DOCSLIB.ORG

Arkeolojik Verilerin Işiğinda Epi-Paleolitikten Tunç Çaği Sonuna Kadar Anadolu-Iran Ilişkileri

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arkeolojik Verilerin Işiğinda Epi-Paleolitikten Tunç Çaği Sonuna Kadar Anadolu-Iran Ilişkileri Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Arkeoloji Anabilim Dalı ARKEOLOJİK VERİLERİN IŞIĞINDA EPİ-PALEOLİTİKTEN TUNÇ ÇAĞI SONUNA KADAR ANADOLU-İRAN İLİŞKİLERİ Bayram Aghalari Doktora Tezi Ankara, 2017 ARKEOLOJİK VERİLERİN IŞIĞINDA EPİ-PALEOLİTİKTEN TUNÇ ÇAĞI SONUNA KADAR ANADOLU-İRAN İLİŞKİLERİ Bayram Aghalari Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Arkeoloji Anabilim Dalı Doktora Tezi Ankara, 2017 KABUL VE ONAY BİLDİRİM YAYIMLAMA VE FİKRİ MÜLKİYET HAKLARI BEYANI ETİK BEYAN v TEŞEKKÜR Hacettepeli olduğum ilk günden beri beni yönlendiren, yardımlarını esirgemeyen, tez çalışmam konusunda tecrübe ve görüşlerinden yararlandığım danışman hocam Doç. Dr. Halil TEKİN'e sonsuz teşekkürlerimi sunarım. Tez izleme komitemde yer alan Hacettepe Üniversitesi arkeoloji bölüm başkanı Prof. Dr. Sevinç GÜNEL, Prof. Dr. Halime HÜRYILMAZ, Doç. Dr. Ayşegül AYKURT, Ankara Üniversitesi bölüm başkanı Prof. Dr. Tayfun YILDIRIM ve Prof. Dr. Fikri KULAKOĞLU'NA tez çalışmam boyunca bilgilerini benimle paylaşmaları, konuya farklı bakış açılarıyla katkıda bulunmalarından ve beni desteklemelerinden dolayı çok teşekkür ederim. Ayrıca ders aşamasında bilgilerinden yararlandığım bütün Hacettepe Arkeoloji bölümü öğretim üyeleri ve görevlilerine teşekkürlerimi bildirmek isterim. Tez çalışmam boyunca yararlandığım İngiliz Arkeoloji Enstitüsü (BIAA) elemanlarına derin teşekkürlerimi bildirmek isterim. Yanı sıra araştırmanın uygulamasını gerçekleştirdiğim süre içinde teknik yardım ve desteklerini gördüğüm Türk ve İranlı arkadaşlarıma da teşekkür ederim. Maddi Manevi desteklerini esirgemeyen hayatımın her anında yanımda olan, Eğitim ve öğretim hayatım boyunca beni her yönden destekleyen, sevgili aileme derin teşekkürlerim sonsuzdur. vi ÖZET AGHALARİ, Bayram. Arkeolojik verilerin ışığında Epi-Paleolitikten Tunç Çağları sonuna kadar Anadolu-İran ilişkileri, Doktora Tezi, Ankara, 2017. Yukarıda belirtildiği başlıklı bu çalışmada Ön Asya'nın iki önemli coğrafi bölgesi olarak Anadolu-İran ilişki ve bağlantıları Epi-Paleolitik dönemden itibaren ele alınmıştır. Anadolu kökenli obsidiyen endüstrisinin ürünlerine Levant, Mezopotamya ve Zagroslarda rastlanıyor olması, kabaca M.Ö. 17.000-9.500 tarih aralığında bölgeler arasındaki bağlantıların varlığının önemli bir göstergesidir. Bununla birlikte dönemin en önemli yaşam unsuru olan yontma taş endüstrisi dikkate alındığında, aynı zaman diliminde farklı kültürel yapılanmaların var olduğu göze çarpmaktadır. Epi-Paleolitik dönemi izleyen ilk yerleşik toplum düzeninin temellerinin atıldığı Çanak Çömlek Öncesi Neolitik dönem ile birlikte Doğu Anadolu kökenli obsidiyen buluntuların günümüz İran sınırları içine ulaşması ile söz konusu ilişkilerin yeni boyutlar kazandığını söylemek mümkündür. Çanak Çömlekli Neolitik dönemde neredeyse tüm Kuzeybatı, Batı, Güneybatı ve Güney İran'da yer alan yerleşimlerde bu tür ürünler bulunmuştur. Obsidiyen buluntularına karşın, mimari, çanak çömlek, yontma taş endüstrisi, ölü gömme gelenekler ve diğer küçük buluntuları dikkate alındığında iki coğrafyanın temelde farklı gelişim sureci izlediğini söylemek mümkündür. Erken Kalkolitik (Ubaid) dönem ile birlikte Güneybatı İran ve Güneydoğu Anadolu bağımsız olarak Mezopotamya'yla yoğun bir ilişki/etkileşim halinde olmasına karşın İran-Anadolu ilişkileri açısından en az bilgiye sahip olduğumuz dönemi oluşturur. Geç Kalkolitik sürecinde Kuzeybatı İran, Güney Kafkasya ve Doğu Anadolu, Yukarı Mezopotamya ve Suriye yerleşimleri ile sıkı bir ilişki ve iletişim göstermektedir. Ardından gelen Erken Tunç Çağı ile birlikte yeni bir süreç olarak temel sosyo kültürel değişimlerle ile birlikte Kura-Aras/Erken Transkafkasya kültürü Kafkasya topraklarının yanı sıra, yüksek Doğu Anadolu ve kuzeybatı İran bölgeleri tek bir kültür etkisi altına girmişlerdir. Bu dönemde yerel farklılıkları ile vii birlikte ilişiklilerin en zirve noktasına ulaştığını görmekteyiz. Söz konusu ilişkiler Orta/Geç Tunç Çağlarında Van-Urmiye boyalıları ile coğrafi açısından da sınırlanarak Demir Çağı başlangıcına kader devam ettiği anlaşılmaktadır. Anahtar Sözcükler: Anadolu, Iran, İlişki/İletişim, Epi-Paleolitik, Neolitik Çağ, Kalkolitik Çağ, Tunç Çağları viii ABSTRACT AGHALARİ, Bairam. Relation