LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES A LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE
Leurs relations à la lumière des documents archéologiques La couverture est illustrée d'une figurine en albâtre de Dashli-3 (cf. p. 136). COLLOQUES INTERNATIONAUX DU CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE SCIENTIFIQUE ,
N° 567
LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES A LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE
Leurs relations à la lumière des documents archéologiques
Paris 22-24 mars 1976
ÉDITIONS DU CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE SCIENTIFIQUE 15, quai Anatole-France - 75700 PARIS 1977 Actes du Colloque International N° 567 : « LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES A LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE - Leurs relations à la lumière des documents archéologiques », organisé dans le cadre des colloques internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, à Paris, du 22 au 24 mars 1976, par M. J. DESHAYES, Professeur à l'Université de Paris I, Directeur de l'U.R.A. N° 7 du C.N.R.S. et des Fouilles de Tureng Tépé.
@ Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1977. ISBN 2-222-02047-6 LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
Organisateur : Prof. J. DESHAYES, Université de Paris 1.
Participants :
Mrs. G. AZARPAY, Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of California, Berkeley. M. P. BERNARD, directeur de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan, Caboul. M. R. BISCIONE, Istituto per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. M. R. BOUCHARLAT, attaché de recherche au C.N.R.S., Paris. Mlle A. CATTENAT, U.R.A. n° 10 du Centre de Recherches Archéologiques du C.N.R.S., Paris. M. S. CLEUZIOU, attaché de recherche au C.N.R.S., Paris. Prof. G. DALES, Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of California, Berkeley. M. P. DOLUKHANOV, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Leningrad. Prof. R. DYSON, University Muséum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphie. M. H.-P. FRANCFORT, directeur adjoint de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan, Caboul. M. G. FUSSMAN, maître de conférence à l'Université de Strasbourg II. M. J.-C. GARDIN, directeur de recherche au C.N.R.S., Paris. M. P. GENTELLE, chargé de recherche au C.N.R.S., Paris. Prof. R. GHIRSHMAN, membre de l'Institut, Paris. M. J.-F. JARRIGE, chargé de recherche au C.N.R.S., Paris. M. 1. KHLOPIN, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Leningrad. Mme E. KOUZMINA, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Moscou. Prof. C. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY, Peabody Muséum, Harvard University, Cambridge (Mass.). M. P. LERICHE, pensionnaire à l'Institut Français d'Archéologie de Beyrouth. M. L. LEVINE, Royal Ontario Muséum, Toronto. M. M. MANDELSHTAM, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Leningrad. M. D. POTTS, Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of California, Berkeley. Mme G. POUGATCHENKOVA, Institut d'Art, Tashkent (Uzbekistan). M. V. SARIANIDI, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Moscou. M. M. Tosi, Istituto Universitario Orientale, Naples. M. V. VOLKOV, Institut d'Archéologie de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S., Moscou.
TABLE DES MATIÈRES
AVANT-PROPOS 11 P.M. DOLUKHANOV. — Evolution of eco-social systems in Central Asia and in Iran in the course of upper Pleistocene and Holocene 13 Daniel POTTS. — Tepe Yahya and the end of the 4th Millennium on the Iranian Plateau. 23 C.C. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY. — Foreign Relations in the Third Millennium at Tepe Yahya. 33 Maurizio Tosi. — The archaeological evidence for protostate structures in Eastern Iran and Central Asia at the end of the 3rd Millennium BC 45 Georges F. DALES. — Shifting trade-patterns between the Iranian Plateau and the Indus Valley in the Third Millennium BC 67 J.F. JARRIGE. — Nouvelles recherches archéologiques au Baluchistan : les fouilles de Mehrgarh 79 Jean DESHAYES. — A propos des terrasses hautes de la fin du M'' millénaire en Iran et en Asie Centrale 95 Raffaele BISCIONE. — The Crisis of Central Asia Urbanization in II Millennium BC and Villages as an alternative system 113 Victor SARIANIDI. — Ancient Horasan and Bactria 129 I.N. KHLOPIN. — Les tombes de Sumbar - une clef pour l'harmonisation des chronologies des sites de l'époque du Bronze du sud de l'Asie Centrale et de l'Iran 143 Robert H. DYSONo — Architecture of the Iron 1 period at Hasanlu in Western Iran and its implications for theories of migration on the Iranian Plateau 155 Louis D. LEVINE. — East-West Trade in the Late Iron Age : A view from the Zagros .... 171 Serge CLEUZIOU. — Les pointes de flèches « scythiques » au Proche et Moyen-Orient .... 187 E.E. KUZMINA. — Liens entre la Bactriane et l'Iran aux VIle-IV" siècles avant notre ère .. 201 A.M. MANDELSHTAM. - Les Nomades en Asie Centrale dans l'Antiquité 215 Annette CATTENAT et Jean-Claude GARDIN. — Diffusion comparée de quelques genres de poterie caractéristiques de l'époque achéménide sur le Plateau Iranien et en Asie Centrale 225 Pierre GENTELLE. — Quelques observations sur l'extension de deux techniques d'irrigation sur le Plateau Iranien et en Asie Centrale 249 Paul BERNARD. — Les traditions orientales dans l'architecture gréco-bactrienne 263 Henri-Paul FRANCFORT. — Le plan des maisons gréco-bactriennes et le problème des structures de type « megaron » en Asie Centrale et en Iran 267 G.A. POUGATCHENKOVA. — La culture de la Bactriane du Nord à la lumière des décou- vertes archéologiques dans la vallée du Sourkhan-Darya ...... 281 Pierre LERICHE. — Problèmes de la guerre en Iran et en Asie Centrale dans l'empire perse et à l'époque hellénistique 297 Gérard FUSSMAN. — Le renouveau iranien dans l'empire Kouchan 313 Guitty AZARPAY. — Sassanian and Sogdian patterns : a comparative study 323 Rémi BOUCHARLAT. — La forteresse sassanide de Tureng-Tépé 329 Roman GHIRSHMAN. — La religion de l'Iran du vnr siècle avant notre ère à l'Islam .... 343 AVANT-PROPOS
L'organisation d'un Colloque International sur le Plateau Iranien et l'Asie Centrale des origines à la conquête islamique répondait certes à une indéniable nécessité scientifique. Mais elle constituait aussi une importante nouveauté dans la mesure où cette rencontre a permis de rassembler les représentants d'aires culturelles qui, pour avoir été jadis en contact étroit, n'en ont pas moins été depuis lors irrémédiablement séparées par les aléas de l'histoire. Il n'est pas fréquent de voir les spécialistes de l'Iran, de l'Asie Centrale Afghane ou Soviétique, de la Vallée de l'Indus et du Baluchistan, échanger non seulement des informations sur les dernières décou- vertes archéologiques mais aussi, et c'est là l'essentiel, des hypothèses sur les courants d'influences, les voies de pénétration, les échanges commerciaux. Il est capital aussi que tous les savants réunis aient été mis à même de constater que des problèmes analogues se posent pour toutes les époques, depuis le Chalcolithique jusqu'aux Kouchans et aux Sassanides : tel est l'avantage d'un Colloque restreint sur un vaste Congrès, dans lequel chacun se limite à l'écoute des communications qui touchent à sa propre spécialisation. Pour un tel Colloque, Paris constituait un cadre privilégié sur le plan scientifique, puisque des missions françaises fouillent actuellement, avec les importants résultats que l'on sait, des sites du Nord-Est de l'Iran, de l'Afghanistan Septentrional et du Baluchistan, et puisque aussi bien l'archéologie française a déjà mis en œuvre, dans ces régions, divers programmes de recherche qui concernent soit le Chalcolithique et l'Age du Bronze, soit l'Age du Fer et l'époque achéménide, soit enfin les périodes grecque, kouchane et sassanide. Mais quelque intérêt que pouvait représenter la confrontation de ces seuls programmes, l'apport de nos collègues américains, soviétiques et italiens était indispensable, et fut en fait d'une valeur inestimable. La présentation par les archéologues russes du prodigieux matériel qu'ils ont récemment découvert, ne constitua-t-elle pas, pour la plupart des auditeurs, une révélation inattendue et d'autant plus précieuse qu'elle élargissait et approfondissait bien des hypothèses déjà proposées ? Et les problèmes archéologiques du Sud-Est de l'Iran et du Baluchistan ne ressor- tent-ils pas bien mieux encore de la confrontation des résultats obtenus par les équipes améri- caines, italiennes et françaises ? Il serait assurément prématuré de tracer un tableau d'ensemble des conclusions de ce colloque. Nombre d'interrogations subsistent, tandis que d'autres ont surgi à cette occasion. Certaines questions n'ont pas été abordées, parce qu'elles ne se sont pas trouvées fondamentalement renou- velées par les découvertes récentes ou bien, plus prosaïquement, parce que le nombre des parti- cipants avait dû être limité : tel fut par exemple le cas du problème des relations entre le Nord du Plateau Iranien et la Turkménie au Néolithique Récent et au Chalcolithique, ou encore de presque tout ce qui concerne l'empire parthe. Un rééquilibrage s'imposerait donc avant que des conclusions générales puissent être tirées. Deux zones privilégiées n'en ressortent pas moins des diverses communications présentées : ce sont les voies par lesquelles les produits et les influences ont circulé et furent échangés au cours des âges entre le Plateau et l'Asie Centrale, c'est-à-dire la plaine de Gorgan - l'ancienne Hyrcanie - d'une part, le Sistan d'autre part. Cependant, la vaste zone comprise entre ces deux passages demeure terra incognita : ni le Khorassan iranien, ni la vallée du Heri Roud n'ont été explorés. Il n'est que de constater le rôle actuel de Meshhed comme intermédiaire entre le Sistan et le Gorgan pour soupçonner qu'il en fut peut-être de même en certaines périodes de l'Antiquité; de même, la vallée du Heri Roud pourrait fort bien fournir une alternative à celle du Hilmand dans les relations de l'Asie Centrale avec le Sistan. Il s'agit là de perspectives d'avenir ouvrant la voie à des recherches nouvelles dont on souhaite qu'elles puissent être entreprises au plus tôt. Mais d'ores et déjà, il ressort à l'évidence qu'on ne pourra plus écrire l'histoire de l'Orient Ancien sans y inclure non seulement les terri- toires les plus reculés du plateau iranien, mais aussi et surtout les vastes plaines de l'Asie Centrale. Les textes, on le savait déjà, ne nous donnent qu'une vision partielle des réalités historiques : c'est ainsi qu'à travers eux les expéditions septentrionales de Cyrus ou de Darius paraissaient difficilement compréhensibles; grâce à l'archéologie on sait maintenant qu'une importante civili- sation citadine s'était développée au delà des montagnes qui ferment au Nord le plateau iranien; la politique achéménide de rassemblement de toutes les terres urbanisées au sein d'un empire universel ne pouvait donc manquer d'inclure ces territoires. Il est certain qu'ils n'en seront plus désormais séparés, du moins aux yeux des archéologues et des historiens. On s'en voudrait toutefois de résumer ici, en les appauvrissant, les communications pré- sentées, dont le texte intégral peut maintenant être édité grâce au C.N.R.S. Il convient de remercier celui-ci, dont l'aide a permis la tenue de cette réunion. Et l'on n'omettra pas M. J. Cuisenier, Conservateur en Chef du Musée des Arts et Traditions Populaires, qui a bien voulu offrir à cette conférence un cadre aussi commode qu'agréable. J. DESHAYES Colloques Internationaux du C.N.R.S. N" 567. — LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES À LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE.
