Abstract
Persian Gulf, as a main trade route, has played an important role in the third millennium BCE cultural sphere of Southwest Asia. According to archaeological evidence, at least from the 5th millennium BCE, this waterway appeared to function as a channel for social interaction and exchange of material culture in the region. It seems that the Jiroft region as the hinterland of the Persian Gulf has been interacted with the contemporaneous civilizations from Indus to Babylonia via the maritime routes. The chlorite vessels produced in Jiroft have been obtained over a wide geographical range from the Indus valley to the north of Mesopotamia. The existence of the production workshops at Tepe Yahya, Hajjiabad- Varamin and Konar Sandal, and thousands of complete objects from the looted cemeteries of Jiroft, as well as their mines in Jiroft have made Halilrud region the center of production of these objects in the third millennium BCE. Tarut Island in Saudi Arabia is known as one of the ancient ports in the Persian Gulf trade sphere. More than several hundreds of fragments and complete chlorite vessels have been discovered in Tarut Island mostly from destroyed graves. Due to the large number of chlorite vessels as well as semi-finished objects, researchers of the Persian Gulf Archaeology refer to this island as a center for the production of chlorite vessels. In terms of iconography and raw material, chlorite vessels of Tarut are comparable with those recovered from the Halilrud Basin, Kerman province, Iran. In this paper, we will examine the hypothesis that Tarut was the production center of the chlorite vessels. In addition, we will discuss the relation of the Tarut and the Southeastern Iran, in particular the Jiroft region. 
Keywords: Persian Gulf, Jiroft Civilization, Tarut Island, Chlorite Vessels, Marhashi.

Introduction
This study aims to investigate the interactions between Tarut Island in Saudi Arabia and the Jiroft region in southeastern Iran through the chlorite objects in the Bronze Age. This island was a very important commercial port on the southern coast of the Persian Gulf during the third millennium BCE, when the newly known Jiroft Civilization prospered in southeastern Iran. Most scholars, notably Piotr Steinkeller, believe that the Halil Rud/ Jiroft region was probably known as the land of Marhaši (in Sumerian) or Parahšum (in Akkadian), the most important political counterpart of ancient Mesopotamia in the 3rd millennium BCE. 
 One of the most significant cultural characteristics of the Jiroft civilization is notoriously the production and distribution, sometimes on long distances, of carved soft stone vessels with a quite distinct iconography, previously labeled “intercultural style”. These often beautiful and intriguing objects have been widely discussed. These artefacts actually appeared, although sometimes in limited amounts, in a very large corridor from Mesopotamia in Iraq via the Iranian plateau into the Indus valley. Mineralogical analyses on some of the ancient vessels as well as on the mines in the Jiroft highlands have confirmed their production in the southern Kerman.  
The chlorite vessels’ inventory can be subdivided in two different productions, namely a “série ancienne” datable to pre-early Akkadian times (with elaborate figurative patterns), and a later “série recente”. Holly Pittman (2018) believes that the earlier group would be made exclusively with Iranian chloritic rocks, while the later one would have been made in the Arabian Peninsula from Omani rocks. 

Materials and Methods  
The materials of this study are mainly Bronze Age chlorite objects from both Tarut island in Saudi Arabia and the Jiroft region in SE Iran. In this study, chlorite assemblages of both regions were compared in terms of iconography and object forms to explore the cultural connections of this island with the Kerman region as the main center of production and consumption of the chlorite in the third millennium BCE. In addition, an attempt was made to explain the existence of Halil Rud/ Jiroft stone objects in Tarut island. Discovery of such a quantity of the Jiroft material in the small island of Tarut raises these important questions: Movement of people from the Jiroft region of the Tarut island happened as a colonizing group to take control of the Persian Gulf trade network in the mid third millennium BCE? Or a group of Marhashian/Jiroftian were settled in the Island as trade diasporas?