between Anatolia and İran from the Epi-Paleolithic to the end of Bronze Ages based on Archeological fainding, Ph.D Tesis, Ankara, 2016. During this study with the title which has been provided above, two important geographies of Asia Minor, the Anatolian-Iranian relations and their connections beginning with the Epi- Paleolithic period, have been dealt with. Existence of the products of Anatolian based obsidian industry at Levant, Mesopotamia and Zagros is an important indicator of connections between the regions roughly during the period of 17.000-9.500 B.C. In addition to this, when we take into consideration the industry of the Paleolithic era, which was the most important life element of the period, we notice the existence of different cultural structures during the same time period. Together with the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period following the Epi-Paleolithic period, during when the foundation of the first established community order was laid down, obsidians with Eastern Anatolian origin reaching the Iranian borders, is a good indicator of the subject relations attaining new dimensions. It was possible to find such products during the Pottery Neolithic Period at almost all of the residential areas of Northwestern, Western, Southwestern and Southern Iran. Despite the obsidian findings, we can easily say that the two geographies basically followed different developmental processes when we take into consideration the architecture, pottery, chipped stone industry, burial customs and other small findings. Even though Southwestern Iran and Southeastern Anatolia entered into close Relationship/interaction with Mesopotamia together with the Early Chalcolithic (Ubaid) period, it constitute the period during which we have the least knowledge in terms of Iran- Anatolian relations. It is seen during the Late Chalcolithic period that Northwestern Iran, Southern Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia entered into close relations with Mesopotamia and Syria. Together with Early Bronze Age which followed it, as a new process together with basic socio-cultural changes, Kura-Aras/ Early Transcaucasian Culture, High Eastern ix Anatolia and northwestern Iranian regions, in addition to the Caucasian lands entered into the influence of a single culture. During this period, we can easily see that in addition to the local difference, relations have increased to the highest level. It is understood that the subject relations have continued to the beginning of Iron Age, by being geographically limited with Van-Urmiye Wares in Middle / Late Bronze Ages. Keywords: Anatolia, Iran, Relation, İnteraction, Epi-Paleolithic, Neolitik, Kalkolitik, Bronz Ages. x İÇİNDEKİLER KABUL VE ONAY ................................................................................................................ i BİLDİRİM ............................................................................................................................. ii YAYIMLAMA VE FİKRİ MÜLKİYET HAKLARI BEYANI ........................................... iii ETİK BEYAN ....................................................................................................................... iv TEŞEKKÜR ........................................................................................................................... v ÖZET..................................................................................................................................... vi ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ viii İÇİNDEKİLER ...................................................................................................................... x KISALTMALAR DİZİNİ ................................................................................................... xiv HARİTALAR DİZİNİ ......................................................................................................... xv TABLOLAR DİZİNİ ......................................................................................................... xvii LEVHALAR DİZİNİ ........................................................................................................ xviii GİRİŞ .................................................................................................................................... 1 I. Konu ...................................................................................................................... 