EVOLUTION OF ECO-SOCIAL SYSTEMS IN CENTRAL ASIA AND IN IRAN IN THE COURSE OF UPPER PLEISTOCENE AND HOLOCENE
P.M. DOLUKHANOV
RÉSUMÉ
L'évolution des systèmes éco-sociaux en Iran et en Asie Centrale ail cours du Pléistocène supérieur et du Holocène
L'évolution du milieu géographique et de la société préhistorique en Iran et en Asie Centrale au cours du Pleistocène supérieur et du Holocène (- 30 000-3 000 BP) est passé en revue. L'analyse est effectuée dans le cadre des systèmes éco-sociaux qui englobent les éléments du milieu (ressources naturelles) ainsi qu'éléments de la société préhistorique. Territoire disposant des ressources naturelles uniformes et qui sont accusés par des types de l'économie homogène sont traités en tant que zones naturelles économiques. Les étapes suivantes peuvent être établies dans l'évolution des systèmes éco-sociaux : 1) 30 000-10 000 BP. Domination du climat aride. Le niveau élevé de la mer Caspienne. La zone habitée inclut les montagnes de l'Iran de l'ouest et du nord, ainsi que le plateau d'Oust' Ourt. L'économie est basée exclusivement sur chasse et ramassage. 2) 10 000-8 000 BP. Le climat devient plus humide. La végétation forestière se met à proliférer dans les . montagnes de l'Iran de l'ouest et du nord. Le niveau de la mer Caspienne s'abaisse rapidement. L'apparition et la prolifération de l'économie productrice dans les montagnes du Zagros et au nord de l'Iran. 3) 8 000-3 000 BP. La croissance maximale de la précipitation. La végétation forestière couvre les hautes collines de l'Iran de l'ouest et du nord, ainsi que les vallées. La zone de l'économie productrice inclut les hautes collines et les plaines dites sous-montagneuses de l'Iran de l'ouest et du nord, les oasis du Plateau iranien. 5 000 BP environ établissements agricoles apparaissent sur les plaines alluviales de l'Iran de l'est. Entre 3 500 et 3 000 BP établissements agricoles font leur apparition sur la plaine alluviale au sud-est de la région caspienne ainsi que dans les vallées intérieures des montagnes Tourkméno-Khorassan.
The ultimate end of any archaeological investigation consists in the reconstruction in the fullest possible manner of all aspects in the evolution of prehistoric society, i.e. social, economic, ethnic and cultural processes. In the opinion of some investigators, including the author, to achieve this end it is necessary to make use of a complicated research procedure which provides for an initial treatment of archaeological material on a lower or empirical level, and for the building up of models of prehistoric society on an uppermost or theoretical level basing upon empirical date. The said model, among other things may help to determine the place taken by the archaeological facts in the framework of prehistoric society. One of the possible models that includes both prehistoric society and its environment is the eco-social system (Dolukhanov, 1975). This model is composed of two subsystems : ecological and social ones. The eco-subsystem includes climate, vegetation, the animal world, soils, water resources, raw material, i.e. the natural resources of prehistoric society. The social subsystem incorporates : economic pattern, working tools, population. The functioning of the economic pattern may be satisfactorily described through the application of the optimiser strategy principle. In relation to prehistoric society this principle may be interpreted thus : prehistoric society tends to chose the economic strategy that guarantes an optimum output at a minimum risk. Working tools which form an important element of the eco-social system reveal both components related to leading economical patterns and components related to ethnic attribution as shown by G.F. Korobkova (1975). The leading role played by demographic factors in the prehistory of Central Asia was shown by I.N. Hlopine (1968). The territorial manifestations of eco-social systems are natural - economic zones which are determined as areas disposing of more or less uniform range of natural resources and characte- rised by more or less homogenous patterns of economic behaviour. In the following paragraphs we shall try to follow up the evolution of the natural-economic zones in the course of the Upper Pleistocene and the Holocene, from ca. 30000 to 3000 years B.P. The territory under investigation includes the republics of Soviet Central Asia, Iran and some regions of Iraq. The geographical unity of the territory under investigation is greatly due to the fact of its being situated in the western portion of the great desert belt of Central Asia. In the whole area prevails an arid climate with a low precipitation, the evaporation exceeding the precipitation more than ten fold. The rivers in most of the area are poor in water and often ephemeric. The only exceptions arl the Tigris-Euphrates system; rivers falling into the Caspian Sea from the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains; Syr-Darya and Amu-Darya. At the same time the geographical setting of the area is characterised by many distinctive features which may provide the basis for the regional division. The relief of the territory is marked by sharp contrasts and is generally featured by the passage from high mountains to plains and lowlands. Vast areas are taken up by the North-Iranian mountains, by the Armenian highland, by the Elburz and by the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains, an integral part of the Alpine geosyncline belt. The Kopet-Dagh, the northern-most range of the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains, is formed by a row of parallel ranges separated by deep valleys. Northern and southern slopes of the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountain are flanked by evenly tilted proluvial sub-mountain plains. The South Iranian ranges form gigantic steps descending towards the Mesopotamian alluvial plain, the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. One of the important features of the natural setting of the area is that within its limits is situated one of the centers of origin of the wild cereals : the Irano-Afghan center, according to N.I. Vavilov (1925). Summing up previous investigations (cf. Petrov, 1955) one may propose the following natural regional division of the area under investigation : 1. North-Iranian mountain area (the Armenian highland; the Elburz; the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains) : a) high and medium-high mountains; b) intermontane valleys and depressions; c) submountain plains. 2. Caspian area : a) South Caspian littoral plain; b) South-Eastern Caspian plain. 3. South-Western Iranian Mountain area : a) high- and medium high mountains and valleys; b) submountain plains. 4. Central Iranian mountain area 5. South Iranian mountain area. 6. Eastern Iranian mountain area. 7. High plains of the Iranian Plateau. 8. The Mesopotamian alluvial plain. 9. The Middle Asian Plain : a) The Ust Urt plateau; b) The Turan Lowland. An important factor in the environmental evolution of the area was related to the Late Quaternary history of the Caspian Sea. As follows from recent geological investigations the level of the Caspian Sea was subjected to drastic fluctuations reaching 40-50 meters in magnitude in the course of the last thirty thousand years. From 30 to 10 thousand years B.P. the level of the Caspian Sea was ca. 12 meters higher than the present one reaching an absolute height of 16 meters below m.s.l. (Mayev, Lebedev, 1974). During the initial stage of the Holocene, ca. 10000-8000 B.P. there took an important regression of the Sea during which the level reached the point of 30-40 meters below m.s.l. The lowering of the erosial basis led to intensive erosion in the river valleys. During this period the Middle Asian Plain was crossed by a large river (designated by geologists as Uzboy river) which carried large amounts of silt. This transgression manifested itself in a row of minor transgressions and regressions (from 3 to 5 according to different authors). According to Rychagov (1974) the maximum magnitude was reached during the first transgression (20 meters below m.s.l.) (Fig. 1).
FIG. 1. — Fluctuation of the level of the Caspian Sea in the course of the Upper Pleistocene and the Holocene. According to paleobotanical investigations carried out by van Zeist (1967) for the lacustrine deposits in the Zagros piedmont area during the time span corresponding to the maximum advance of the Last Glaciation in the northern latitudes (22500-14000 B.P.) cold and dry steppes were spread in the area. The spectra corresponding to the time span from 14000 to 10000 B.P. reflect a gradual amelioration of the climat. The vegetation that occurred in the area between 10000 and 8000 B.P. is determined as an 'oak-pistaccio savanna'. The oak forests of the modern type were spread in the area after 8000 B.P. Basing on this data palaeobotanists now suggest that between 30000 and 14000 B.P. treeless vegetation was predominantly spread in the medium high mountains and upon the plateaus of the Middle East. The relict character of the forest vegetation now spread in the South Caspian plain validates a suggestion that these forests were preserved here during the coldest periods of the Upper Pleistocene. An environmental change manifested in the gradual spread of the forest vegetation in the medium high mountains sufficiently provided by increasing precipitation was fixed at 14000 and 10000 B.P. The last ecological change coinciding with an important regression in the Caspian Sea is related to the global shift in the environmental structure fixing the end of the Pleistocene — the beginning of the Holocene. The maximum increase in the precipitation corresponding to the maximum spread of forests vegetation and the beginning of the Holocene transgression of the Caspian Sea is dated to ca. 8000 B.P.
