scarcity of ancient evidence and data. By conducting typological studies of these graves, their structural patterns can be reconstructed, and by comparing the surrounding areas, it is possible to date these tombs. Extensive studies have been conducted on megalithic graves in the north and northwest of Iran, but independent and specialized research on these tombs has not been carried out in Kermanshah province. Since the tombs in this area have not been methodically excavated yet, it is difficult to present a precise structural design of the tomb architecture. In this study, the typology will be based on the surface structure, and the dating of the tombs will be conducted through comparative studies. Research questions include the following: What are the types of megalithic graves? What are the characteristics of the architectural structure of these tombs? What is the distribution area for these species, and what pattern can be identified in this distribution?
In order to achieve the desired goals in this study, a set of field activities was performed, including sketching, photography, documenting and recording findings, and design. The research method used for classifying the shape and structure of graves is descriptive and also relies on comparative and library studies. This includes the collection of maps, reports, articles, and all useful information available in the region. The preparation and collection of the locations where the graves are situated are recorded using a GPS device. In the analysis of the distribution pattern of registered graves, a geographic information system (GIS) has been employed. In the study of the factors influencing the distribution of graves, various factors such as topography, water resources, elevation, and slope have been examined.
By identifying these factors, analyzing the data distribution pattern, and ultimately visualizing them on a map, it is possible to gain a partial understanding of why and how the areas are distributed and concentrated in the region.

Discussion 
Research on the structure of cemeteries and graves can be conducted using two different approaches: Firstly, typological studies are conducted based on the shape, dimensions, and materials of the graves. Secondly, factors such as the orientation of the graves, their proximity to one another, and their relationship to water sources, roads, and expanses in the cemetery are examined (Orlet, 1392: 93). The important point to note is that the structure of graves exhibits a distinct relationship with the geographical environment. In mountainous areas, for instance, there is often an abundance of large stones and slates that can be utilized in constructing graves. Consequently, there are variations in the shape and material of these graves, primarily due to the differing types of stones found in each region (Ibid, 1392: 107). The graves identified in this study are categorized into two groups: Cist graves and Cromlech graves.
 In the construction of cist graves, a pit was excavated approximately one meter deep from the ground, and its walls were lined with layers of large and small stones. Subsequently, after interring the deceased, the grave was sealed by placing large and extremely heavy boulders on top (Yukmen, 2003).
Cromlech graves are classified into following types based on the shape of the stone rings:
Mounded Cromlech refers to a type of grave that consists of one or more stone rings encircling a large stone tomb (Smith, Badalyan, Avetisyan, 2009: 106).
Paved Cromlech is characterized by its very low height from the ground, and its distinguishing feature is the scattering of small rocks on its surface (Ibid, 2009: 107).
Stepped Cromlech is defined by stone rings that encompass the central structure, exhibiting a vertical upward movement (Ibid, 2009: 108).
The elevation study of Gilan Gharb and Sarpol-e Zahab towns indicates that Sarpol-e Zahab has the lowest elevation at 540 meters, while Gilan-e Gharb reaches the highest altitude of 1340 meters that suggests a higher prevalence of graves in colder areas.
Through the examination of the influence of rivers on the distribution of graves and by referencing the water network map, it becomes evident that the graves tend to be situated in proximity to water sources. This distribution pattern signifies the significance of close access to water and further highlights the correlation between the location and distribution of graves within the river basin. Considering that the megalithic graves belong to the nomadic tribes, this proximity may be indicative of the convenience of accessing water for the needs of them and their livestock.

Conclusion
The typology of graves and their classifications in the study area of Sarpol-e-Zahab and Gilan-e-Gharb in Kermanshah province is based on comparative and comparative studies with megalithic graves in the north and northwest regions of the country. These graves are categorized into Cist and Cromlech graves.
