year 7, Issue 25 (12-2023)
Parseh J Archaeol Stud 2023, 7(25): 29-54 |
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:
Zivari-Madam Z, Abbasnejad Seresti R, Hoseinzadeh Sadati J. (2023). A Comparative Study of the Socio-Economic Complexities in the Central Plateau and Southwestern Iran During the Second Half of 5th Millennium BC. Parseh J Archaeol Stud. 7(25), 29-54. doi:10.30699/PJAS.7.25.29
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-905-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/mbp/article-1-905-en.html
1- Ph.D. Student in Archaeology, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran ,r.abbasnejad@umz.ac.ir
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Architecture and Arts, University of Kashan, Kashan, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Art and Architecture, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran ,
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Architecture and Arts, University of Kashan, Kashan, Iran
Abstract: (1919 Views)
Abstract
The central plateau and southwestern Iran were two pivotal points to begin social and economic developments during the second half of 5th millennium BC, which played an important role in commercial exchanges and cultural interactions between the east and west of the Iranian plateau in the 4th millennium BC. Technology and industry were the main indicators of complexity in the central plateau, while in the southwestern of Iran, agriculture, animal husbandry and water resources were important in this sense. The level of complexity, the appearance of management technique, and pottery production in the key excavated sites in a range from the central plateau to a part of the eastern plains of central Zagros and the and southwest of Iran, was evaluated and studied. The structural analysis of the interactions between the two regions with a cultural ecology approach and based on five paradigms including assimilation, specialization, synchronization and self-organization, condensation of geo-economy, and concentration of power has shown that some societies during the second half of the fifth millennium BC, based on these five principles, they strengthened each other and created complex societies. We have achieved some results in the framework of economic-sociological indicators which include the creation of production and distribution systems, efficient families, pyramids of power and super elites, the destruction of public consensus and expanding elites.
Keywords: Complexity Indicators, Central Plateau, Southwest of Iran, Pottery, Management Technique.
Introduction
Due to its economic, cultural and geographical capabilities, Iran has always been at the center of transportation routes. Based on the available settlement maps, the dense and compact geographical structure of the southwest Iran caused the integration and unity of settlements and ultimately the formation of early states. On the other hand, the scattered geographical context of the central plateau had caused its social fragmentation.
The current research is based on the following questions and hypotheses: 1) how can the studies on the indicators of socio-economic complexity in the central plateau and southwestern Iran in the second half of the 5th millennium BC be evaluated? What are these indicators and why and how did they cause complexity? 2) What does the comparative study of the process of socio-economic complications in the central plateau and the southwestern region of Iran indicate?
Technologies such as pottery and metalworking, intra-regional and extra-regional relations are the main reasons, and agriculture, animal husbandry and exploitation of ground water and irrigation are secondary indicators of the complexities in the central plateau. In the southwest, agriculture, animal husbandry, exploitation of ground water and the intensive agricultural system in the western and eastern Shushan plains and the rainfed system in the middle and high plains (Dehlran plain) are the main characteristics. It seems that the residents of these two regions acted based on adaptation of surrounding environment. The theory of Special Evolution of Culture and interaction between humans and the environment can be used to interpret this topic. They used similar indicators in the process of complexity, but followed different paths in terms of quantity, quality and prioritization of the use of the mentioned indicators.
In the current research, the required documents have been collected through library studies. The method of analysis is to use the method of explaining cultural changes and using theories of socio-economic complexity.
Structural analysis of the interactions of two regions
In the second half of the 5th millennium BC and especially in the late 4th millennium BC, each of the five mentioned paradigms, on the part of the more advanced societies, not only did not endanger the old civilizations, but they strengthened each other and important results brought.