7 II. Amaç .................................................................................................................... 7 III. Yöntem ................................................................................................................ 7 IV. Kapsam ............................................................................................................... 8 I. BÖLÜM: COĞRAFYA .................................................................................................. 10 I.1. Anadolu Coğrafyası .......................................................................................... 10 I.1.1.Yer Şekilleri ................................................................................................ 10 xi I.1.2. İklim ........................................................................................................... 15 I.1.3. Akarsuları ..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economic Commission for Europe Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes
    WG.1/2015/INF.4 Economic Commission for Europe Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes Working Group on Integrated Water Resources Management Tenth meeting Geneva, 24 and 25 June 2015 Item 8 of the provisional agenda Thematic assessment of the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus Draft assessment of the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus in the Alazani/Ganykh River Basin Prepared by the secretariat with input from experts Summary At its sixth session (Rome, 28–30 November 2012), the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes requested the Task Force on the Water-Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus, in cooperation with the Working Group on Integrated Water Resources Management, to prepare a thematic assessment focusing on the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus with a view to its publication prior to the seventh session of the Meeting of the Parties (see ECE/MP.WAT/37, para. 38 (i)). The present document contains the draft nexus assessment of the Alazani/Ganykh River Basin. The draft assessment is the result of an assessment process carried out according to the methodology described in document ECE/MP.WAT/WG.1/2015/8 developed on the basis of a desk study of relevant documentation, an assessment workshop (Kachreti, Georgia; 25-27 November 2013), as well as inputs from local experts and officials of the riparian countries. The draft assessment of the Alazani/Ganykh was circulated for review and comments to the authorities of the riparian countries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, C.3500 – 1000 BC
    The Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, c.3500 – 1000 BC Volume I, Part III K. J. Roach Doctor of Philosophy, (Near Eastern) Archaeology 2008 The University of Sydney Chapter 5 – Summary of Style Distribution across the Elamite Sites The purpose of this chapter is to detail and outline the specific glyptic style distribution at each site included in the Corpus. This survey has two main objectives. The first is the summation and discussion of the Elamite styles from each site, and thereby the revision and reassessment of the ‘glyptic material’ survey presented for each site in the initial site survey section (Chapter 2), by detailing the site glyptic material in the terms of the new Elamite stylistic paradigm here presented. The second intention is to provide some of the background information and data, be it contextual, stylistic and chronological, regarding the function of various glyptic items at each site and across Elam, thereby enabling the following discussion on glyptic function (Chapter 6). The style distribution (how many styles and in what proportions) of each site will be presented, and thereby the basic chronological distribution of the glyptic material, with any necessary discussion where this information strongly contradicts the established chronological periodisation of a site, will be outlined. The glyptic material types (seals/sealings) and the specific materials will be presented, as will any information regarding seal function from provenance (that is, grave or temple context etc.) or type (sealing type especially). For the most part, this information may be presented and detailed in graphs, figures and tables. 5.1 Susa As already mentioned and explained, Susa has contributed by far the most items to the Corpus.