The paleobotanical data collected by G.N. Lisitsyna (1965) point to the existence of floodplain forests formed by Ulmus, A Inus, during the 4-th and 3-th millennia B.C. in areas now taken up by semi-arid vegetation. Arboreal species (tamarisk, poplar, ash, elm) were found in the cultural layers of the Shahr-i Sokhta sites in Seistan (Constantini, manuscript). These data are very informative, Seistan being one of the dryest areas in the Eastern Iran mountain area. On the basis of the present-day data one may assert that during the Upper Pleistocene upper palaeolithic sites were concentrated exclusively in the mountainous areas. Considerable number of the upper palaeolithic sites were concentrated in the South-Western Iranian mountain area. Paleolithic sites were situated exclusively in caves, mostly in medium high moutains (Sha- nidar, Yafteh, Warwasi, Ghar-i-Khar, Ghar Ajenah, Pa Sangar). The upper palaeolithic industries (Baradostian) appear in the Zagros mountains at early stages (Shanidar : ca. 36000 B.P. ; Jafteh : ca. 38000 B.P.) Judging from the faunal evidence (Perkins, 1960) the upper palaeolithic economy was based upon specialized hunting (Bos primigenius; Ovis orientalis); the upper palaeo- lithic settlers of the Southern Zagros were hunting mostly wild goat and red deer (Hole, Flannery, 1967). Ph. Smith (1971) determines the flint industry of the Baradostian as an unspecialised blade one. F. Hole and Flannery (1967) distinguish a later stage of the Baradostian as represented in the Pa Sangar and Warwasi caves. At the final stage of the Pleistocene in the conditions of gradually ameliorating climate the Baradostian industries were succeeded by the Zarzian industries. The settlement pattern of the Zarzian industries remained unchanged as compared to the Baradostian ones; the Zarzian layers were found either above the Baradostian ones in the same caves (Shanidar, Warwasi, Ghar-i- Khar) or in other caves but situated in the similar geomorphic conditions (Zarzi, Palegavra). The Zarzian industries are determined as blade industries with a great proportion of small sized tools including geometric microliths. The economical pattern of the Zarzian did not differ considerably from the Baradostian. In the Zarzian layer of the Shanidar cave (B 1) the same species as in the Baradostian layers predominate. An increase in number of shellfish points to increasing economic importance of the food collecting. This points in turn to the crisis of the hunting economy : meat deficiency was partly compensated by food collecting. Another area of concentration of Upper palaeolithic sites was the North-Iranian mountain area flanking the South-Caspian littoral plain (McBurney, 1964; 1968). Here a number of cave sites were discovered the oldest of which was dated to 12000 B.P. Of particular importance is the fact that in a number of sites changes in economical pattern coinciding in time with ecological changes were established (Fig. 2). In the oldest layers dated to 12000-11000 B.P. the economic pattern based on hunting of gazelle, red deer and seal was determined. About 10000 B.P. there occurred a profound change in the economic pattern. Food producing economy based upon sheep/goat breeding with an important role of cattle and of pig was established.
FIG. 2. — I he faunal content of the Ali Tappeh. Belt and Hotu caves (after C.B.M. McBurney, 1968).
The third area of concentration of upper palaeolithic population was the Ust' Urt plateau and neighbouring Greater and Little Balkhan ranges, the western continuation of the Kopet- Dagh system. It should be kept in mind that considerable areas of the Southern and South Eastern Caspian plain were flooded by sea waters and that in the vicinity of the plateau the Uzboy river was located. A number of upper palaeolithic and mesolithic sites was found on the Krasno- vodsk peninsula and in surrounding areas. The mesolithic sites were established in the Dam Dam Cheshme I and II caves and in the Djebel cave in the Balkhan range. The mesolithic site of Kaylyu, situated on the littoral deposits of the Caspian sea, makes it possible to date it to the time of the sea regression that started about 10000 B.P. The economy of the upper palaeolithic and mesolithic sites in the area was based upon hunting (gazelle being economically most impor- tant), upon fishing and food collecting. In a number of sites establishment of the incipient food production may be followed up in more details. Besides the South Caspian sites mentioned above this process is established in the B I layer of the Shanidar Cave and in the open site of Zawi Chemi Shanidar in the valley of the Greater Zab. According to D. Perkins (1960) in both sites the evidence of goat domestication is found. To a later stage one should classify the appearance of sites with a mixed economy in the hilly piedmont area of the Zagros mountains. Thus in the Qalat Jarmo site situated in the Chem- chemal plain (Braidwood and Howe, 1960) elements of food producing economy with the predo- minance of hunting and food collecting were firmly established. Investigation of sites situated in the Deh Luran Plain, in the piedmont of the South Western Iranian mountain area (Hole, Flannery Neely 1969) proves that during the earliest stages (Bus Mordeh; Ali Kosh : 10000-7000 BP) the bulk of the food was provided through hunting, food collecting and fishing. Notable changes in the economic pattern occurred there during the Sabz stage, 5500-5000. Hence forth a stable food producing economy is established in the area leading to marked increase in the population density. Considerable changes in the distribution of the natural economic zones occur in the course of the 6-th mill. BC. During this time there took place a considerable expansion of the zone of food producing economy. This process was caused, on the one hand by the overpopulation of the initial agricultural zones and, on the other, by the formation of ecological subsystems favorable to the establishment and evolution of a stable food producing economy. Thus, in the course of the 6-th mill. BC the settlements with the food producing economy appear in the intermontane valleys and in the submountain plains of the South-Western Iranian mountain area. This spread is fixed in the lowermost layers of the Giyan (Ghirshman 1938); Tall-i-Bakun (Egami, Masuda 1962), Tepe Yahya (Lamberg-Karlovsky 1972), Tall-i-Iblis (Caldwell 1967). Agricultural settlements evolve in the oases of the Central Iranian Plateau during the 6-th mill. BC, what is evidenced in the Hassuna related horizons of the Sialk 1^ (Ghirshman 1938; Dyson 1965). All the afore mentioned sites reflect the influence of Mesopotamian civilisation (Dyson 1965). Their spread into this region may be interpreted as a reflection of an eastward diffusion of part of the Mesopotamian civilisation. Another independent center of the food producing economy was situated in the North Iranian mountain area. The earliest agricultural settlements in this area are represented in the northern submountain plain and belong to the Djeitoun culture, the earliest sites of which are dated to the 6-th mill. BC (Masson 1971). The sites of the Djeitoun culture are situated mostly upon dejection cones of numerous small rivers crossing the submountain plain. According to palaeogeographical data these settlements were sufficiently provided by water. The economy of the Djeitoun sites was based upon husbandry (mostly sheep/goat), hunting (gazelle, onager, wild pig and sheep) and agriculture : Hordeum Listicum; Triticum vulgare, T. compactum (Masson, Sarianidi 1972). At about the same time the agricultural population spread into the southern submountain plain of the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains. It is attested by such sites as Turang Tepe and Yarim Tepe in the Ghorghan valley, revealing affinities to the Djeitun culture (Crowford 1963; Sarianidi 1970). During the 6-th millennium BC the neolithic Ghissar culture with an economy based primarily upon hunting and collecting appeared in the mountain areas of the South Tadjikistan (Ranov, Korobkova 1972). During the succeeding aeneolithic periods there was a considerable increase in the size of the settlements; the spread of the agricultural population to surrounding areas; an increase in population density : intensification of agriculture and of stock breeding based on sophsticated irrigation systems (Masson 1961; Hlopine 1973; Lisicyna 1969). Increase in population density led overpopulation which was repeatedly resolved by budding-off a part of the surplus population. Such budding off directed to the Central Iranian plateau occurred about 5000 BP and resulted in establishment of a group of settlements of Shahr-i Sokhta (Tosi, Lamberg-Karlovsky 1973). At the same time a part of the surplus population was spreading northwards, to the Middle Asian plains, acquiring an economy based upon hunting and food collecting (culture of Kelteminar : Vinogradov 1968). At the final stage of the 2-nd mill. BC agricultural settlements appear upon the alluvial Misrian and Chat plains in the South-Eastern Caspian plain (Masson 1954). Basing upon palaeogeographical investigations (Lisicyna, Priscepenko 1972; Kes', Lisicyna 1975) a conclusion was made that during the end of the 2-nd - beginning of the 1-st mill. BC there existed an important agricultural center, based upon sophisticated irrigational scheme using the waters of the Sumbar and Atrek rivers. The main crops were barley and wheat. The irrigated area reached 100 ha.
FIG. 3. — The Sumbar Valley (a scheme).
Sites culturally related to the mentioned above were discovered in the middle stretches of the Sumbar valley crossing the ranges of the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountain (Hlopine 1973, 1974, 1975). The sites (settlements and cemeteries) are situated inside the lake-like widening of the terrace, upon heavily dissected loess-covered terrace and upon the flood-plain (Fig. 3). Summing up the data as outlined above one may establish the following stages in the evolution of the eco-social systems in the area. 1. 30000-10000 BP. Arid climate and treeless vegetation. A high level of the Caspian Sea. The settled area comprises the medium high mountain of south-western and northern Iran, the Ust' Urt plateau. The economy is based upon hunting, fishing and food collecting. About 14000 BP the economic importance of food collecting increases. 2. 10000-8000 BP. Increase in precipitation. Forest type vegetation appears in the Zagros piedmont area. An abrupt fall in the level of the Caspian Sea. Incipient food production in the piedmont area of the Zagros mountains and in the Northern Iran. 3. 8000-3000 BP. Maximum increase in precipitation. Forest type vegetation covers the piedmonts of the Western and Northern Iranian mountains as well as the flood-plains of the river valleys. The natural-economic zone of food-producing economy extends into the submountain plains and intermountain valleys of South-Western Iran; the oases of the Central Iranian plateau; the northern and southern submountain plains of the North Iranian mountains. About 5000 BP agricultural settlements appear in the alluvial plains of the Eastern Iranian mountain area. Between 3500 and 3000 BP agricultural settlements appear in the alluvial plains of the South Eastern Caspian area and in the intermountain valleys of the Turkmeno-Khorassan mountains (Fig. 4).
FIG. 4. — Iran and Central Asia during the Middle Holocene (8 000-3 000 BP). REFERENCES
BRAIDWOOD R.J., HOWE B., 1960. — Prehistoric investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. Studies in ancient oriental civilisations, 31, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago. CALDWELL J.R. — The excavations at TaII-i-Iblis. Illinois State University. Preliminary reports 9. CONSTANTINI L., 1974. — Preliminary report on the palaeobotanical finds and their possible socio- economic interpretation. Roma. CROWFORD V., 1963. — Beside the Kara Su. BMMA. DOLUKHANOV P.M., 1975. — Ökosoziale und soziokulturelle Systeme in der Vorgeschichte. In : Moderne Probleme der Archäologie. Berlin. DYSON R.H., 1965. — Problems in the relative chronology of Iran. In : Chronologies in the Old World Archaeology. R.W. Ehrich ed. Chicago. EGAMI N., MASUDA S., 1962. — The excavations at Tall-i-Bakun, 1956. Institute of Oriental Research, University if Tokyo. GHIRSHMAN R., 1938. — Fouilles de Sialk, pres de Kashan, t. I. Musee du Louvre, Departement des antiquités orientales. Serie archéologique, IV, Paris. HOLE F., FLANNERY K., 1968. — The prehistory of southwestern Iran : a preliminary report. PPS n.s., XXXIII.
HOLE F., FLANNERY K., NEELY J., 1969. — Prehistory and human ecology of the Deh Luran plain. Ann Arbor.