A) Standardization (assimilation): Regions such as the central plateau where the industry formed the basis of daily work and activities, needed standardized weight and measure tools. By applying the principle of standardization, many differences were eliminated or regional and local differences were distinguished from other places. An example in this regard is the making and decorating of pottery in regions such as Shushan, Fars and Central Plateau (such as dot motive pottery, plum ware, and Cheshme-Ali); which provides the possibility of rebuilding inter-regional cultural and ultimately political boundaries.
b) Specialization: With the acceleration of the division of labor, the expert, who only specialized in one profession, took the versatile villager place who worked intermittently. In this way, there was an opportunity for some specialist groups to monopolize the relevant knowledge and specialized professions emerged. The evidence of ancient metalworking in Zaghe, Uzbaki, Cheshme-Ali, and Tepe Gabrestan, as well as the similarity of inscribed buff ware from layers II-V of Qara-Tepe Qomrud with Rahmat-Abad, Gap, Chogha-Ahovan, and Geser sites, is a symbol of the level of specialization.
C) Synchronization (self-organization): Sometimes the concentration of power in societies will cause multiple pressures; and self-organization refers to the formation of patterns that were related to the endogenous factors of societies, and finally, this discipline became evident in a factor called management technique that it leads to the emergence of specialization and convergence. The similarities of the management technique of these regions can be found in the similarity of the seals of Qara Tepe Qomroud and Sialk with Giyan V, Shush A and Bakun A.
d) Density of geo-economy factors: When the economic capabilities of states depend on geographic issues, a geo-economy is formed, whose main goal is not to achieve physical power, but trade and commerce. The geo-economic position of the Central Plateau in line with the industrialists and southwest of Iran in line with increasing agricultural production and regular and permanent surplus production (relying on the data of irrigation canals obtained from Mahme, Sabz and Musian) and growth the development indicators.
e) Concentration of power and stability: the construction of buildings with a view and structures with a special spatial arrangement, such as temples and monuments such as the adobe platform of Shush, Farrokh Abad, Chogha Mish, Jafar Abad and the patterned structures of Zaghe are a sign of the concentration of power for supervision. On economic and religious technological activities.
Conclusion
The five principles proposed in the factions of societies that were becoming more complex were used almost identically and strengthened each other; created some of the most powerful administrative organizations in the societies from 4500 BC and then the 3rd millennium BC and left his special stamp on the civilizations of the 4th millennium BC.
Therefore, the results obtained from the five paradigms in line with economic-sociological indicators led to the creation of production and distribution systems. Early societies, based on their needs, started “necessary innovations”; the appearance of tools and development of the accounting and counting systems are some changes that have happened in Qomroud, Geser, Zaghe, Shush and related sites. Creating efficient families is another result. The nuclear family with relatives could have a standard model.
Some nuclear families were superior to others and caused complexities. Tribal territories are clearly visible in the settlement pattern of the southwest Iran. Chogha Mish and Shush 15 hectares expansion shows the preference of some households over another. Following this issue, pyramids of power and super elites were formed. The technologists and experts of power, who were in charge of the leader, were themselves organized in the hierarchy of elites and sub-elites, and in turn, they were integrated by the comprehensive elites, which consisted of people with various specialties; such as the control of central locations such as Zaghe, Qomroud, Shush, Chogha Mish, Farrokhabad, Bayat, and Jafarabad.
On the other hand, the people had similar and basic needs, and the other hand, a factor called public consensus was considered an attainable goal which its collapse discredited the concept of leadership; sometimes there was a possibility of this event which its analysis is very difficult. Most of the sites of this period, after an amazing prosperity suffered a gradual collapse. The expanding elite is another case in this regard.
An important factor called the burden of decision is always up to the few who can handle it, unless the number of decisions increases and the decision load abilities of the old ruling groups become weaker; then new elites were placed at the head of affairs in recent periods so that they could handle the decision load burden. Therefore, the level of participation in a society can be less depend on culture and political wills and more about the result of decision-making. Frank Hole considers the organization of the late 5th millennium BC of Susa and its administrative positions to belong to religious people or the existence of a state with hereditary classes. It is not unlikely that centralization occurred in these societies.