The Cromlech species exhibit various structural forms within each range. Commenting on the shape of the landscape of megalithic graves is a complex subject that requires specialized studies and extensive investigations covering a wide area. When considering the geographic distribution of these graves, it is important to take into account factors such as the natural environment, topography, and the number of areas containing this type of graves. Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge the limited availability of extensive and specialized studies on these graves. Based on general findings from studies conducted on the distribution of graves, it is possible to identify certain areas that are centrally occupied with burials, while other areas remain devoid of any kind of burial. For instance, in certain areas of Sarpol-e Zahab, the absence of megalithic graves can be attributed to the scarcity of stones. Certainly, this can be justified by one reason: landscape manipulations in later periods carried out by farmers to level the land for cultivation. This is prominently observed throughout Sarpol-e Zahab due to its geographical structure and favorable conditions for agriculture. In relation to the correlation between water resources and the distribution of megalithic graves in this area, it is worth noting that the information obtained from GIS maps concerning the water bodies in the region demonstrates the close proximity of these graves to water sources. This proximity can be attributed to the practical utilization of fresh water sources by the nomadic communities, particularly for the purpose of sustaining their livestock. Hence, the architectural structure of large stone graves exhibits a distinct relationship with the geographical environment. In mountainous areas, the abundance of large stones contributes to a higher concentration of these graves in such regions. Based on comparative studies and the analysis of architectural features and structures of these large stone tombs, in conjunction with similar tombs found in the northwestern and northern regions of Iran, as well as in Anatolia, Caucasus, Russia, and Georgia, the period ranging from the ancient Bronze Age to Iron Age III can be attributed to megalithic graves. This classification is further supported by the presence of metal and pottery artifacts discovered within these graves.
Full-Text [PDF 2302 kb]   (722 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special Archeology
Received: 2022/04/30 | Accepted: 2022/06/7 | Published: 2023/05/22

References
1. - افضلی، سید ایمان؛ ایروانی‌قدیم، فرشید؛ و چایچی‌امیرخیز، احمد، (1400). «تبیین مردم‌شناختی جوامع کوچ‌رو جنگجوی اورآسیا در شمال‌غرب ایران بر پایۀ فرهنگ مادی تدفین». نامۀ انسان‌شناسی، 18 (32): 81-47.
2. - اورلت، برونو، (1393). عصر‌آهن اولیه در پشتکوه لرستان. ترجمۀ کمال‌الدین نیکنامی و امیر ساعد‌موچشی، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
3. - پورفرج، اکبر، (1386). «بازنگری عصرآهن شمال‌غرب، مطالعۀ موردی محوطه شهریری و قلاع اقماری». رسالۀ دکتری باستان‌شناسی، دانشگاه تربیت‌مدرس (منتشرنشده).
4. - حصاری، مرتضی؛ و اکبری، حسن، (1385). «مسئله معماری عصربرنز قدیم ماوراء‌قفقاز». پیام باستان‌شناس، 2 (6): 62-43.
5. - حصاری، مرتضی؛ و علی‌یاری، احمد، (1391). «مطالعه و گونه‌شناسی قبور کلان‌سنگی و تپه‌ای (کورگان) استان اردبیل». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 4 (1): 130-113.
6. - حیدری‌مهر،پوریا، (1394). «گونه‌شناسی و مطالعه پراکنش مکانی و زمانی قبور کلان‌سنگی استان کرمانشاه (مطالعۀ موردی: شهرستان‌های گیلان‌غرب، سرپل‌ذهاب)». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد، گرایش پیش‌ازتاریخ، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان (منتشر نشده)
7. - خان‌محمدی، بهروز، (1389). مقبره‌ای از عصر آهن در بایزیدآباد نقده (آذربایجان غربی). باستان‌پژوهی، 8-9: 159-173.
8. - خلعتبری، محمدرضا، (1383الف). کاوش‌های باستان‌شناسی در محوطه‌های باستانی تالش (مریان، تندوین). تهران: ادارۀ کل میراث‌فرهنگی استان گیلان، ادارۀ کل آموزش، انتشارات و تولیدات فرهنگی.
9. - خلعتبری، محمدرضا، (1383ب). کاوش‌های باستان‌شناسی در محوطه‌های باستانی تالش: وسکه - میانرود. تهران: انتشارات سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی.
10. - خوراهه، غزال، (1392). «گونه‌شناختی و مطالعۀ بعد لندسکیپی ساختار قبور کلان‌سنگی شمال‌غرب ایران». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی‌ارشد باستان‌شناسی گرایش پیش‌ازتاریخ، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان (منتشرنشده).
11. - صمدی، حبیب‌الله، (1338). «حفریات باستان‌شناسی گرماک و تماجان». باستان‌شناسی، 1 و 2: 95-94.