    [Show full text]
  • JHE Wezmeh Accepted.Pdf
    Kent Academic Repository Full text document (pdf) Citation for published version Zanolli, Clément and Biglari, Fereidoun and Mashkour, Marjan and Abdi, Kamyar and Monchot, Hervé and Debue, Karyne and Mazurier, Arnaud and Bayle, Priscilla and Le Luyer, Mona and Rougier, Hélène and Trinkaus, Erik and Macchiarelli, Roberto (2019) A Neanderthal from the Central Western Zagros, Iran. Structural reassessment of the Wezmeh 1 maxillary premolar. DOI Link to record in KAR https://kar.kent.ac.uk/75685/ Document Version Author's Accepted Manuscript Copyright & reuse Content in the Kent Academic Repository is made available for research purposes. Unless otherwise stated all content is protected by copyright and in the absence of an open licence (eg Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher, author or other copyright holder. Versions of research The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record. Enquiries For any further enquiries regarding the licence status of this document, please contact: [email protected] If you believe this document infringes copyright then please contact the KAR admin team with the take-down information provided at http://kar.kent.ac.uk/contact.html A Neanderthal from the Central Western Zagros, Iran. Structural reassessment of the Wezmeh 1 maxillary premolar Clément Zanolli a, *, Fereidoun Biglari
    [Show full text]
  • The Anahita Temple at Kangavar
    THE ANAHITA TEMPLE AT KANGAVAR The modern town of Kangavar, the site of the Anahita Temple, is situated midway between Hamadan and Kermanshah, on the main historical Hegmataneh-Ctesphon highway. The Temple has an area of 4.6 hectare and is located on a huge schist outcropping that overlooks the Kangavar plain. Like a number of other monumental buildings, the Anahita Temple is constructed on a platform, a technique common on the IRanian plateau in historical periods. The town of Kangavar is the principal population center in the vast plain of Kangavar. This fertile plain is surrounded from the north and northwest by the central Zagros ranges. The Chelmaran heights, the main stone quarry of the region, is located on the west, not far from the Temple. High annual precipitation provides the plain with ample irrigation water supplied by natural springs and the Gamasab river, the confluence of the Khurram-rud, the Asadabad, and te Kangavar rivers. As in many regions in Iran, these rivers and the natural springs have played an important role in the cultural development of the Kangavar plain from prehistoric to the present time. The flourishing prehistoric cultures of Seh-Gabi and Godin, whose type sites are located northeast of Kangavar, and the latter's economic and cultural contact with Susa are indicative of the importance of the region from the early Neolithic to the late Chalcolithic period. Southern view of Anahita Temple The strategic geographical location of the plain also played an important role as the commercial highway and locus of contact between the cultural centers on the west and east streching as far as Khorasan and China.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Interactions Between Prehistoric Societies of the Central
    Herausgeber*innenkollektiv, eds. 2021. Pearls, Politics and Pistachios. Essays in Anthropology and Memories on the Occasion of Susan Pollock’s 65th Birthday: 239–57. DOI: 10.11588/propylaeum.837.c10747. Cultural Interactions between Prehistoric Societies of the Central Iranian Plateau with Residents of the Central Zagros, Fars, and Southwestern Iran during the 5th Millennium BCE HASSAN FAZELI NASHLI,* PARISA NEKOUEI** & ROUHOLLAH YOUSEFI ZOSHK*** The North Central plateau and mountains in eastern Iran, and by the hot and Central Zagros regions during dry Dasht-e-Lut and Dasht-e-Kavir regions the 5th millennium BCE to the south (Badiei 1994, 93). This area, through the Shamshirbor Pass northeast of The North Central Iranian Plateau (see Bastam, includes all of the Gorgan plain, and Fig. 1) is a vast area, with an average some of the southern parts of Turkmenistan elevation of 1200 meters above sea level, and northeastern Iran (Malek-Shahmirzadi which was inhabited by modern humans from 2003, 317). Numerous plains are enclosed ca. 7200 BCE onwards. It is bounded to the by the southern limits of the Alborz, each of north by the Alborz Mountains, the Zagros which has its own cultural history; among the Mountains to the west, at its eastern limit by most important plains are the Tehran, Qazvin, Fig. 1. Map showing the locations of the most important 5th millennium BCE sites mentioned in the text. Map by the authors. * University of Tehran, Tehran (Iran) ** University of Tehran, Tehran (Iran) *** Islamic Azad University of Varamin, Varamin (Iran) Hassan Fazeli Nashli, Parisa Nekouei & Rouhollah Yousefi Zoshk Qom, and Kashan plains.