Discussion 
There is still ongoing discussion regarding the chronology of the cultural artifacts discovered on Tarut Island. The artifacts discovered on Tarut Island suggest that, in the early part of the third millennium BC, the island harbor was consistently used as an important hub in the Persian Gulf region. Judging from the Babylonian pottery of Early Dynastic I and II date found on Tarut, this strategically located island must have already at this time assumed a position of some significance in the exchange networks. However, even if inscribed, sculpted chlorite vessels compatible to types found on Tarut are known to date from the Early Dynastic II period onward, it appears more likely that the sculpted chlorite traded into Tarut date to the Early Dynastic III and Sargonic periods (Laursen and Steinkeller 2017:10). Various artifacts found on Tarut Island provide evidence of trade with Babylonia. Among these artifacts, the limestone statue depicting a standing nude male with clasped hands in a traditional Sumerian devotional posture is particularly noteworthy. Experts have suggested different dates for this statue, ranging from the Jemdat Nasr period (around 3000 BC) to a more plausible dating in the Early Dynastic period. Other Babylonian-made artifacts found on Tarut Island with a broad Early Dynastic I-III date include a marble macehead and a copper bull’s head that is similar to the examples found on lyres from the Royal Tombs of Ur (For more, see Laursen and Steinkeller 2017). From southeastern Iran perspective, the most noteworthy discoveries from Tarut Island are the sculpted vessels and fragments made of chlorite. These were discovered by chance by local gardeners, likely from disturbed burials. Interestingly, there is a striking difference between the amount of sculpted chlorite vessels found on Tarut Island and the small quantities that have been discovered on the Oman peninsula. Apart from the chlorite vessels, another imported finds from southeastern Iran are painted ceramics, so-called Bampur black on grey ware. They have been found in limited quantities on Tarut Island as well as in mainland Saudi Arabia. It is noteworthy that the imports from southeastern Iran ceased to appear on Tarut Island by the end of the third millennium BCE, which coincides with the decline of the Marhashi Kingdom. The available evidence from Tarut Island indicates that this harbor played a significant role in linking the neighboring civilized regions within the Persian Gulf area during the Early Bronze Age. In other words, Tarut Island served as a meeting point in the commercial networks that facilitated trade in the Persian Gulf region. 

Conclusion 
The presence of many chlorite objects in the small island of Tarut in the southern part of the Persian Gulf shows that population groups of Jiroft civilization settled in this island for some time (at least one to two centuries) in the mid-late third millennium BCE. According to the fact that the mentioned chlorite objects were obtained from the destroyed cemetery of Tarut, it is clear that these objects were placed inside the grave as the burial goods and were not brought there to be displayed and sold in the Tarut market.
Despite the fact that most of the chlorite objects obtained from Tarut are exactly the same as the samples obtained in the Halil Rud Basin, there are a number of objects with motifs that are rooted in Mesopotamian mythology, among which the image of Anzu is the most obvious. This shows that Jiroft chlorite vessels were also produced on Tarot Island, or at least on the undecorated samples of Jiroft vessels, engraving with Mesopotamian themes was done on this island.
The main issue is the reason for the presence of Jiroft civilization people in Tarut Island in the Persian Gulf. Considering that in the middle to late 3rd millennium BCE, a wide maritime trade network was formed in the Persian Gulf and Oman Sea, it seems logical to imagine that a group of inhabitants of Jiroft / Marhashi civilization in the mid-late 3rd millennium BCE, as trade diasporas, have settled in this island to have control over sea trade and the movement of goods in the strategic waterway of the Persian Gulf. It is worth mentioning that in the first half of the third millennium BCE, this role was played by the Mesopotamians in Tarut Island. The provenance of Tarut artefacts has been a source of debate among archaeologists. Some scholars suggested their provenance in the southern part of the Persian Gulf even based on the chemical analyses. While the Jiroftian motifs on the vessels tell another story which makes this hypothesis questionable. More physical and chemical analyses are needed to investigate the provenance of Tarut materials.
 

Abstract
Reading ancient artifacts is the first step after the act of excavation. Therefore, dealing with ancient objects as a fundamental pillar of archaeological science, especially paying attention to methodological issues for the analysis of historical artifacts, is essential. In other words, the need to use new methodological capacities, with emphasis on the relationship between visual media and ancient artifacts as valuable sources of information, forms the focus of this discussion. In this regard, in the last three decades, visual narratology has also been considered as a newly emerging method in the history of contemporary art, along with other interdisciplinary fields, for analyzing the meanings of visual texts and for a deeper understanding of discovered ancient documents. Visual narratology emerged from the First Vienna School. Its theoretical foundations for the creation of art history, regardless of aesthetic judgment, also developed an analytical method by which All Kind of cultural creations can be read. The main goal of the present study is also to identify the Different methods through which the creators of these works have created narratives and transmitted meanings, through the three indicators of character, scene and movement. Therefore, using Franz Wickhoff`s typological system of visual narrative in the Vienna School, the basic types of narrative were examined on 6 study samples of the ancient Jiroft civilization. As a result, after examining the frequency or maximum of the most frequent types among the visual samples of the Jiroft civilization, it was shown that the visual narrative patterns in this ancient civilization still follow the scope of Wickhoff typological system. Finally, with the help of typological analyses, the studied samples are formatted into a table according to Wickhoff`s Isolated, continuous and Complementary.
Keywords:  Visual Narratology, Archaeological Artifact, Jiroft Civilization, Wickhoff’s Typological System of Narrative.