Acknowledgment
This article is extracted from the thesis of the first Author entitled “Comparative study of the trend of socio-economic complexities in the central plateau and southwest of Iran in the second half of the 5th millennium BC” which is worthy of the material and administrative support University of Mazandaran Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor, Faculty of Arts And the architecture and archeology department are grateful.
Observation Contribution
The Authors declare that according to the extraction of the article from the doctoral dissertation, the writing of the article was done by the first Author with the guidance and supervision of the second Author and the consultation of the third Author.
Conflict of Interest
The Authors, while complying with the publication ethics, declare the absence of conflict of interest and material and administrative support from University of Mazandaran Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor, Faculty of Art and Architecture, and Department of Archeology.
The central plateau and southwestern Iran were two pivotal points to begin social and economic developments during the second half of 5th millennium BC, which played an important role in commercial exchanges and cultural interactions between the east and west of the Iranian plateau in the 4th millennium BC. Technology and industry were the main indicators of complexity in the central plateau, while in the southwestern of Iran, agriculture, animal husbandry and water resources were important in this sense. The level of complexity, the appearance of management technique, and pottery production in the key excavated sites in a range from the central plateau to a part of the eastern plains of central Zagros and the and southwest of Iran, was evaluated and studied. The structural analysis of the interactions between the two regions with a cultural ecology approach and based on five paradigms including assimilation, specialization, synchronization and self-organization, condensation of geo-economy, and concentration of power has shown that some societies during the second half of the fifth millennium BC, based on these five principles, they strengthened each other and created complex societies. We have achieved some results in the framework of economic-sociological indicators which include the creation of production and distribution systems, efficient families, pyramids of power and super elites, the destruction of public consensus and expanding elites.
Keywords: Complexity Indicators, Central Plateau, Southwest of Iran, Pottery, Management Technique.
Introduction
Due to its economic, cultural and geographical capabilities, Iran has always been at the center of transportation routes. Based on the available settlement maps, the dense and compact geographical structure of the southwest Iran caused the integration and unity of settlements and ultimately the formation of early states. On the other hand, the scattered geographical context of the central plateau had caused its social fragmentation.
The current research is based on the following questions and hypotheses: 1) how can the studies on the indicators of socio-economic complexity in the central plateau and southwestern Iran in the second half of the 5th millennium BC be evaluated? What are these indicators and why and how did they cause complexity? 2) What does the comparative study of the process of socio-economic complications in the central plateau and the southwestern region of Iran indicate?
Technologies such as pottery and metalworking, intra-regional and extra-regional relations are the main reasons, and agriculture, animal husbandry and exploitation of ground water and irrigation are secondary indicators of the complexities in the central plateau. In the southwest, agriculture, animal husbandry, exploitation of ground water and the intensive agricultural system in the western and eastern Shushan plains and the rainfed system in the middle and high plains (Dehlran plain) are the main characteristics. It seems that the residents of these two regions acted based on adaptation of surrounding environment. The theory of Special Evolution of Culture and interaction between humans and the environment can be used to interpret this topic. They used similar indicators in the process of complexity, but followed different paths in terms of quantity, quality and prioritization of the use of the mentioned indicators.
In the current research, the required documents have been collected through library studies. The method of analysis is to use the method of explaining cultural changes and using theories of socio-economic complexity.
Structural analysis of the interactions of two regions
In the second half of the 5th millennium BC and especially in the late 4th millennium BC, each of the five mentioned paradigms, on the part of the more advanced societies, not only did not endanger the old civilizations, but they strengthened each other and important results brought.
A) Standardization (assimilation): Regions such as the central plateau where the industry formed the basis of daily work and activities, needed standardized weight and measure tools. By applying the principle of standardization, many differences were eliminated or regional and local differences were distinguished from other places. An example in this regard is the making and decorating of pottery in regions such as Shushan, Fars and Central Plateau (such as dot motive pottery, plum ware, and Cheshme-Ali); which provides the possibility of rebuilding inter-regional cultural and ultimately political boundaries.
b) Specialization: With the acceleration of the division of labor, the expert, who only specialized in one profession, took the versatile villager place who worked intermittently. In this way, there was an opportunity for some specialist groups to monopolize the relevant knowledge and specialized professions emerged. The evidence of ancient metalworking in Zaghe, Uzbaki, Cheshme-Ali, and Tepe Gabrestan, as well as the similarity of inscribed buff ware from layers II-V of Qara-Tepe Qomrud with Rahmat-Abad, Gap, Chogha-Ahovan, and Geser sites, is a symbol of the level of specialization.