HLOPIN I.N. — Segmientaciya v istorii piervobytnogo obsciestva. Voprosy istorii, 1968, No. 8. HLOPIN I.N., 1973. — The ancient farmers of southern Turkmenia. EW, XXIII. HLOPIN I.N., HLOPINA L.I., PYATKIN B.N., 1974. — Raskopki v dolinie Sumbara. Arheologicieskiie otkrytiya 1973 goda. Moskva. KEs' A.S., LISICYNA G.N. — Drievniie orosytel'nye sooruzieniya yugo-zapadnoy Turkmenii (po ma- tierialam rabot 1969-1971 gg.). Sovetskaya Arheologiya I, 1975. KOROBKOVA G.F., 1975. — Kul'turnyie i lokal'nyie varianty mezolita i neolita Sriedniey Azii po ma- terialam kamiennoy industrii. Sovetskaya Arheologiya, 3, 1975. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY C.C., 1972. — Tepe Yahya 1971. Mesopotamia and the Indo-Iranian borderlands. Iran X. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY C.C., Tosi M. — Shahr-i Sokhta and Tepe Yahya : tracks on the earliest history of the Iranian plateau. EW, XXIII, 1973. LISICYNA G.N., 1969. — The earliest irrigation in Turkmenia. Antiquity, XLIII, 172. LISICYNA G.N., PRISCPENKO L.V., 1972. — Til'ki-depe i niekotoryie voprosy paleogeografii yugo- zapadnoy Turkmenii. Kratkyie soobscieniya Instituta Arheologii, 132. MARKov G. Ye, 1966. — Grot Dam-Dam-Cesme 2 v vostocnom Prikaspii. Sovetskaya Arheologiva, 1966, 2. MASSON V.M., 1954. — Drievnyaya kul'tura Dakhistana (istoriko-arheologiceskiye ocierki). Leningrad. MASSON V.M., 1961. — The first farmers in Turkmenia. Antiquity XXXV. MASSON V.M., SARIANIDI V.I., 1972. — Turkmenia before Achaemenids. London.
MAYEV Ye. G., LEBEDEV L.I., 1974. — Niekotoryie cierty mangyslakskoy i dagestanskoy stadiy drievniego Kaspiya. In : Komplieksnyie issliedovaniya Kaspiyskogo morya, vyp. 4. Moskva. OKLADNIKOV A.P., 1956. — Piesciera Dzebel pamyatnik drievniey kul'tury prikaspiyskikh pliemyon. Trudy Yutake, VII, Askhabad. OKLADNIKOV A.P., 1966. — Vierhniepaleoliticieskoye i mezoliticieskoye vriemya. In : Sriedniya Aziya v epokhu kamnya i bronzy. Moskva. RANOV V.A., KOROBKOVA G.F., 1971. — Tutkaul - mnogosloynoie posielieniye gissarskoy kul'tury. Sovetskaja Arkheologija, 2. PETROV M.P. — Iran (fiziko-geograficeskiy ocierk). Moskva, 1955. PERKINS D., 1960. — The faunal remains of the Shanidar cave and Zawi Chemi Shanidar. Sumer. XVI. RYCAGOV G.I., 1974. — Pozdiepleistocenovaya istoriya Kaspiyskogo morya. In : Kompleksnoye izucieniyp. Kaspiyskogo morya, vyp. 4, Moskva. SARIANIDI V.I., 1971. — South Turkmenia and northern Iran. Ties and differences in very ancient times. EW, XXI, 3-4. SMITH P.E.L., 1971. — The palaeolithic of Iran. Melanges offerts a A. Varagnac. Paris. McBuRNEY C.B.M., 1964. — Preliminary report on Stone Age reconnaissance in north-eastern Iran. P.P.S., n.s., XXX. McBuRNEY C.B.M., 1968. — The cave of Ali Tappeh and the epipalaeolithic North-eastern Iran. P.P.S., n.s., XXXIV. V AVILOV N.I., 1965. — Centry proiskhozdieniya kul'turnukh rastieniy. Izbrannyie trudy, tom 5, Moskva. VINIGRADOV A.V., 1968. — Neoliticieskiye pamyatniki Khorezma. Materialy Khorezmskoy ekspedicii, 8, Moskva. ZEIST van W., 1967. — The Late Quaternary vegetational history of Western Iran. Revue de Paleo- botanique et Palynologie, 2. Colloques Internationaux du C.N.R.S. N° 567. — LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES À LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE.
TEPE YAHYA AND THE END OF THE 4TH MILLENNIUM ON THE IRANIAN PLATEAU
Daniel POTTS Harvard University
ABSTRACT
The Period IVC complex at Tepe Yahya is focused upon in this report. These materials are used to outline the Jamdat Nasr and Proto-Elamite phenomena which are of major importance at the end of the fourth millennium on the Iranian Plateau. This preliminary clarification, in turn, allows us to better perceive southern Turkmenia's role in relation to the Iranian Plateau. Furthermore, these relationships are only part of an increasingly integrated proto-urban development at this time involving the interaction of various regional centers in lowland Mesopotamia and Khuzistan, the Iranian Plateau, the Quetta and Mundigak areas, and southern Turkmenia. RÉSUMÉ Tepe Yahya and tlie end of the 4tii millennium 01/ the Iranian Plateau
Il est traité dans cette communication de la culture de la Période IVC à Tépé Yahya. Les matériaux de cette culture permettent de mettre en évidence les manifestations, sur le plateau iranien à la fin du IV" millé- naire, des éléments de type Jemdet Nasr et proto-élamites. Cette mise au point préliminaire, à son tour, nous permet de mieux entrevoir le rôle de la Turkménie du Sud dans ses rapports avec le Plateau iranien. De plus. ces relations ne constituent qu'une partie d'un développement proto-urbain de plus en plus intégré, impliquant. à cette époque, l'interaction de divers centres régionaux de la plaine mésopotamienne, du Khuzistan, du Plateau Iranien, des zones de Quetta et Mundigak, et de la Turkménie du Sud.
The end of the fourth millennium in western Asia saw the crystallization of most of the important social and economic developments which we normally associate with complex societies. It therefore seemed a worthwhile contribution to this congress to offer a few speculations which may eventually help in the elucidation of the relations between the proto-urban configuration on the Iranian Plateau and contemporary developments in Central Asia at this time (1). Specifically
(1) I would like to thank Prof. Jean Deshayes, Vice-President of the Sorbonne and organizer of the present colloquium, for his gracious invitation to present a paper. Thanks must also be extended to Dr. Maurizio Tosi and Dr. Raffaele Biscione of IsMEO who have put so much data from Shahr-i Sokhta at my disposal; to Dr. Pierre Amiet, Curator of Oriental Antiquities at the Louvre, who generously offered his time to show me the important corpus of glyptic material from the Proto-Elamite levels at Susa; and to Prof. Hans J. Nissen and Mr. Allan Zagarell, Freie Universitat Berlin, and Mr. Peder Mortensen, Moesgård, for their very helpful criticisms and suggestions. Finally, I must especially thank Prof. C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky of Harvard University who, as director of the excavations at Tepe Yahya. has allowed me to participate in the excavations and to study the material from the Period IVC complex. I shall address myself to the Proto-Elamite phenomenon on the Plateau and the southern Turkme- nian Namazga III culture. The problem of relations between the Iranian Plateau and southern Turkmenia has been examined from various points of view already (2). Within this literature, we can distinguish three main trends of thought. At one extreme, southern Turkmenia during the Namazga III period is viewed as a passive recipient of influences from Mesopotamia and the Iranian Plateau carried by invading tribes (3). On the basis of ceramic parallels and similarities in figurines and pins, influences from Sialk 1114-7, Hissar Ic-IIa, and Giyan V have been suggested by Professors Masson and Sarianidi (4) who write : Apparently some time at the end of the fourth and the beginning of the third millennium BC (the Jemdet Nasr period). the territory of ancient Iran was the scene of major tribal migrations which reached the fertile oases of southern Turkmenia. It is quite possible that this migration reflected the general historical situation in the Jemdet Nasr period when the formation of an early urban society was in progress. Ancient Iran, with its rich deposits of metal ores and building stone, held an attraction for the newly formed states and encouraged their expansionist tendencies in an earsterly direction... There is indisputable evidence that it was during the Namazga III period that southern Turkmenia established definite contacts with far off Mesopotamia.
In contrast to this view, I.N. Hlopin has strongly defended the indigenous development of southern Turkmenia during the entire Geoksjur period. He writes (5) : There was not one group of ornamental motifs... which did not originate from the southern Turk- menian material; this means that there is no point in looking for the source of the Geoksjur polychrome painting outside the boundaries of this zone, and still less in wanting to extend such research to such distant zones of the Near East as southern Mesopotamia and Elam (10). The population of these areas was extraneous to the historical evolution of a small group of related sedentary agricultural commu- nities, set at the extreme northeast of the agricultural oikumene of the Near East.
These two views, representing the opposite ends of the spectrum, may now be juxtaposed against that of C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and M. Tosi whose excavations at Tepe Yahya and Shahr-i Sokhta offer us a new understanding of the Iranian Plateau, particularly during the fourth and third millennia BC (6). The new data from these sites allow us, I believe, to discard both the invasionist and isolationist positions, and to postulate a more complex form of interaction involving the lowland cultures of Mesopotamia and Khuzistan; the Plateau settlements in Fars, Damghan, Kerman, Kashan, and Sistan; southern Turkmenia; and the Quetta and Mundigak areas. While Shahr-i Sokhta presents possibly the most convincing tie yet discovered of any Plateau site
(2) See, for example, V.M. Masson, "The First Farmers of Turkmenia", Antiquity, XXXV, No. 139, 1961, pp. 203-213; Id., "The Urban Revolution in South Turkmenia", Antiquity, XLII, No. 167, 1968, pp. 178- 187; V.M. Masson and V.I. Sarianidi, Central Asia. Turkmenia Before the Achaemenids, Thames & Hudson, London, 1972; R. Biscione, "Dynamics of an early South Asian urbanization : the first period of Shahr-i Sokhta and its connections with Southern Turkmenia", in N. Hammond, ed., South Asian Archaeology, Duckworth, London, 1973; C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and M. Tosi, "Shahr-i Sokhta and Tepe Yahya: Tracks on the Earliest History of the Iranian Plateau", East and West, NS Vol. 23, No. 1-2, 1973, pp. 21-58; M. Tosi, "Early Urban Evolution and Settlement Patterns in the Indo-Iranian Borderland", in C. Renfrew, ed., The explanation of culture change: models in prehistory, Duckworth, London, 1973, pp. 429-446; I.N. Hlopin, "Ancient Farmers in the Tedzen Delta", East and West, NS Vol. 24, No. 1-2, 1974, pp. 51-88. (3) Masson, "The First Farmers...", cit., p. 213; Masson and Sarianidi, op. cit., p. 76 ff. (4) Ibid., p. 90. (5) Hlopin, op. cit., pp. 70-71. (6) C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, "Prehistoric Central Asia", Antiquity, XLVII, No. 185, 1973, pp. 43-46; Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit.; Tosi, op. (-it. to southern Turkmenia, Mundigak, and Quetta (7), it does not to date, in my opinion, provide as clear an insight into over all trends cross the Plateau during Period I as does Yahya IVC. Yet the insight which Yahya provides into the Proto-Elamite and Jamdat Nasr phenomena, to which Shahr-i Sokhta is in some way related, together with Shahr-i Sokhta's relation to developments in southern Turkmenia allow one to sketch an interactive dynamic across Western and Central Asia that only ten years ago would have been unthinkable. With this in mind, I shall attempt to outline the late fourth millennium Proto-Elamite phenomenon as seen from Tepe Yahya (8). Any discussion of the Proto-Elamite phenomenon within Iran becomes inextricably bound up with a discussion of Jamdat Nasr Mesopotamia. It was in fact from the vantage point of the latter that I began to work towards an understanding of the former. One can point to numerous finds identified as "Jamdat Nasr" made with increasing frequency over the years on sites outside of Mesopotamia, specifically in Iran and on the Persian Gulf (9). Such an identification necessarily begs the question : what is Jamdat Nasr ? When one looks at the ways in which the term has been used, e.g. as a chronological period, a pottery style, a cylinder seal style, and a "culture", it becomes clear that a clarification of the term and an understanding of what is meant by those scholars who use it, both inside and outside of Mesopotamia, is necessary in order to understand the situation on the Iranian Plateau at the end of the fourth millennium.