Introduction
Narratology is one of the most important methods of textual analysis, first applied in the study of verbal-linguistic media. From the perspective of linguistic narratologists, a narrative is defined as a story that follows a chronological order and consists of a sequence of interconnected events with a beginning, middle, and end.
The groundwork for the encounter between narratology and archaeology in the present era was laid with the help of Propp’s studies-recognized as the first modern narratological approaches-on Russian folktales, emphasizing recurring motifs within the literary genre. In other words, his formalist-structuralist method, by identifying repetitive and transformative patterns in narrative elements, was primarily developed in storytelling traditions and subsequently introduced archaeologists and anthropologists to this field. Moreover, in 1980, linguistic narratologists, recognizing the significance of non-verbal media, prioritized the study of visual texts as a rich source of knowledge. Consequently, although the historical background of visual narrative studies traces back to art history, archaeology, and the examination of various forms of narrative art in ancient Greece and Rome... (Horvath, 2010)
However, following the fields of archaeology and art history, narratologists began studying visual narratives. This marked the first time in the history of linguistic narratology that, beyond literature and cinema, narrative theory extended into the realm of visual arts, including sculpture, figurative representation, relief carvings, inscriptions, and more. Consequently, since the 1980s, visual narrative studies have become a common ground for various disciplines, particularly art history, narratology, archaeology, anthropology, epistemology, semiotics, and others.
The undeniable potential of visual narrative, alongside linguistic media and the communicative/cognitive nature of visual documents, led research in this field toward interdisciplinary approaches. Overall, it can be stated that contemporary studies on visual narratives widely agree that visual elements are essential for establishing a form of visual communication and constructing the meaning of an artwork. This consensus has contributed to the emergence of a new interdisciplinary branch known as visual narratology over the past two decades.
In this regard, archaeologists such as Landau (1991) and Terrell (1990) explored narratives related to human evolution and prehistoric stories from the Pacific region. As a result, they primarily examined the perspectives of key narrative roles in the form of protagonists who undergo arduous trials, overcome significant obstacles, or return to their homeland (Pluciennik, 1999: 654).

Discussion
In this research, an attempt is made to introduce a new approach to the study of visual narratives by drawing on recent methodological frameworks in the field of visual culture studies across different civilizations-with a particular focus on reading narratives or stories within images. In addition to presenting an innovative method for analyzing visual narratives, this study aims to establish more objective and precise criteria for interpreting visual texts and ultimately uncovering their themes, messages, or implicit meanings. This is achieved through the examination of three key narrative components: the actor (agent), the representational space, and all directional or movement-evoking elements within the image.
From this perspective, the proposed method significantly differs from other image and symbol analysis approaches, particularly iconography and semiotics. Overall, these components distinguish the present research methodologically from previous studies on the cultural heritage of Jiroft, which have primarily relied on semiotic and iconographic analyses of motifs-rather than exploring the narrativity of images. This distinction is considered one of the study’s key innovations.