C) Synchronization (self-organization): Sometimes the concentration of power in societies will cause multiple pressures; and self-organization refers to the formation of patterns that were related to the endogenous factors of societies, and finally, this discipline became evident in a factor called management technique that it leads to the emergence of specialization and convergence. The similarities of the management technique of these regions can be found in the similarity of the seals of Qara Tepe Qomroud and Sialk with Giyan V, Shush A and Bakun A.
d) Density of geo-economy factors: When the economic capabilities of states depend on geographic issues, a geo-economy is formed, whose main goal is not to achieve physical power, but trade and commerce. The geo-economic position of the Central Plateau in line with the industrialists and southwest of Iran in line with increasing agricultural production and regular and permanent surplus production (relying on the data of irrigation canals obtained from Mahme, Sabz and Musian) and growth the development indicators.
e) Concentration of power and stability: the construction of buildings with a view and structures with a special spatial arrangement, such as temples and monuments such as the adobe platform of Shush, Farrokh Abad, Chogha Mish, Jafar Abad and the patterned structures of Zaghe are a sign of the concentration of power for supervision. On economic and religious technological activities.
Conclusion
The five principles proposed in the factions of societies that were becoming more complex were used almost identically and strengthened each other; created some of the most powerful administrative organizations in the societies from 4500 BC and then the 3rd millennium BC and left his special stamp on the civilizations of the 4th millennium BC.
Therefore, the results obtained from the five paradigms in line with economic-sociological indicators led to the creation of production and distribution systems. Early societies, based on their needs, started “necessary innovations”; the appearance of tools and development of the accounting and counting systems are some changes that have happened in Qomroud, Geser, Zaghe, Shush and related sites. Creating efficient families is another result. The nuclear family with relatives could have a standard model.
Some nuclear families were superior to others and caused complexities. Tribal territories are clearly visible in the settlement pattern of the southwest Iran. Chogha Mish and Shush 15 hectares expansion shows the preference of some households over another. Following this issue, pyramids of power and super elites were formed. The technologists and experts of power, who were in charge of the leader, were themselves organized in the hierarchy of elites and sub-elites, and in turn, they were integrated by the comprehensive elites, which consisted of people with various specialties; such as the control of central locations such as Zaghe, Qomroud, Shush, Chogha Mish, Farrokhabad, Bayat, and Jafarabad.
On the other hand, the people had similar and basic needs, and the other hand, a factor called public consensus was considered an attainable goal which its collapse discredited the concept of leadership; sometimes there was a possibility of this event which its analysis is very difficult. Most of the sites of this period, after an amazing prosperity suffered a gradual collapse. The expanding elite is another case in this regard.
An important factor called the burden of decision is always up to the few who can handle it, unless the number of decisions increases and the decision load abilities of the old ruling groups become weaker; then new elites were placed at the head of affairs in recent periods so that they could handle the decision load burden. Therefore, the level of participation in a society can be less depend on culture and political wills and more about the result of decision-making. Frank Hole considers the organization of the late 5th millennium BC of Susa and its administrative positions to belong to religious people or the existence of a state with hereditary classes. It is not unlikely that centralization occurred in these societies.
Acknowledgment
This article is extracted from the thesis of the first Author entitled “Comparative study of the trend of socio-economic complexities in the central plateau and southwest of Iran in the second half of the 5th millennium BC” which is worthy of the material and administrative support University of Mazandaran Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor, Faculty of Arts And the architecture and archeology department are grateful.