    [Show full text]
  • New Evidence on the Chronology of the “Anahita Temple”
    Iranica Antiqua, vol. XLIV, 2009 doi: 10.2143/IA.44.0.2034383 NEW EVIDENCE ON THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE “ANAHITA TEMPLE” BY Massoud AZARNOUSH (Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, Tehran) Abstract: Partly standing-partly excavated remains of a monument in Kangavar, a town in western Iran between Hamadan and Kermanshah, have been dated to the Seleucid and/or Parthian periods. In an article published in 1981, nevertheless, M. Azarnoush argues in favour of a late Sasanian date for this site. The discovery of a brick under the massive masonry of the western platform of the monument in the course of later excavations provided the possibility for thermoluminescence dating of this sample. The TL reading of the brick confi rms the Sasanian date of the monument. The present article intends to assess this and some other new information about the site. Keywords: W-Iran, Kangavar, Anahita Temple, Sasanian, chronology I- Introduction In an article published in 1981, I argued in favour of a late Sasanian date for the monument of Kangavar, frequently labelled the “Anahita Temple” (Azarnoush 1981: 69-94, Pl. 12-19). By that time I had completed two seasons of excavations on this site, following fi ve seasons of work headed by Seyfollâh-e Kâmbakhsh-e Fard, another Iranian archaeologist of whose expeditions I am certainly honoured to have been a member. Reasons backing the new chronology may be outlined in the following: – Isidor of Charax is the oldest author who mentions the presence of an Artemis Temple in Concobar, most probably the Greek pronunciation for the Iranian Kangavar.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia
    World Heritage papers41 HEADWORLD HERITAGES 4 Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia VOLUME I In support of UNESCO’s 70th Anniversary Celebrations United Nations [ Cultural Organization Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia Nuria Sanz, Editor General Coordinator of HEADS Programme on Human Evolution HEADS 4 VOLUME I Published in 2015 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France and the UNESCO Office in Mexico, Presidente Masaryk 526, Polanco, Miguel Hidalgo, 11550 Ciudad de Mexico, D.F., Mexico. © UNESCO 2015 ISBN 978-92-3-100107-9 This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Cover Photos: Top: Hohle Fels excavation. © Harry Vetter bottom (from left to right): Petroglyphs from Sikachi-Alyan rock art site.