Conclusion
Overall, the focus of this study was on the fundamental doctrine of the Vienna School, with a particular emphasis on Franz Wickhoff. In this regard, pictorial narration is inherently meaningful, generates cultural cognition, and is considered within a historical context. In other words, in line with Wickhoff’s teachings, an effort was made to examine seemingly indistinct events and ambiguous prehistoric incidents within overarching and universal metanarratives, which often reflect grand social transformations in various forms.
The case studies of this research (see: Table 1) exhibit characteristics that demonstrate how the examination of the typological diversity of pictorial narration goes beyond textual analysis and delves into deeper subtextual and interpretative layers. Thus, every representational narrative is situated within a macro-narrative framework, which may encompass an archaeological site, a cultural civilization, or an evolutionary process transitioning from one historical era to another. In other words, the semantic appeal among the narrative samples of this research results from the interplay of the powerful poles of myth, nature, and culture. Therefore, the narrative logic of these artworks emerges through a permutation-based relationship and continuous movement between the cycle of natural life, the mythological realm, and cultural existence, centered around the main character or actors of the scene.
In this ongoing struggle between the worlds of myth, nature, and culture, the dominant force within the scene is sometimes influenced by the mythological pole, manifesting in the figure of a king-hero (Figs. 4 & 6) such as Gilgamesh and Enkidu, who reflect the grand ideals of their culture and society. At other times, with nature prevailing over mythology, domesticated animals in the grasslands (Fig. s 5 and 7) are depicted as integral to their local ecosystem. In this way, pictorial narratives serve as tangible representations of the collective unconscious of these ancient civilizations, embodying their aspirations, desires, beliefs, and cultural and mythological needs through the artifacts and objects of their time. In this sense, beyond their decorative and aesthetic aspects, narrative motifs also reflect the worldview of their creators regarding ways of living, the geographical environment, and the prevalent cultural values and mythological concepts of that era.
As Plato described in Timaeus, referring to nature as “the womb of all change”, the encounter between humans and nature in Jiroft civilization represents an ongoing process of transformation resulting from the clash of opposing forces in nature and the stabilizing power of human reason. Accordingly, the case studies of this research illustrate how historical human interactions with nature are reflected in the uninterrupted transition of pictorial actors through the three essential stages of existence—imitation and assimilation (myth), contact and interaction (nature/ecosystem), and desire and confrontation (culture) through various cultural-narrative patterns of the time.
Thus, in their evolutionary and transformative journey (human-bull, human-lion, or human-scorpion), humans inevitably find themselves in a continuous struggle with the unknown and unstable forces of nature. Consistent with Frazer (1926), the urgent biological and existential necessity of direct contact with nature compelled ancient people to perceive themselves as defenseless against the uncontrollable forces of the natural world. In such a situation, they had to rely on collective intelligence to devise solutions for coping with the fragmented natural world and its creatures. On one hand, in response to existential questions and in facing the unknown forces of nature, as well as to alleviate their inner anxieties, they entered the mythological phase, passively and fearfully absorbing these uncontrollable forces into their collective unconscious. However, in the natural phase, in order to meet their biological and vital needs, they gradually became familiar with the enigmatic surrounding nature through constant contact, discovering its hidden forces. Finally, in the cultural phase-marked by the formation of urban societies and local states-they externalized the absorbed mythological forces and applied their accumulated experiential and cognitive knowledge of the surrounding nature to heroic actions aimed at establishing and defending their civilization and territorial boundaries against external threats. In other words, the passive and imitative human within the mythological realm transforms into a coexisting inhabitant of the natural order and ultimately into people with symbolic cultural identities, engaging in heroic acts. This heroic movement in ancient cultural and civilizational life frequently manifests in the figure of a king-hero.
Consequently, emphasizing the maximal narrative quality in images, six pictorial types were purposefully selected from 144 pictorial samples of the Jiroft civilization. Upon analyzing the sample volume, it was demonstrated that Wickhoff’s three fundamental narrative patterns comprehensively encompass the various pictorial narratives (related to Jiroft civilization’s chlorite stone artifacts) under three general categories: “human narratives”, “grassland narratives” and “confrontational animal narratives”. In this way, the endless cycle of substitutions and transformations in the biological, mythological, and cultural systems of humans was structured under Wickhoff’s visual narratology framework in the form of three models: continuous, isolated, and Complementary  narratives.
The isolated models in Figs. 8 & 9 revealed that by suspending movement, avoiding sequential framing, and focusing on the climax of the story in a single scene, they effectively captured the timeless and placeless mythological world in a tangible manner. In the continuous models, it was observed how, through the repetition of the hero figure within the scene (Fig. 5), the sequence of events could be followed until the hero’s fate was determined. The artist successfully arranged minor actions around the main actors (Figs. 6 & 7) to vividly depict the continuity of natural life in Jiroft civilization. Finally, by segmenting events into successive frames (Fig. 4), it was shown how an artist could convey the essence of a story in a cinematic manner.