Observation Contribution
The Authors declare that according to the extraction of the article from the doctoral dissertation, the writing of the article was done by the first Author with the guidance and supervision of the second Author and the consultation of the third Author.
Conflict of Interest
The Authors, while complying with the publication ethics, declare the absence of conflict of interest and material and administrative support from University of Mazandaran Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor, Faculty of Art and Architecture, and Department of Archeology.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special Archeology
Received: 2022/08/28 | Accepted: 2022/12/1 | Published: 2023/12/3
Received: 2022/08/28 | Accepted: 2022/12/1 | Published: 2023/12/3
References
1. - اسدیاجایی، سیدکمال؛ عباسنژادسرستی، رحمت؛ فاضلینشلی، حسن و ولیپور، حمیدرضا، (1398). «تحلیل پیچیدگیهای اجتماعی-اقتصادی جوامع فلاتمرکزی ایران در هزارۀ پنجم قبل از میلاد بر پایه فناوری سفال». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، 9 (20): 36-21. https://doi.org/10.22084/NBSH.2019.16225.1739
2. - اکبری، حسن؛ و حصاری، مرتضی، (1395). «مسأله سفال آلویی و خاکستری براساس حفاری فصل اول تپه شغالی». جستارهای باستانشناسی ایران پیش از اسلام 1 (2): 65-57.
3. - حصاری، مرتضی، (1392). شکلگیری و توسعه آغاز نگارش در ایران (از پیش نگارش تا آغاز ایلامی). تهران: انتشارات سمت، چاپ اول.
4. - صالحی، محمدصالح، (1373). «احتمال وجود اشیای شمارشی در تپه زاغه». در: یادنامۀ گردهمایی باستانشناسی- شوش، سازمان میراثفرهنگی کشور (پژوهشگاه)، ویرایش علمی: سید محمود موسوی، 28- 25 فروردینماه 1373، ج. 1: 258- 249.
5. - طلایی، حسن، (1390). ایران پیشازتاریخ: عصر مسسنگی. تهران: انتشارات سمت، چاپ چهارم.
6. - عباسنژادسرستی، رحمت، (1387). «فرآیند تحولات اقتصادی-اجتماعی و برهمکنشهای فرهنگی در هزارههای پنجم و چهارم ق.م در دشت قزوین: با تکیهبر فلزکاری». رسالۀ دکترای باستانشناسی پیشازتاریخ، دانشگاه تهران.
7. - عزتی، عزت الله، (1380). ژئوپلیتیک در قرن بیست و یکم. تهران: انتشارات سمت، چاپ دوم.
8. - علیزاده، عباس، (1392). مبانی نظری و عملی در باستانشناسی. تهران: انتشارات ایران نگار، چاپ اول.
9. - علیزاده، عباس؛ احمدزاده، لقمان؛ و امیدفر، مهدی، (1395). سیستمهای استقراری و فرهنگهای باستانی دشت رامهرمز (نتایج کاوش در تل گسر و بررسی منطقهای رامهرمز). ترجمۀ ماندانا کرمی و رامین یشمی، تهران: نشر پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری، چاپ اول.
10. - کابلی، میرعابدین، (1394). کاوشهای قرهتپۀ قمرود. تهران: پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی وگردشگری.
11. - کرامر، کرول، (1400). «سفال و جوامع انسانی». ترجمۀ مجتبی چرمچیان و حمزه خردمند، نشریه ایران ورجاوند، 4 (6): 134-104.
12. - مقیمی، نیلوفر، (1394). «بررسی باستانشناختی سامانۀ حسابداری در جوامع انسانی پیشازتاریخ دشت قزوین: مورد مطالعاتی تپه زاغه». مطالعات باستانشناسی 7 (1): 146-127.
13. - ملکشهمیرزادی، صادق، (1378). ایران در پیشازتاریخ: باستانشناسی ایران از آغاز تا سپیدهدم شهرنشینی. تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی کشور، چاپ دوم.