The Jamdat Nasr complex was first typologically defined at Uruk in level III of the Eanna precinct and at Khafajah in Sin Temples I-IV (10). However, a look at a number of other Meso- potamian sites with late fourth millennium components indicates that the single typological index associated with a Jamdat Nasr level which appears to be temporally restricted to the period is polychrome pottery (11). To be sure, others are cited, yet these invariably have wider distribu-
(7) Biscione, op. cit.; Biscione, "Relative Chronology and Pottery Connections Between Shahr-i Sokhta and Mundigak, Eastern Iran", Memorie dell'Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia Umana, Vol. II, Rome 1974, pp. 131-145; Tosi, op. cit.; Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit. (8) The original work on this theme was presented to the Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, in my undergraduate honors thesis entitled The Late 4th Millennium Universe of a Highland Community in //-a/! : Problems of Proto-Elam and Jamdat Nasr Mesopotamia, Harvard University, Cambridge, 1975. (9) Among these can be cited Sialk, Giyan, Susa, Tal-i Ghazir, the Hulailan Valley in Luristan, the Barbar Temple on Bahrain, the Buraimi Oasis, Tarut Island, Tal-i Malyan, Tal-i Iblis, Shahr-i Sokhta, Hissar, and Tepe Yahya. (10) P. Delougaz, Pottery from the Diyala Region, OIP Vol. LXIII, Chicago, 1952; A. Perkins, The Comparative Archaeology of Early Mesopotamia, SAOC 25, Chicago, 1963; B. Al-Soof, "The Relevance of the Diyala Sequence to South Mesopotamian Sites", Iraq, XXIX, pt. 2, 1967, pp. 133-142. (11) I am aware that polychrome sherds have also been found at Uruk in levels dated to Period IV, both in the Eanna precinct and in the Deep Sounding (A. v. Haller, "Die Keramik der archaischen Schichten von Uruk", Vierter vorliiufiger Bericht... Uruk-Warka..., Berlin, 1932, p. 36; E. Heinrich, "Arbeiten in Eanna, im Stadtgebiet und im Südbau", Fiinfter vorliiufiger Bericht... Uruk-Warka..., Berlin, 1934, p. 16). Falkenstein even writes: "Die von S. Langdon in Zusammenhang mit den Tontafeln beobachtete sogenannte 'Gemdet Nasr-Keramik' - neben unbemalter vor allem polychrom bemalter Ware - gehört in Uruk den Schichten IV-II an, ist also nicht so eng begrenzt wie die Zeit der Tontafeln aus Gemdet Nasr. In der Archaischen Schicht I erscheint sie dagegen nur noch vereinzelt" (Archaische Texte aus Uruk, Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forsch- ungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka, Band 2, Harrassowitz, Leipzig, 1936, p. 14). In this regard, I can only say that this earliest occurrence of polychrome, if it is in fact not a contamination from higher levels, together with the marked paucity of its presence at Uruk, cause some distinct problems in my model. If these represent, however, the first occurrences of polychrome, it seems nevertheless safe to say that elsewhere in Mesopotamia, Khuzistan, the Persian Gulf, and the Iranian Plateau, the contemporaneity and fullest expression of Poly- chrome comes rather uniformly at a slightly later date, i.e. c. 3000 B.C. tions in time (12). For this reason, I have called Jamdat Nasr polychrome a "horizon style" after Willey and Phillips (13). Yet if polychrome is an accurate temporal index, it is hardly an inclusive one. R. Adams and H.J. Nissen have noted its scarcity in the Uruk area, for example, and concluded that as a ceramic type it is so rare that one could hardly suggest those sites at which it is present constitute the sum total of settlements inhabited at this time (14). It is equally impossible to use its characteristic of being a horizon style to tie sites in Iran and on the Persian Gulf into the Mesopotamian chronology. There are even fewer sites in these regions dated to the period in question which have polychrome. Clearly the definition of a temporal horizon is something quite different from the definition of a cultural phase or period. The latter must be characterized by an entire set of cultural manifes- tations which are both restricted in time and space (15). I would rather suggest that the notion of a "cultural horizon" as that
primarily spatial continuity represented by cultural traits and assemblages whose nature and mode of occurrence permit the assumption of a broad and rapid spread which the horizon style allows us to define (16), further lets us define in this case a cultural "universe" (17). By that I mean to subsume the temporal and spatial characteristics of the horizon, and suggest participation in certain shared activities. Rather than defining any sort of coherent cultural province either in Mesopotamia, Khuzistan, the Persian Gulf, or the Iranian Plateau, I suggest that perhaps the polychrome pottery may be bound up with a specific activity which one may say is cross-culturally performed. Whether this activity was a manifestation of political, economic, or ideological motivations, I suggest that this distinctive ceramic, which contrasts substantially with preceding traditions and enjoyed a relatively short lifespan, was intended to be immediately recognizable and functioned within the process in question (18). I suggest that polychrome is more than just a "luxury" ware. Hence, the selective distribution of polychrome both in Mesopotamia and across the Iranian Plateau becomes a main focus of interest. In Iran, both in lowland Khuzistan and on the Iranian Plateau, we are faced with quite a different phenomenon. It is one characterized by both local traditions with considerable regional integrity, and, at the same time, we find evidence of yet another "universe", the Proto-Elamite. Those site components known as Proto-Elamite illustrate quite clearly what I mean by the term "universe". For spread over an enormous area and including the sites of Susa, Sialk, Godin Tepe,
(12) These include bevel-rim bowls, nose lugs, twisted handles, drooping spouts, ceramic wall cones, conical cups, and various glyptic styles. On the definition of the period ceramically and for good discussions of typo- logical indices, see : R. McC. Adams, Land Behind Baghdad, Chicago, 1965; Id. and H.J. Nissen, The Uruk Countryside : The Natural Setting of Urban Societies, Chicago, 1972; McGuire Gibson, The City and Area of Kish, Miami, 1972; D. Hansen, "The Relative Chronology of Mesopotamia. Pt. II", in R. Ehrich, Chronolo- gies in Old World Archaeology, Chicago, 1965; and G. Johnson, Local Exchange and Early State Development in Southwestern Iran, Ann Arbor, 1973. On problems in the temporal specificity of Jamdat Nasr seals, see : E. Porada, "The Relative Chronology of Mesopotamia. Pt. I", in Ehrich, op. cit., pp. 133-200; A.L. Farkas, "Review of D.J. Wiseman, Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum", Bibliotheca Orien- talis, XXI, 1964, pp. 196-197; and P. Amiet, "La Glyptique de TAcropole (1969-1971)", Cahiers de la Dele- gation Archéologique Française en Iran, I, Paris, 1971, pp. 217-233. (13) G.R. Willey and P. Phillips, Method and Theory in American Archaeology, Chicago, 1958, p. 32. (14) Adams and Nissen, op. cit., p. 100. (15) Willey and Phillips, op. cit., p. 22. (16) Ibid., p. 33. (17) Potts, op. cit., p. 53. (18) Henry Wright's work in attempting to delineate a grammar of design on Jamdat Nasr polychrome jars with specific symbolic meaning attached to motif arrangement may bear on this matter. Tal-i Ghazir, Tal-i Malyan (Ansan), Shahr-i Sokhta, and Tepe Yahya, we find Proto-Elamite account tablets which I suggest are demonstrative of common participation in a particular phenomenon. Moreover, it is clear that this phenomenon, whether it be, for example, an expanding political or economic hegemony, cross-cuts cultural boundaries. In each area one can document a coherent regional development within a particular historical tradition which manifests itself archaeologically in a distinct corpus of artifacts, and undoubtedly was characterized by certain ethno-linguistic differences in antiquity as well. That these traditions did not, in most cases, develop in complete isolation from one another is clear. However, their peculiarity, indeed given the substantial distances separating them, is certainly more notable. It is against this tapestry of regional development, then, that the selective distribution of sites with Proto-Elamine tablets, as, in some way, part of a unifying structure, becomes particularly important. It is most interesting to note, furthermore, that on every site dated to this period which played a role in the Proto-Elamine universe as demonstrated by the presence of a particular form of Proto-Elamite tablets, with the sole exception of Shahr-i Sokhta, Jamdat Nasr polychrome pottery has been found as well (19). This includes Tal-i Ghazir, Susa, Tal-i Malyan, Tepe Yahya, and Sialk. Once again, one would hardly argue that these sites represent the extent of settled occupation in Iran at the time. Moreover, Proto-Elamite tablets would appear on stratigraphic grounds to pre- and post-date the Jamdat Nasr phenomenon (20). Yet, I suggest we seek the understanding of the Jamdat Nasr and Proto-Elamite phenomena in that selective distribution of sites wherein both polychrome and Proto-Elamite tablets are found. Always associated with these two classes of finds, moreover, are cylinder seals and sealings which can be paralleled in Mesopo- tamia and Khuzistan, bevel-rim bowls, and other items which point to the lowlands, as well as aspects of the local cultural tradition. If we now turn to an examination of the Period IVC complex at Tepe Yahya, we have a clearer view of what the nature of this interaction described above may have been (21). Well over 400 sq. m. of IVC exposure have been cleared in the south step-trench to date. This comprises principally the remains of a single, large, multi-roomed building constructed upon a combination of levelled Period V domestic architecture and rubble fill. Standard brick size in the construction was 48 X 24 X 8 cm. A particularly interesting aspect of the building is its drainage system which included such features as a segmented fired-clay "pipe", square in cross-section, and a stone-lined pool (22). Over thirty Proto-Elamite account tablets and eighty-four tablet blanks (23) have been recovered in Rooms 1, 2, 7 and courtyard 3. According to P. Meriggi, they parallel most closely