12. - فرمانی، داریوش، (1380). «گزارش بررسی باستان‌شناسی گیلان‌غرب». کرمانشاه: انتشارات سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی (منتشرنشده).
13. - کامبخش‌فرد، سیف‌الله، (1370). تهران سه هزار و دویست‌ساله براساس کاوش‌های باستان‌شناسی. تهران: نشر فضا.
14. - کمری، منوچهر؛ و جمشیدی، رضا، (1392). سرپل‌ذهاب در گذر تاریخ (جغرافیای تاریخی و تاریخ مفصل سرپل‌ذهاب). کرمانشاه: چشمۀ هنر و دانش.
15. - واندنبرگ، لوئی، (1345). باستان‌شناسی ایران‌باستان. ترجمۀ عیسی بهنام، تهران: مؤسسۀ چاپ و انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
16. نیکنامی، کمال‌الدین، (1390). «بررسی و شناسایی محوطۀ زردخانۀ اهر». با همکاری گروه باستان‌شناسی دانشگاه تهران (منتشر نشده).
18. - Afzali, S. I.; Iravani Ghadim, F. & Chaychi Amir Khiz, A., (2021). “Anthropological Explanation of Eurasian Warrior Nomadic Communities in Northern and Northwestern Iran Based on Archaeological Burial Material Culture”. Iranian Journal of Antheropology, 18(32): 47-81. (In Persian).
19. - Bахşəliyеv, V., (2008). Nахçıvаnın аrхеоlоji аbidələri. Bаkı: Еlm (Аzərbаycаn Milli Еlmlər Аkаdеmiyаsının Nахçıvаn Bölməsində)
20. - Brown, T. B., (1951). Excavations in Azarbaijan, 1948. London.
21. - Burney, C. A. & Lang, D. M., (1972). The peoples of the hills: Ancient Ararat and Caucasus.
22. - Cover, L. B., (1971). Anthropology for our times. Oxford Book Company.
23. - Egami, N.; Fukai, S. & Masuda, S., (1966). Dailaman II: The Excavations at Noruzmahale and Khoramrud, 1960. University of Tokyo, Institute of Oriental Culture.
24. - Farmani, D., (2001). :The report of the archaeological investigation of Gilan-Gharb, Kermanshah”. Publications of the Cultural Heritage Organization. (Unpublished), (In Persian).
25. - Hessari, M. & Ali Yari, A., (2012). “Introducing the large Chamber or Kurgans graves of Ardabil Province”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, 4(1): 113-130. (In Persian).
26. - Hessari, M. & Akbari, H., (2015). “The problem of Transcaucasia Old Bronze Age architecture”. Payam-e Bastanshenas journal, 2 (6): 43-62 (In Persian).
27. - Heydari Mehr, P., (2016). “Typology and study of spatial and temporal transmittal of megalithic graves of Kermanshah province. Case study: city of Gillan-e-gharb, Sarpol-e-zahab”. M. A. Thesis, Art University of Isfahan (Unpublished), (In Persian).
28. - Ingraham, M. L. & Summers, G., (1979). “Stelae and settlements in the Meshkin Shahr plain, northeastern Azerbaijan, Iran”. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran Berlin, 12: 67-102.
29. - Iravani Ghadim, F., (2011). “Jafar Abad VIII. Kurgan Kazıları, Kuzeybatı İran, Karadeniz’den Fırat’a Bilgi Üretimi, Önder Bilgi’ye Armağan Yazıları, Editörler: Aliye Öztan/ Şevket Dönmez”. Bilgin Kultur Sanat Yayinlari: 191-216.
30. - Iravani Ghadim. F., (2014). “Jafar Abad Kurgan No IV”. SCRIPTA: Essays in Honour of Veli Sevin, A Life Immersed in Archaeology, Editör Aynur Özfırat, Ege Yayınları, İstanbul: 87-106.
31. - Iravani Ghadim. F., (2018). “The role of domestic animals in the life of Eurasian nomadic warrior groups in light of recent archaeological evidence”. TÜBA-AR., 22: 19-33.
32. - Iravani Ghadim. F. & Beikzadeh, S., (2018). “Animal Remains Excavated at Jafar Abad and Tu Ali Sofla Kurgans, Northwest Iran (2010 And 2013 Seasons)”. Tüba-Ar, 23: 101-120.