14. - ملکشهمیرزادی، صادق، (1382). «گاهنگاری پیشازتاریخ فلاتمرکزی ایران بر اساس اطلاعات به دست آمده از نتایج پژوهش طرح بازنگری سیلک». در: نقرهکاران سیلک، تهران: سازمان میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری، پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی.
15. - نکویی، پریسا؛ و یوسفیزشک، روح الله، (1400). «بررسی چگونگی ارتباط فرهنگی بین ساکنان مرکز فلات ایران، زاگرسمرکزی، فارس و جنوبغرب ایران در هزارۀ پنجم پیشازمیلاد». نشریه مطالعات باستانشناسی، 13 (1): 258-237. https://doi.org/10.22059/jarcs.2020.289501.142829
16. - هورشید، شقایق؛ عباسنژادسرستی، رحمت؛ فاضلینشلی، حسن؛ و ولیپور، حمیدرضا، (1397). «تحلیل گاهنگاری و روند تحول دوران روستانشینی در دشت پتک موسیان؛ دهلران». پژوهشهای باستانشناسی ایران، 8 (16): 62-43. https://doi.org/10.22084/NBSH.2018.15309.1684
18. - Abbasnejad Seresti, R., (2008). “The Socio- economic Process and Cultural Interactions of the 5th and 4th Millennium B.C. in the Qazvin Plain: On the Basis of Archaeometallurgy”. Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Tehran. (In Persian).
19. - Adams, R. Mc C., (1962). “Agriculture and Urban Life in Early Southwestern Iran”. Science, 136: 109-122.
20. - Akbari, H. & Hessari, M., (2017). “Plum and Black-gray wares problem Based on first season excavations in Shoghali Tappeh”. Journal of Iran's Pre-Islamic Archaeological Essays, 1 (2): 57-65. (In Persian).
21. - Alizadeh, A.; Ahmadzadeh, L. & Omidfar, M., (2016). Ancient Settlement Systems and Cultures in Ramhormoz Plain (Excavations in Talle-Gesar and Regional Survey of Ramhormoz Region). Translated by: Mandana Karimi and Ramin Yashmi, Tehran: Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute. First Edition. (In Persian).
22. - Alizadeh, A., (2013). Theoretical and practical foundations in archaeology. Tehran: Iran-negar Publications, First Edition. (In Persian).
23. - Allen, M. W., (1996). “Pathways to Economic Power in Maori Chiefdoms”. Ecology and Warfare in Prehistoric Hawke’s Bay.Research in Economic Anthropology, 17: 171-225.
24. - Asadi Ojaei, K.; Abbasnejad Seresti, R.; Fazeli Nashli, H. & Valipour, H. R., (2019). “Analysis Socio-Economic Complexities of the Societies of the Central Plateau of Iran During 5th Millennium BCE on the Basis of Pottery Technology”. Archaeological Researches of Iran, 20: 36- 21. https://doi.org/10.22084/NBSH.2019.16225.1739 (In Persian).
25. - Azarnoush, M. & Helwing, B., (2005). “Recent Archaeological Research in Iran - Prehistory to Iron Age”. Barbara Helwing. Stand Vom 20: 3.
26. - Binford, S. R. & Binford, L. R., (1968). A New Perspectives in Archaeology. Chicago.
27. - Chapman, R., (2003). Archaeologies of Complexity. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
28. - Childe, V. G., (1951). Social Evolution. London, Watts and Company.
29. - Clarke, D. L., (1968). Analytical Archaeology. London.
30. - Costin, C. L., (1991). “Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting and Explaining the Organization of Production”. Archaeological Method and Theory, the University of Arizona Press, Tucson: 1- 55.
31. - Kramer, K., (2021). “Pots and Peoples”. Translated by: Charmchian, M. & Kheradmand, H., Iran Varjavand 4 (6): 104-134. (In Persian).
32. - D’Altori, T. N. & Earle, T., (1985). “Staple Finance, Wealth Finance, and Storage in the Inka Political Economy”. Current Anthropology, 26: 187-206.