(19) The polychrome found at Shar-i Sokhta (Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit., Figs. 139-140) does not belong to this category. (20) This is clear both at Susa and Godin V. (21) See, principally, C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, "The Proto-Elamite Settlement at Tepe Yahya", Iran, IX, 1971, pp. 87-96; Id., "Tepe Yahya, 1971 : Mesopotamia and the Indo-Iranian Bordelands", Iron, X, 1972, pp. 89-100; Id., "Urban Interaction on the Iranian Plateau: Excavations at Tepe Yahya 1967-1973", Pro- ceedings of the British Academy, LIX, London, 1974; and Lamberg-Karlovsky, this volume. (22) Cf. a similar situation in contemporary levels of the Eanna precinct, Uruk. Here, Heinrich notes : "Immer wieder treffen wir in den archaischen Schichten und ganz besonders in Schicht III auf Anlagen, die Zeugnis davon ablegen, dass fliessendes Wasser in den Bauwerken der alten Zeiten eine erhebliche Rolle gespielt haben muss", Heinrich, op. cit., p. 10. (23) In reference to the presence of tablet blanks at Yahya, we again find an analogous situation at Uruk during Period III. Falkenstein writes : "Tonklumpen, an denen die Spuren der knetenden Finger noch deutlich zu erkennen sind, sind zusammen mit schreibfertig gemachten, aber nicht beschrifteten Tafeln in dem grossen Depot im Planquadrat Z XVI2 gefunden worden", Falkensten, op. cit., p. 5. those datable to Susa Cc (24). F. Vallat compares them instead to Susa level 16 (25). Of particular interest are three tablets recovered in 1975 from Room 2 whose character and stratification suggest a graduated complexity in development formerly not seen at Yahya (26). The Period IVC corpus of seals and sealings is of particular importance for our discussion of developments both at Yahya and across the Iranian Plateau. Stylistic parallels point unquestion- ably to Khafajah, Sin Temples I-V, and to Proto-Elamite Susa (27). Similarities are in most cases so close that I would suggest goods are being sealed at and transported from both of these sites to Yahya. It does seem that at least some of the Yahya sealings, however, were made for sealing doors and not storage jars (28). Intestingly, the seals from Khafajah which most closely parallel the Yahya sealings come notably from three particular contexts: Room 39 of Temple II; Room 24 of Temple IV; and Room 19 of Temple V. Rooms 24 and 39 are each the central cella of the shrine in different phases and are associated characteristically with an impressive array of figurines, beads, inlaid stone vessels, amulets, and animal pendants. Room 19 is a small storage room off of the main room of the shrine which yielded nevertheless the largest single group of goods, again comparable to those described above, from the temple during that phase (29). Of equal importance of course has been the discovery of numerous Jamdat Nasr polychrome bi-conical storage jars within the building. These have been found in clear association with bevel-rim bowls, conical cups (30):. and aspects of the local tradition including burnished greyware, black-on-buff, and plain buff wares. In short, the IVC building and its contents suggest a major administrative operation being undertaken at Yahya. My interpretation of these discoveries consists of the following observations. Nothing about this rather remarkable assemblage suggests to me a general diffusion of ideas or
(24) P. Meriggi, La Scrittura Proto-Efamica, Parte In : La scrittura e il contenuto dei Testi, Academia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1971. Meriggi suggests that the tablets refer to the provision of seed corn by a central authority to certain "institutions" at seed time. (25) F. Vallat, "Les documents epigraphiques de I'Acropole (1969-1971)", in Cahiers..., cit., p. 243. (26) C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, personal communication. As the final plan of the IVC building is just being completed, the room numbers I use are still preliminary. (27) I would like to thank P. Amiet for his comments on the stylistic analysis of the IVC glyptic material in my thesis. (28) M. Tosi, personal communication. Dr. Tosi has seen the most recently discovered sealings from Yahya, and has had access to data compiled by E. Fiandra. Ministero dei Beni Cultural!. Rome, whose functional analyses of a wide-ranging corpus of sealings has demonstrated that many must have been used to seal doors and not pots. (29) These are interesting associations given the overall secular character of the Yahya complex and the decidedly religious nature of the Sin Temples, particularly if, as I have suggested, goods are being shipped from Khafajah to Yahya. (30) As has already been pointed out, the bevel-rim bowls found at Yahya are smaller yet taller than the classic Mesopotamian variety. At this time, we seem to have two distinct sizes at Yahya. If they did function within a centralized system of ration distribution as Nissen has suggested (see also Johnson, op. cit., and H. Wright's forthcoming Tepe Farukhabad report), then their small numbers at Yahya in comparison with sites in Mesopotamia and Khuzistan is indeed curious. Nissen (personal communication) has also raised an objection to the contention that conical cups exist at Yahya. (Note, although they have often been called solid-footed chalices, this is, I believe, a terminological error). I would argue that a) differences in ceramic fabric betweeen the Yahya cups and those from Mesopotamia suggest local manufacture, while b) differences in size may imply a different ration. Nevertheless, their very marked similarity to the Mesopotamian variety, their context, and their associations in the IVC building suggest to me that they functioned in the same way in both areas. (See Adams and Nissen, op. cit., p. 99; and H.J. Nissen, "Grabung in den Quadraten K/L XII in Uruk-Warka", Baghdader Mitteilungen, Vol. 5, Mann, Berlin, 1970. influence such as the term oikurnene implies (31). For this reason, I prefer the term "universe" which denotes something quite different, i.e. participation in directed activity which is restricted in time but not in space and adheres to no cultural boundaries. The nature of the activity being undertaken in the IVC building, is, of course, the problem here. Regardless of whether that activity was undertaken for essentially political, economic, or ideological reasons, there are, in my opinion, no indications in Period V of a bureaucratic structure in the Soghun Valley capable of managing these transactions. I suggest that a small number of individuals from one of the larger Proto-Elamine centers further west such as Susa or possibly Tal-i Malyan were operating with the IVC building (32). I would not imagine a full colonization although the degree of discontinuity between Periods VA and IVC is marked. Fine black-on-red ware which constitutes one-third to one-half of the VA corpus disappears in IVC. Furthermore, the abandonment of over forty sites in the neighboring Dolatabad Valley at the end of Period V leaving Yahya as the only major settlement in the area during IVC times is of great interest (33). Such a drastic alteration of settlement pattern may be linked to the functions of the IVC complex. On the other hand, certain wares do continue from Period V including black-on- buff, grey burnished, and bevel-rim bowls in very small quantities, and a number of plain ware forms. Some of these are obviously southeastern wares and can be clearly related to sites in Baluchistan, principally Bampur and other sites in the area such as Chah Hussaini, Khurab, Hazar Mardi, Damin, Tepe Nurabad, and Qala-i Sardegah (34). Continuity of local forms, however, need in no way exclude the hypothesis of the inclusion of foreign elements at Yahya (35). As indicated above, I suggest goods are being shipped from Khuzistan and the Diyala to Yahya. Direct transfers with the latter region suggest that Yahya's role at this time is seemingly more complex than, for example, that of Godin Tepe where, at a slightly earlier date, the existence of a merchant colony from Susa has been postulated (36). We have, unfertunately, no evidence
(31) The term oikumene has, in my opinion, been frequently misused, particularly in regard to the Proto- Elamite phenomenon. It was originally applied to the Ubaid period by R. Braidwood and B. Howe, which they felt was characterized by a "flow of general ideas... the dispersion of certain gross traits and over-all know-how but not necessarily specific ways of doing things. The latter are much more likely to have developped locally, or on the basis of existing regional cultural patterns" (quoted in D. Whitcomb, The Proto-Elamite Period of Tall-i Ghazir, unpub. M.A. thesis, U. of Georgia, 1971). Caldwell suggested that the term be applied to a "Jamdat Nasr" culture (Whitcomb, op. cit., p. 63). In my opinion, there is nothing general about either the Jamdat Nasr or the Proto-Elamite phenomenon. They are, if anything, highly goal-oriented. On this important distinction between "broad social needs" and the organized, determined pursuit of goals, see R. Adams, "Anthropological Perspectives on Ancient Trade". Current Anthropology, Vol. 15. No. 3, pp. 239-258. (32) It is still too early to assess Tal-i Malyan's role within the process, one that we know to have been great later in history. See W. Sumner's excevation reports in Iran, X. XI, and XII; J. Hansman, "Elamites, Achaemenians and Anshan", Iran, X, pp. 101-124; and E. Reiner, "The Location of Ansan", Revue d'Assy- riologie et d'ArcheoIogie Orientate, LXVII, I, 1973, pp. 57-62. (33) This is based on survey data collected by Ms. Martha Prickett. (34) Observations drawn from my own studies of collections from the Bampur excavations conducted by Miss B. De Cardi, and the materials gathered by Sir Aurel Stein in southeastern Iran. (35) The most telling illustration of this fact comes from Kiiltepe where the excavator remarks: "The artefacts found in Levels II and lb reflect the remarkable degree to which the Assyrian colonists adopted the culture of their Hatti neighbors. Except for the clay tablets, with their cuneiform script and distinctly Mesopo- tamian cylinder-seal impressions, all the artefacts of these levels are in the native style. If the tablets and their sealed envelopes had not been found, in fact, we might never have suspected the existence of the merchant colony", T. Ozgii?, "An Assyrian Trading Post", Scientific American, No. 208, pt. 2, 1963, pp. 96-106. (36) H. Weiss and T. Cuyler Young, Jr., "The Merchants of Susa. Godin V and Plateau-Lowland Relations in the Late Fourth Millennium B.C.", Iran, XIII, 1975. The nature of any possible relations between Godin and the Diyala still seems unclear. Dr. Louis D. Levine (personal communication) has suggested to me that although Godin V precedes the Yahya IVC settlement, the incised biconical storage jars found in association with account as yet for commodities which may have been moving between these regions. Moreover, the many varieties of polychrome storage jars found in Western Asia suggest, in my opinion, that while the existence of these jars, and, in Iran, their association with Proto-Elamite tablets, seals and sealings, and bevel-rim bowls, identifies common participation within a particular process, they were probably produced at the various local centers discussed and not imported from a particular center to all the others. While clearly constituting a coherent class of artifacts, they are identificably region-specific, both in various parts of Mesopotamia and Khuzistan, and on the Iranian Plateau. I align the above data in the following way: sealings and seals demonstrate the receipt and export of goods; tablets inscribed on the site suggest bookkeeping of local and/or inter-regional transactions; and polychrome jars, along with the above, indicate participation in an operation involving both western lowland and Plateau sites. This data clearly suggests an administrative function. A lack of evidence for commodities prompts one to see a political or ideological phenomenon rather than an economic one (37). Yet these kinds of distinctions can be understood and the nature of the IVC complex can be clarified only within the particular historical social context extant in Mesopotamia and Khuzistan at the end of the fourth millennium. Although the texts make this one of the most difficult historical periods in Western Asia in which to clarify the character of social and economic relations, we may suggest the following (38). Surplus production and social stratification would appear developped. A temple estate, judging by the Uruk III and Sin Temple evidence, appears to have consolidated itself, while a system of ration payments and the distribution of certain agricultural necessities are being performed by an administrative authority. Craft specialization and long-distance trade can be documenter, and economic accounts are now being kept. I suggest that the IVC complex at Tepe Yahya is a reflection of these social trends, and that these trends signify an increasing degree of segmentation and stratification within the social order of those groups in the Proto-Elamite universe on the Iranian Plateau, while at the same time indicating a greater degree of integration across the bounds of regional traditions. Concurrently, this integration may be linked to an intensification of central authority, probably residing at Susa, which may have exercised its influence around the Plateau upon regional traditions in different ways. Thus, the situation in Sialk IV would appear to be one of much greater and direct dependence upon Susa than at Yahya or Shahr-i Sokhta for example (39). The material from this latter site is particularly important in this discussion and several points bear mentioning. During Period I Shahr-i Sokhta is very clearly involved with Mundigak IV, and with develop- ments in the Quetta Valley beginning with Damb Sadaat II as evidenced by extraordinarily high percentages of virtually identical ceramic parallels. The presence of "Quetta ware" on all three sites and its clear similarity to Namazga III pottery, coupled with the abandonment of the Tedzen River delta at the end of the fourth millennium have led to the suggestion of a migration out of
tablets, sealings, and bevel-rim bowls within the proposed merchant complex at Godin V may be the functional precursor of the Jamdat Nasr polychrome ware found in similar overall association at a later date on the sites we have been dealing with here. (37) This is perhaps a simple conclusion drawn on grounds of negative as opposed to positive evidence. While it is certainly possible to compile a list of perishable commodities which may well have been traded in the fourth millennium and which would have left no archaeological tracks, I don't think this is a particularly productive exercise in this case. I would like to thank Mr. Peder Mortensen for his comments on this problem. (38) The archaeological, i.s. non-textual, data is if course very informative when the right questions are posed. (39) R. Ghirshman, Fouilles de Sialk, près de Kashan, Vol. I, Paul Geuthner, Paris, 1938, p. 58; V.G. Childe, New Light on the Most Ancient East, Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., London, 1952, p. 197. southern Turkmenia at this time resulting in major population intrusions breaking local traditions at Mundigak and the Quetta Valley, and in the original settlement of Shahr-i Sokhta (40). In my opinion, the exact nature of the Namazga III — Shahr-i Sokhta I relationship remains unclear and the colonization hypothesis is quite problematic (41). Some form of interaction, however, is clear and may relate to their participation in the lapis lazuli trade as two principal market centers. Moreover, Shahr-i Sokhta, while clearly a part of developments in Turkmenia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan at this time, was also partipating on some level in the Proto-Elamite phenomenon. Seals and sealings from Period I levels show resemblances to material from Susa 15 and 17, Uruk IV, archaic Ur, and Sin Temple III (42). During the most recent season a Proto-Elamite tablet was also discovered (43). In addition, bull vases find parallels in Sin Temples IV-V (44). Relations at this time with Yahya, certainly not as strong as during Yahya IV B, do not seem to have been very substantial (45). Nevertheless, Shahr-i Sokhta is clearly ocnnected with southern Turkmenian influences and with contemporary Proto-Elamite developments on the Iranian Plateau. Tepe Yahya, on the other hand, is not directly related to developments in Turkmenia, but is in some as yet undetermined way related to Shahr-i Sokhta I and is clearly participating in the Jamdat Nasr and Proto-Elamite phenomena. Hence, we can begin to chart out an interactive process across Western and Central Asia involving various nuclear areas. On the Iranian Plateau, this involves a number of local tradi- tions participating with varying degrees of intensity and autonomy in the Proto-Elamite pheno- menon. We can see southern Turkmenia, then, directly involved with cultural developments in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Sistan, while Sistan appears to be participating in some way in deve- lopments occurring in Kerman, Fars, Khuzistan, and Mesopotamia. Finally, the IV C complex at Tepe Yahya, through its connections with Mesopotamia and Khuzistan, above all helps in clarifying some of those social trends embracing the Iranian Plateau at the end of the fourth millennium. This is of greatest importance if we are to reach a better understanding of southern Turkmenia's relationship to the Plateau at this time.
(40) Tosi, op. cit.; Biscione, "Dynamics...", cit.; Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit. (41) While the model is an appealing one, an I do not doubt that there was some clear interaction involved, I simply think we should ask more questions before accepting the idea of outright colonization. Tosi and Biscione suggest that 40% of the painted Period I pottery from Shahr-i Sokhta has Turkmenian designs. Now, -at the Late Uruk "colony" of Tall Habuba Kabira in northern Syria, virtually the entire ceramic corpus is interchangeable with material from Uruk itself. (H.J. Nissen, personal communication, and E. Strommenger, varia in MDOG). Although Tosi and Lamberg-Karlovsky (Tosi, op. c/f., p. 441; Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit.) have stressed a direct movement from southern Turkmenia to Sistan, Biscione (Dynamics..., cit., p. 106) offers what I consider a more tenable thesis. Noting the presence of Quetta wares already in Mundigak III, and parallels between Shahr-i Sokhta I and (pre-Quetta ware) Damb Sadaat I, he suggests a) that the Turkmenian influence at Shahr-i Sokhta came through Mundigak, and b) that the Quetta Valley received a second wave of influence after its initial movement from the Tedzen Delta to Mundigak. (42) These are the observations of P. Amiet in the as yet unpublished "Archaic Glyptice at Shahr-i Sokhta (Period I)" which is to appear in a forthcoming IsMEO volume on Sistan. (43) M. Tosi, personal communication. The tablet was found on the last day of the 1975 season and no doubt more remain to be uncovered. (44) Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi, op. cit., p. 36. (45) Ibid., Chart I. Lamberg-Karlovsky and Tosi relate Yahya IVC and Shahr-i Sokhta I on the basis of several shared attributes, principally black-on-grey ware, bowls with hatched triangles, and geometric-patterned seals. Also mentioned are polychrome and naturalistic seals. The ceramic parallels are certainly not numerous at this time, and the seal parallels are quite vague and inconclusive. The polychrome jar at Sharh-i Sokhta, as already mentioned, is most curious and quite unlike the Jamdat Nasr variety in most respects.
Colloques Internationaux du C.N.R.S. N" 567. — LE PLATEAU IRANIEN ET L'ASIE CENTRALE DES ORIGINES À LA CONQUÊTE ISLAMIQUE.
RELATIONS IN THE FOREIGN AT TEPE YAHYA*THIRD MILLENNIUM
C.C. LAMBERG-KARLOVSKY Harvard University
ABSTRACT We have attempted to detail the processes which directed Yahya throughout the third millennium. These processes are derived from an understanding of the excavations at Tepe Yahya and its surrounding settlement patterns. The evidence seems to suggest that, after initial incorporation into a Proto-Elamine hegemony, the site of Tepe Yahya is, throughout the third millennium, a center of an indigenous political, economic and social polity. At different times Yahya had relations with Seistan, Baluchistan, Susiana, Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf. It should be emphasized that these relationships are supported by rare ceramic and material inventory parallels because of the basic independence of each of these areas throughout the third millennium.
RÉSUMÉ
Les fouilles de Tépé Yahya et d'ensembles voisins nous ont permis de tenter une étude de l'évolution de ce site à travers le III" millénaire. Les témoignages archéologiques semblent suggérer qu'après une première incorporation dans une hégémonie Proto-Elamite, le site de Tépé Yahya a été, tout au long du Ille millénaire, le centre d'une organisation politique, économique et sociale indigène. A différentes époques, Yahya entretint des relations avec le Sistan, le Baluchistan, la Susiane, la Mésopotamie et le Golfe Persique. Il convient de souligner le fait que la connaissance de ces relations s'appuie sur la comparaison de quelques éléments concer- nant la céramique ou d'autres catégories d'objets, éléments assez rares étant donné l'indépendance fondamen- - tale de chacune de ces zones tout au long du IIIe millénaire.
Every effect is a distinct event from its cause. D. HUME
In recent years our understanding of the prehistoric periods of Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau has been dramatically transformed. Almost a decade ago parallels were drawn between neolithic Djeitun and the "Zagros Group", whille parallels linking the Bronze Age painted ceramics of Munidgak III, Quetta, Namazga III, Shahr-i Sokhta, Tepe Yahya and Mesopotamia
(*) Paper presented at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique Symposium on "Le Plateau Iranien et I'Asie Centrale des Origines a la Conquete Islamique. Leurs Relations a la Lumiere des Documents Archeolo- giques". Paris, March 22-24, 1976. is a more recent devlopment (1). Ceramic parallels provide the first acceptable basis for establishing a relative comparative stratigraphy which ties Central Asian archaeology to that of the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia. While our Soviet colleagues have continued to provide further understanding of Soviet Central Asia through their highly productive excavations, particularly at Altyn Tepe, Namazga Tepe, Chapuz Tepe, Ulug Tepe and the Geoksyur Oasis, a new interest in the Eastern Iranian Plateau has led to new excavations which place the entire geographical area of Soviet Central Asia and the Iranian Plateau in a more comprehensible context. Although a picture slowly begins to emerge, the mechanisms which generated the interactions have not come completely into focus. This is not unexpected given the preliminary nature of much of the published data and the presence of large geographical areas such as Khorasan in Iran, that remain virtually unexplored. Never- theless, new excavations have shown that this vast area appears to have shared a degree of communication previously unexpected. Today it has become apparent that the isolationist approach to archaeology is hardly productive. It is no longer possible to understand cultural processes within one area or site without considering the conditions and cultural processes in neighboring areas.