33. - Kamari, M. & Jamshidi, R., (2013). Sarpol Zahab in the passage of history (historical geography and detailed history of Sarpol Zahab). Kermanshah: the fountain of art and knowledge. (In Persian).
34. - Kambakhshfard, S., (1991). Three thousand and two hundred years old Tehran based on archaeological excavations. Tehran: publication Faza(In Persian)
35. - Khalatbari, M., (2004a). Archaeological excavations in the ancient sites of Talash: Maryan-Tandabin. Research Institute of Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts & Tourism Publication. (In Persian).
36. - Khalatbari, M., (2004b). Archaeological excavations in Talash ancient sites: Veske – Mianroud. Research Institute of Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts & Tourism Publication. (In Persian).
37. - Khourahe, Gh., (2013). “Typology and Study the Landscape Dimension of Megalithic Graves Structure in Northwestern Iran”. M. A. Thesis, Art University of Isfahan (Unpublished). (In Persian).
38. - Kleiss, W., (1997). “Hügelgraber in nordwest und west Iran”. AMIT, 29: 179- 190.
39. - Kleiss. W, (1971). Zendan‌-I Suleiman die bauwerke, Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, Wiesbaden.
40. - Koryakova, L., (2000). “some notes about the material culture of Eurasian nomads”. Kurgans, ritual sites, and settlements Eurasian bronze and iron age, ed by: Jeannine Davis Kimball, Part: I: 13-18.
41. - Kroll, S., (1984). “Archaologische fundplatze in Iranisch ost Azerbaijan”. AMI, 17: 13-133.
42. - Kushnareva, K. K., (1997). The southern Caucasus in prehistory: stages of cultural and socioeconomic development from the eighth to the second millennium BC (Vol. 99). UPenn Museum of Archaeology.
43. - Khan Mohammadi, B., (2010). “A tomb from the Iron Age in Bayzid Abad Naqdeh (West Azerbaijan)”. Journal of Ancient Studies, 8-9: 159-173. (In Persian).
44. - Muscarella, O. W., (1971). “The tumuli at Se Girdan: second report”. Metropolitan Museum Journal, 4: 5-28.
45. - Midgley, M. M., (2008). The megaliths of northern Europe, routledge. London and New York.
46. - Niknami, K., (2011). “Investigation and identification of the area of Ahar Zardkhaneh”. with the cooperation of the Department of Archeology of Tehran University (Unpublished). (In Persian).
47. - Overlaet, B., (2003). The Early Iron Age in the Pusht-i Kuh, Luristan. Translated by: Kamal-Aldin Niknami& Amir Saed Mucheshi, Tehran: SAMT Publications (In Persian)
48. - Özfirat, A., (2009). “Excavation of the Bozkurt kurgan cemetery, 2007: First preliminary report”. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan, 41: 233-47.
49. - Pourfaraj, A., (2007). “The Revision of Iron Age in North Western Iran with case study on Shahar yeri site and its around fortresses”. Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Archaeology, Department of Archaeology School of Humanities Tarbiat Modarres University (Unpublished). (In Persian).
50. - Rubinson, K. S., (1991). “A mid second millennium tomb at Dinkha tepe”. American journal of archaeology, 95 (3): 373- 394.
51. - Samadi, H., (1959). “Archaeological Excavations of Garmak and Tamajan”. Archeology Journal, 1 & 2: 95-94. (In Persian).
52. - Shaw, I., (1999). A dictionary of archaeology. Robert Jameson, Oxford university.
53. - Smith, T. A., (2009). The archaeology and geography of ancient Transcaucasian societies: the foundations of research and regional survey in the Tsaghahovit plain, Armenia, Rubens S. Badalyan, Pavel Avetisyan. vol. 1, The university of Chicago oriental institute publications.
54. - Vanden Berghe, L., (1966). Archéologie de l'Iran ancien. Translated by: Isa behnam, Tehran University Printing and Publishing Institute (In Persian).
55. - Yükmen, B., (2003). Doğu ve Güneydoğu Anadolu dolmenleri ışığında Anadolu megalitleri: The megaliths of Anatolia: a survey revealing the significance of the dolmen in Eastern Anatolia. Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları.

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.