33. - Delougaz, P. P. & Kantor, H. J., (1975). “The 1973-74 Excavation at Čoqa Miš”. Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, 3: 93-102. Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research. (In Persian).
34. - Dollfus, J., (1975). “Les Fouilles á Djaffarabad de 1969 á 1974, Djaffarabad, Périodes I et II”. Cahiers de la delegation archéologique franҫaise en Iran, 1: 17-162.
35. - Dollfus, G., (1983). “Remarques Sur L'organisation de The Hilly Flanks and Beyond: Essay on The Prehistory of Southwestern Asia. Presented to Robert J. Braidwood”. November 15. 1982. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, No. 36. The Oriental Institute of The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois: 283-313.
36. - Ezzati, E., (2003). Geopolitics in the 21st Century. Tehran: Samt Publications. Second Edition. (In Persian).
37. - Fazeli Nashli, H.; Valipour. H. R. & Azizi Kharanaghi, H., (2013). “The Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age in The Qazvin and Tehran Plains: A Chronological Perspective”. In: Ancient Iran its Neighbors: Local Developments and Long-rang Interactions in the 4th Millennium BC, (ed.), Cameron A. Petrie, Oxbow Books: 104-126.
38. - Fazeli Nashli H. & Desset F., (2018). “Surplus without the state, political forms in prehistory”. 10th archaeological conference of Central Germany, October 19-21, The late prehistory of the Northern Iranian Central Plateau (c. 6000-3000 BC): Growth and Collapse of Decentralized Networks.
39. - Ghirshman, R., (1938). Fouilles de Sialk, Prés, de Kashan, 1933-1934, 1937. Vol. 1, Paris.
40. - Gilman, A., (1991). “Trajectories towards Social Complexity in the Latter Prehistory of the Mediterranean”. In: Chiefdoms: Power, Economy, andIdeology, T. Earle (ed.), Cambridge University Press: 146-168.
41. - Helbaek, H., (1969). “Plant Collecting, Dry Farming, and Irrigation Agriculture in Prehistoric Deh Luran”. Appendix in Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain, Memoir no. 1., Frank Hole, Kent V. Flannery, and James A. Neely (eds.), Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
42. - Hessari, M., (2013). The formation and development of proto-writing in Iran (from pre-writing to proto-Elamite). Tehran: Samt Publications, first edition. (In Persian).
43. - Hole, F., (1977). Studies in the Archaeological History of the Deh Luran Plain. Memoir no. 9, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
44. - Hole, F., (ed.), (1987). The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Series in Archaeological Inquiry. Washington, D.C./London: Smithsonian Institution Press.
45. - Hole, F.; Flannery, K. V. & Neely, J. A., (1969). Prehistory and Human Ecology of Deh Luran Plain. Memoir no. 1, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
46. - Horshid, Sh.; Abbasnejad Seresti, R.; Fazeli Nashli, H. & Valipour, H. R., (2018). “Chronology and Village Periods Process Analysis in Patak Plain, Mousian, Deh Luran, Iran”. Archaeological Researches of Iran, 8 (16): 62-43. https://doi.org/10.22084/NBSH.2018.15309.1684 (In Persian).
47. - Kaboli, M. A., (2015). Excavations at Qara-Tappeh Qomrud. Tehran: Cultural Heritage and Tourism Research Institute. (In Persian).
48. - Kantor, H. J., (1976). “The 1974-75 Excavation at Čoqa Miš”. Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, 4: 23-41. Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research. (In Persian).
49. - Langsdorff, A. & McCown, D. E., (1942). Tall-i-Bakun A: Season of 1932, Oriental Institute Publications, LIX. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
50. - Le Breton, L., (1957). “The Early Periods at Susa, Mesopotamian Relations”. Iraq, 19 (2): 79-124.
51. - Malek Shahmirzadi, S., (2003). Prehistoric Iran: Iran from the Earliest Time to the dawn of Urbanism. Tehran: Iran's Cultural Heritage Organization. second edition. (In Persian).