The recent excavations of Namazga Tepe, Altyn Tepe, Shahr-i Sokhta, Tureng Tepe, Godin Tepe, Malyun, Susa, Gumla, Mundigak and Tepe Yahya range over a very large geographical area. A comparative stratigraphy may be built up through an analysis of ceramics, cylinder seals, sealings, figurines and tablets which relate the above sites within a single chronological framework. Furthermore, by building up a comparative stratigraphy, these sites can be chronologically related to the framework of the larger urban centers of Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley. With the collection of paleofaunal and paleobotanical data it is also possible to interpret and contrast each community's subsistence pattern and specific adaptation to an ecological niche. It is imperative, however, that we go beyond time-space systematics in established compa- rative stratigraphies which allow us to link up various sites and geographical areas. In the final analysis we still have little idea of what motivated the internationalism which linked the above sites and areas for the first time during the late fourth millennium. The Proto-Elamite tablets, for example, known from the earliest third millennium (or earlier) contexts at Susa, Malyun, Choga Mish, Tal-i Ghazir, Sialk, Godin, Yahya and Shahr-i Sokhta seem to relate to a similar language and occur over a vast area in wholly different cultural contexts. Do they represent merchant colonies ? a lingua franca among disparate cultures sharing ecomonic interests ? the migration of populations ? or the diffusion of an idea adopted in more remote regions ? Any attempt to answer the above questions necessitates a careful contextual analysis of associated materials reported in quantifiable terms. Thus, it is not sufficient to illustrate a ceramic type and simply draw parallels to similar types without indicating at least the approximate fre- quency of the ceramic type illustrated. This proceeds from a logical assumption that the produc- tion/consumption ratio of any single item in any one community is in direct proportion to the
(1) V.M. Masson, "The Neolithic Farmers of Central Asia", Antiquity, XXXIX, No. 156, 1965. For the final report on Djeitun and its relations see V.W. Masson (Excavations at Djeitun), Akademia Nauk CCCP, Leningrad, 1971. Relations of the Quetta ceramics to Namazga were first recognized by S. Piggott, "A New Prehistoric Ceramic from Baluchistan", Ancient India, No. 3, 1947. Mundigak's relations to Namazga and Quetta were put forward by J.M. Casals in Fouilles de Mundigak, Librairie C. Klincksieck, Paris, 1961. The comparative stratigraphy of the above sites in relation to Shahr-i Sohkta, Yahya, Mesopotamia and Persian Gulf was advanced by C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and M. Tosi, "Shahr-i Sohkta and Tepe Yahya : Tracks on the Earliest History of the Iranian Plateau", East and West, XXII, Nos. 1-2, 1973. For the recent relations of the above areas see R.H. Meadow, "A Chronology for the Indo-Iranian Borderlands and Southern Baluchistan 4000-2000 B.C.", Radiocarbon and Indian Archaeology, edited by D.P. Agrawal and A. Ghosh, Bombay, 1973. production/consumption ratio of that same item in another community. The differential produc- tion/consumption ratios between sites can only be reckoned if the materials are quantified. Using such an approach, I would like to address myself to "foreign" relations at Tepe Yahya during the third millennium. The periods of time to be dealt with are : VA-C "Yahya Period" ca. 4000-3200 BC IVC "Proto-Elamite" ca. 3200-2900 BC IVB2 ca. 2800-2600 BC IVBi ca. 2600-2400 BC IVA "Old Elamite" ? ca. 2400-1800 BC
By foreign relations I mean to try to establish the cause and extent of social, economic and political interaction which tied Tepe Yahya to other "culture areas" (culture area simply refers to a geographical region in which sites share a large proportion of attributes in the material inventory distinctive from those found in different geographical regions). Finally, it is apparent that few historical events are determined by a single cause, or understood through the formation of a single concept or proposition. An adequate theory of historical events (which leads to an understanding of historical processes) must consider how a complex of propositions comes to be integrated into a final form, and how particular propositions enter into a series of occasions without being fully realized in any one of them. The site of Tepe Yahya in the Kerman Province of southeastern Iran has been discussed in preliminary detail in various other papers (2). It is sufficient for us to recall that the site is first inhabited by ca. 4500 BC (uncorrected radiocarbon determinations provide the bases for our chro- nology). At this time Yahya is a fully developed Late Neolithic community whose subsistence is based on domesticated sheep, goat, and cattle and the cultivation of cereals and legumes (3). The material inventory of Period VI is rather limited. The flint industry is distinct from that of later periods and is not readily paralleled to other sites (4). The ceramics are 100 % coarse chaff tempered ware and again are not readily paralleled to other sites with the exception of Tal-i Iblis, also in the Kerman Province, and the coarse wares of Bakun B II in Fars Province. The mate- rials that have been studied are consistent with our understanding of a regional Late Neolithic economy. We have located twelve other Period VI sites in the vicinity of Yahya, the largest of which is 12 hectares in extent (5). The evidence does not support the existence of large scale or frequent long range contacts, or the centralization of economic or political activities during the fifth and early fourth millennium in southeastern Iran. The succeeding Period V (4000-3200 BC), divided into three phases (C-A), indicates direct continuity from Period VI. Throughout each of the phases important changes in the economic
(2) For relevant publications on Tepe Yahya see C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, Excavations at Tepe Yahya, 1967-1969. Progress Report I. Peabody Museum. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970; "The Proto-Elamite Settle- ment at Tepe Yahya", Iran, IX, 1971; "Tepe Yahya - 1971 - Mesopotamia and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands", Iran, X, 1972; "Urbam Interactions on Iranian Plateau: Excavations at Tepe Yahya 1967-1973", Proceedings of the British Academy, LIX, 1973; and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and M. Tosi. ibid., 1973. (3) Paleobotanical analyses of the Tepe Yahya corpus is being undertaken by Dr. Constantini of IsMEO. For a preliminary statement see M. Tosi, Iran, XIV, pp. 173-74, 1976. The paleozoological analyses are being undertaken by Richard Meadow (forthcoming). Results of pollen analysis at Tepe Yahya have been completed by A.M. Solomon, "Pollen Analysis of Samples from Southern Iran", as have geomorphological studies, "The Physical Geography of the Soghun Valley, Southeastern Iran", by Rodman E. Snead and Philip Durgin. Both await publication in our final reports on the Yahya Project. (4) M. Piperno, "The Flint Industry at Tepe Yahya", East and West, XXXII, Nos. 1-2, 1972. (5) For a preliminary statement on settlement surveys aroud Yahya see C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, T. Beale and M. Prickett in Iran, XIV, pp. 174-76, .1976 and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky and M.C. and Eda Vidali, "Prehistoric Settlement Pattern arounds Tepe Yahya: A Quantitative Analysis", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 35. No. 4, pp. 237-50, 1976. subsistence pattern are indicated by an increasing amount of sheep and goat over cattle and of legumes and barley over wheat. Architecture appears to be entirely domestic in nature. Metallurgy first appears in the form of copper-arsenic alloyed chisels, awls and pins and is accompanied by an increase in the use of mineral resources in the form of carnelian, turquoise, alabaster, chlorite and, by the last phase of Period V, a single lapis lazuli bead. Mr. Thomas Beale has summarized the quantitative data supporting the increase of copper implements over bone implements as well as the increase of turquoise and carnelian from Period VI to V (6). Thus. throughout Period V there is the first clear evidence for the importation of limited foreign goods, in the use of exotics such as carnelian, turquoise and lapis as well as the development of new techniques, i.e. metallurgy. In no instance, however, is there any evidence for the manufacture or production of goods at Yahya within Periods VI and V. Paleobotanical data corroborates our interpretation of an increasingly diversified and pro- ductive subsistence economy. New techniques in agricultural production are attested by field systems directly associated with Period V sites which are walled and terraced for the control of water run-off and soil conservation (7). Greater diversification and agricultural productivity in the means of production allowed certain members of the community to gradually increase their wealth and status through the accumulation of goods. It is also clear from settlement pattern analysis that the immediate area around Yahya undergoes its greatest population increase at this time. There are 73 sites of Period VA-C in the Dolatabad area (25 klms, west of Yahya) compared to only 12 Period VI sites. The ceramics of Yahya Period V experience a gradual decline in the soft coarse ware tradition. In Period VA they are entirely replaced by a red fine-grit tempered ware. Period VC is characterized by a bichrome black and red on a fine buff which is unparalleled and makes up less than 1 % of the total inventory at Yahya. Period VB has less than 20 % of a black-on-buff paralleled at Susa and Tal-i Bakun to the west, while Period VA is characterized by more than 50 % of a painted black-on-red paralleled on many sites in the Kerman Province but without a wider distribution. The clear decrease in black-on-buff toward the end of Period VA may indicate a decrease in direct relationships with the west and a concomitant increase in the internal organi- zation of the area around Yahya which reaches its greatest population density at this time (except for the later Sassanian and Islamic Periods). We take this opportunity to point out there are approximately 25 bichrome red-yellow, black-brown sherds of geometric design in Period VA which have distant parallels to bichrome wares of Namazga Tepe. Following Period VA the settlement analysis indicates there is a break in occupation at Tepe Yahya. We have located over 27 sites with a distinctive type of ceramic referred to at Tal-i Iblis as"Aliabad Ware" (8). The presence of this ware on the surface of Period V sites indicates that it is earlier, later or somewhere within our Period V sequence. Its absence in our excavations at Yahya and in sondages of Period V sites in Dolatabad clearly places it chronologically after our Period VA. Moreover the fabric and painted designs of this ceramic type remove it from the transition betweeen Periods VI and V where no temporal gap is present. There is only one reasonable alternative that is substantiated by survey data and our excavations at Yahya. The Aliabad ceramics represent a period between VA and IVC. This takes on special meaning when one appreciates the special nature of Period IVC at Yahya. The settlement data irrefutably
(6) Thomas W. Beale, "Early Trade in Highland Iran: A View from a Source Area". World Archaeology, 5, No. 2, 1973. (7) A study of the field systems in Period V in the Dolatabad area will be incorporated in the Ph. D. thesis of Martha Prickett (Harvard University. Department of Anthropology). (8) Joseph R. Caldwell, ed., Investigations at Tal-i Iblis, Illinois State Museum Preliminary Report No. 9, Springfield, Illinois, 1967.