    [Show full text]
  • The Compositional Integrity of the Aurignacian
    MUNIBE (Antropologia-Arkeologia) 57 Homenaje a Jesús Altuna 107-118 SAN SEBASTIAN 2005 ISSN 1132-2217 The Compositional Integrity of the Aurignacian La integridad composicional del Auriñaciense KEY WORDS: Aurignacian, lithic typology, lithic technology, organic technology, west Eurasia. PALABRAS CLAVE: Auriñaciense, tipología lítica, tecnología lítica, tecnología orgánica, Eurasia occidental. Geoffrey A. CLARK* Julien RIEL-SALVATORE* ABSTRACT For the Aurignacian to have heuristic validity, it must share a number of defining characteristics that co-occur systematically across space and time. To test its compositional integrity, we examine data from 52 levels identified as Aurignacian by their excavators. Classical indicators of the French Aurignacian are reviewed and used to contextualize data from other regions, allowing us to assess whether or not the Aurignacian can be considered a single, coherent archaeological entity. RESUMEN Para tener validez heurística, el Auriñaciense tiene que compartir características que co-ocurren sistemáticamente a través del espacio y tiempo. Para evaluar su integridad composicional, examinamos aquí los datos procedentes de 52 niveles identificados como ‘Auriñaciense’ por sus excavadores. Se repasan los indicadores ‘clásicos’ del Auriñaciense francés para contextualizar los datos procedentes de otras regio- nes con el objetivo de examinar si el Auriñaciense puede considerarse una sola coherente entidad arqueológica. LABURPENA Baliozkotasun heuristikoa izateko, Aurignac aldiak espazioan eta denboran zehar sistematikoki batera gertatzen diren ezaugarriak partekatu behar ditu. Haren osaketa osotasuna ebaluatzeko, beren hondeatzaileek ‘Aurignac aldikotzat” identifikaturiko 52 mailetatik ateratako datuak aztertzen ditugu hemen. Aurignac aldi frantziarraren adierazle “klasikoak” berrikusten dira beste hainbat eskualdetatik lorturiko datuak bere testuinguruan jartzeko Aurignac aldia entitate arkeologiko bakar eta koherentetzat jo daitekeen aztertzea helburu.
    [Show full text]
  • Arrival in Baku Itinerary for Azerbaijan, Georgia
    Expat Explore - Version: Thu Sep 23 2021 16:18:54 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Page: 1/15 Itinerary for Azerbaijan, Georgia & Armenia • Expat Explore Start Point: End Point: Hotel in Baku, Hotel in Yerevan, Please contact us Please contact us from 14:00 hrs 10:00 hrs DAY 1: Arrival in Baku Start in Baku, the largest city on the Caspian Sea and capital of Azerbaijan. Today you have time to settle in and explore at leisure. Think of the city as a combination of Paris and Dubai, a place that offers both history and contemporary culture, and an intriguing blend of east meets west. The heart of the city is a UNESCO World Heritage Site, surrounded by a fortified wall and pleasant pedestrianised boulevards that offer fantastic shopping opportunities. Attractions include the local Carpet Museum and the National Museum of History and Azerbaijan. Experiences Expat Explore - Version: Thu Sep 23 2021 16:18:54 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Page: 2/15 Arrival. Join up with the tour at our starting hotel in Baku. If you arrive early you’ll have free time to explore the city. The waterfront is a great place to stroll this evening, with a cooling sea breeze and plenty of entertainment options and restaurants. Included Meals Accommodation Breakfast: Lunch: Dinner: Hotel Royal Garden DAY 2: Baku - Gobustan National Park - Mud Volcano Safari - Baku Old City Tour After breakfast, dive straight into exploring the history of Azerbaijan! Head south from Baku to Gobustan National Park. This archaeological reserve is home to mud volcanoes and over 600,000 ancient rock engravings and paintings.
    [Show full text]
  • Arta 2019.002
    Arta 2019.002 http://www.achemenet.com/pdf/arta/ARTA_2019.002_Wicks.pdf Yasmina Wicks - The University of Sydney Between Highlands and Lowlands. The Ram Hormuz Plain in the Neo-Elamite and Early Achaemenid Periods, and Comments on Five Burials from the Fort Mound at Tal-i Ghazir Abstract The plain of Ram Hormuz was a strategically important area of southwest Iran connecting the Susiana lowlands with the Zagros highlands, and undoubtedly a critical zone of Elamite and Iranian interaction in the centuries leading up to the emergence of the Persian Empire. Its archaeological remains must therefore be regarded as a vital key to our comprehension of the processes of acculturation that gave rise to the Elamo-Persian culture of the early Achaemenid period. While the plain has been extensively surveyed, its only excavated site remains Tal-i Ghazir where just two seasons of excavation were conducted in 1948/49 by Donald E. McCown under the auspices of the Oriental Institute. McCown worked in three separate mounds— Mounds A and B, and the so-called Fort Mound—but he never published his results. Almost half a century later, Elizabeth Carter (1994) published a series of burials in the Fort Mound from his field notes, and another two decades later, Abbas Alizadeh (2014) published the complete records of the Tal-i Ghazir excavations. The purpose of this paper is to outline the evidence for the Neo-Elamite (ca. 1000-525 BCE) and Achaemenid periods (ca. 525-330 BCE) collected during the surveys across the Ram Hormuz plain and the excavations at Tal-i Ghazir, with special attention to the burials in the Fort Mound.
    [Show full text]
  • This Learning Toolkit Was Developed in the Framework of the UNDP-GEF
    1 This learning toolkit was developed in the framework of the UNDP-GEF project “Advancing Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) across the Kura river basin through implementation of the transboundary agreed actions and national plans”. It aims to provide a better understanding of the current state of water resources in the Kura river basin. It examines links between human activities and environmental degradation in the basin, as well as potential impacts of such global threats as climate change and disasters on water resources of the Kura river basin. The publication also includes interesting facts about water resources, related ecosystems and provides additional information about some environmental concepts. The toolkit is applicable as an additional source of information for the schoolteachers, students and everyone else who uses water. Contributors: Mary Matthews, Nino Malashkhia, Hajar Huseynova, Ahmed Abou Elseoud, Tamar Gugushvili, Elchin Mammadov, Jeanene Mitchell, Surkhay Shukurov, Aysel Muradova, Maia Ochigava, Sona Guliyeva Disclaimer: The views expressed in this publication are those of the UNDP-GEF Kura II Project Team and do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations or UNDP or the Global Environment Facility TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................9 Is water an economic or social good? ..................................................................13 2. Water cycle in a nutshell .............................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • PREHISTORIC ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNOLOGIES and the ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN REDISTRIBUTION ECONOMY the Case of Greater Susiana
    Gian Pietro Basello - L'Orientale University of Naples - 25/01/2018 CHAPTER EIGHTEEN PREHISTORIC ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND THE ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN REDISTRIBUTION ECONOMY The case of greater Susiana Denise Schmandt- Besserat INTRODUCTION Ancient Near Eastern art of the 4th and 3rd millennium BC gloriies the temple redistribution economy. Mesopotamians are depicted proudly delivering vessels illed with goods at the temple gate (Leick 2002: 52–53; Nissen and Heine 2003: 30–31, Figure 20) (Figure 18.1 A), and Elamites celebrate their huge communal granaries (Amiet 1972b: Pl. 16:660, 662–663; Legrain 1921: Pl. 14: 222) (Figs. 18.1 B-E). What the monuments do not show is the judicious administration which managed the temple’s and community’s wealth. Nor do they tell when, how and why the redis- tribution system was created. In this chapter we analyze what the prehistoric administrative technologies such as tokens and seals may disclose on the origin and evolution of the exemplary redistri- bution economy (Schmandt- Besserat 1992a: 172–183; Pollock 1999: 79–80, 92–96) which developed in antiquity in the land that was to become Elam (Vallat 1980: 2; 1993: CIV). 8TH MILLENNIUM BC – INITIAL VILLAGE PERIOD1 – THE FIRST TOKENS The earliest human presence in the Susiana and Deh Luran plains – Greater Susiana (Moghaddam 2012a: 516) – was identiied in level A of the site of Chogha Bonut, ca. 7200 BC. The evidence suggests the seasonal encampment of a small band who lived from farming as well as hunting (Alizadeh 2003:40). Among the scanty remains they left behind were ire pits dug into living loors and a scattering of artifacts, including lint and obsidian tools, rocks smeared with ochre, clay igurines and tokens (Aliza- deh 2003: 35).
    [Show full text]