52. - Moghaddam, A. & Miri, N., (2007). “Archaeological Surveys in the 'Eastern Corridor, South-western Iran”. Iran, 45: 23–55.
53. - Moghimi, N., (2015). “An Archaeological Study on Accounting System in Prehistoric Human Societies of the Qazvin Plain: the Case of Tepe Zagheh”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, 7 (1): 127-146. (In Persian).
54. - Neely, J. A., (1969). “Preliminary Report on the Archaeological Survey of Deh Luran”. In: Preliminary Reports of the Rice University project in Iran, 1968-69, Frank Hole (ed.), Houston: Rice University Department of Anthropology.
55. - Neely, J. A., (1970). “The Deh Luran Region”. Iran, 8: 202-203.
56. - Negahban, E. O., (1979). “A brief report on the painted building of Zaghe (Late 7th to Early 6th Millen- nium B.C)”. Paléorient, 5: 239-250.
57. - Nekouei, P. & Yousefi Zoshk, R., (2021). “Cultural Interactions Prehistoric Societies of Central Iranian Plateau, with Residence of Central Zagros, Fars and Southwest of Iran during the Fifth Millennium BC”. Journal of Archaeological Studies, 13 (1): 235-258. https://doi.org/10.22059/jarcs.2020.289501.142829 (In Persian).
58. - Petruso, K. M., (2018). Cultural Translation and the Iconography of the master and mistress of the animals Jeremy dubhros B. A anthropology. Faculty Mentor, QED: The Research Annual of the UTA Honors College. Vol. 1
59. - Postgate, J. N. (ed.), (2002). Artefacts of Complexity: “Tracking the Uruk in the Near East”. British School of Archaeology in Iraq, Iraq Archaeological Reports 5.
60. - Phillips, J. D., (2003). “Sources of nonlinearity and complexity in geomorphic systems”. Progress in Physical Geography, 27: 1-23.
61. - Salehi, M. S., (1994). “The Probability of the Existence of Counting Objects at Tepe Zāgheh”. In: S. M. Mousavi (ed.), Proceedings of the Archaeological Symposium-Susa (Spring 1373 A. H. /April 14-17, 1994), Vol. I, Tehran: ICHTO: 249–253 (In Persian).
62. - Service, E. R., (1975). Origins of the State and Civilization. New York.
63. - Sharifi, A.; Pourmand, A.; Canuel, E. A.; Ferer-Tyler, E.; Peterson, L. C.; Aichner, B.; Feakins, S. J.; Daryaee, T.; Djamali, J.; Naderi Beni, A.; Lahijani, H. A. K. & Swart, P. K., (2015). “Abrupt climate variability since the last deglaciation based on a high-resolution: multi-proxy peat record from NW Iran: The hand that rocked the cradle of Civilization?”. Quaternary Science Reviews, 123: 215-230.
64. - Talai, H., (2011). Prehistoric Iran: Chalcolithic Age. Tehran: Samt Publications, 4th edition. (In Persian).
65. - Tosi, M., (1984). “The Notion of Craft Specialization and its Representation in the Archaeological Record of Early States in the Turanian Basin”. In: Marxist Perspective in Archaeology, Spriggs M. (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 22- 53.
66. - Wittfogel, K. A., (1957). Oriental Despotism: A Comparative Study of Total Power. Yale University Press, New Haven; Oxford University Press, London.
67. - Wong, E. H.; Cameron, A. P. & Fazeli Nashli, H., (2010). “Cheshmeh-Ali Ware: A Petrographic and Geochemical Study of Transitional Chalcolithic Period Ceramic Industry on the North Central Plateau of Iran”. Iran, XLVIII: 11-26.
68. - Wright, H. T., (1981). An Early Town on the Deh Luran Plain: Excavation at Tepe Farukhabad. Memoir no. 13, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
69. - Wright, H. T. & Johnson, G. A., (1975). “Population, Exchange and Early State Formation in Southwestern Iran”. American Anthropologist, 77: 267-289.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |