Early Fourth Millennium Developments in Southwestern Iran

British Institute of Persian Studies

Early Fourth Millennium Developments in Southwestern IranAuthor(s): H. T. Wright, J. A. Neely, G. A. Johnson and John SpethSource: Iran, Vol. 13 (1975), pp. 129-147Published by: British Institute of Persian StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4300530 .

Accessed: 27/11/2014 12:02

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

British Institute of Persian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Iran.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.83.63.20 on Thu, 27 Nov 2014 12:02:57 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bips

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4300530?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


EARLY FOURTH MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHWESTERN IRAN

By H. T. Wright, J. A. Neely, G. A. Johnson and John Speth

That urban society and states arose in Mesopotamia during the Uruk period is widely accepted. The end of the 'Ubaid period and the beginning of the Uruk period have been the object of much work. In fact, though individual workers have attributed particular manifestations to such a transitional period, there is no adequate taxonomic or chronological framework for this period, much less an understanding of its fundamental changes. In this paper such a framework is outlined in the hope that it will facilitate future efforts toward such an understanding.

Our geographical focus is what is now south-western Iran, including both the valleys of the central Zagros and the broad upper Khuzistan plains (Fig. I).1 Within this area four important stratigraphies, all of which are at present published in preliminary form at best, span the period of interest. Those at Tall-i Ghazir2, Susas and Farukhabad4 are in the plains. That at Godin Tepe5 is in the highlands.

A3P,

2 A Ay Site.

- ,-.-L.L , ,>, , - _ r--r 2

• r

r.

2 ,

A-

->..A^

- % -

A

• Gulf A

A

m5 Gulf

B c,

-~-N-

?A A-

?~G w I f

Fig. r. South-west Iran in the early Fourth Millennium B.C.: I, Kunji Cave; 2, Baba Jan Tepe; 3, Kuh-i Dasht; 4, Sargarab; 5, KS-269; 6, Tall-i Ghazir.

x Speth's work at Kunji Cave was supported by National Science Foundation Grant GS-2402. Neely's at Sargarab was supported by GS-2194; and Johnson's at KS-269 was supported by GS-3147, both from the same source. Wright was able to visit the first two projects with support from Grant FRR-835 of the University of Michigan Horace Rackham School of Graduate Studies. None of these projects would have succeeded without the full cooperation of the Iran Archaeo- logical Service, and the encouragement of the staff of the British Institute of Persian Studies and the American Institute of Iranian Studies.

2 J. R. Caldwell, " Tall-i Ghazir ", Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archeologie III (Berlin, 1968), pp. 349-55. 3 Robert H. Dyson, Excavations on the Acropolis at Susa and the Problems of Susa A, B, and C, (Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, 1966); Alain Le Brun, " Recherches Stratigraphiques . L'Acropole de Suse (1969-71) ", Cahiers de la Diligation Archiologique Franfaise en Iran I (1972).

4 Henry T. Wright, " Farukhabad ", Iran VII (1969), pp. 172-3. 6 T. Cuyler Young, Jr., "Excavations at Godin Tepe: First

Progress Report ", Occasional Paper No. 17 of the Royal Ontario Museum (Toronto, 1969).

129



130 JOURNAL OF PERSIAN STUDIES

We owe a fundamental debt to the excavators of these stratified sites and to Dr. Frank Hole and Dr. Clare Goff whose surveys in the Pish-i Kuh region of the central Zagros, made available as we were writing this paper, clarified our thinking on many problems. However, the ceramics which are illustrated here derive primarily from soundings and surface collections from a number of other small sites in south-western Iran, none of them previously published. Before turning to these data, let us briefly summarize what is known of settlement organization and ceramic crafts in the Late 'Ubaid period and the Middle-to-Late Uruk periods in south-western Iran.

By Late 'Ubaid times human settlement had spread to every part of greater Mesopotamia. Every lowland river bank and every highland valley contained small villages or hamlets, and most larger tracts of easily cultivable land had one or more small centres covering up to ten hectares. The occupants of both the centres and the villages were herding sheep, goats, and cattle, and cultivating wheat, barley, and other crops. Ceramics and stone tools were certainly produced in both villages and centres, although the production of goods with special social functions may have been restricted to the centres. Differences in residential architecture in both types of settlement and differentation in burials suggest the presence of social ranking. The relative size and elaboration of the centres probably indicates they were the seats of the richer and politically more influential kin groups.

Craftsmen of Late 'Ubaid times probably used some type of potter's wheel to produce many of their vessels. This is suggested by the symmetry of the bowl forms and the structure of the clay body, as most vessels were subsequently scraped and smoothed until all trace of surface wheel scoring was obliterated. Many vessel forms were individually slipped, or painted in bold geometric and naturalistic motifs, or both. The end product of this individualized approach to vessel production was a series of simple basins, bowls, and high-necked jars with a wide variety of designs.

By Middle to Late Uruk times, the inhabitants of Greater Mesopotamia lived in a different manner. Communities were less evenly distributed and more differentiated. In several areas of the lowlands, there were settled enclaves centred around large towns of 20-50 hectares. In south-western Iran the main enclave was centred around Susa and Chogha Mish on the Susiana plain. There were several types of smaller settlements including smaller towns, centres involved in administration, villages involved in specific crafts like stone-working, and villages probably involved solely in food production. Portions of the towns were devoted to large buildings in and near which there is clear evidence of record-keeping and other administrative activities, but not of direct involvement in agricultural work or even in food preparation. Most types of ceramics were made solely in the towns and were distributed through smaller towns to the villages. Craftsmen of the Middle and Late Uruk periods used both the potter's wheel and rough press moulds. Vessels were seldom subsequently finished or embellished. The end product was a variety of standardized bowl and jar shapes with little decoration in comparison with earlier 'Ubaid assemblages. Without question Middle and Late Uruk societies were highly differentiated and were coordinated by some kind of bureaucracy.6 In contrast, the smaller lowland plains and the nearby highland valleys of lower Luristan contained little Uruk settlement. Only isolated small villages, perhaps important as herding centres or as transfer points in the nascent trade network,' occurred.

There are several series of Carbon-14 datings on later 'Ubaid assemblages in south-western Iran, for instance on the earlier Late 'Ubaid Bayat phase of the Deh Luran plain,8 and on the Susa A phase of the Susiana plain. It is now possible to determine absolute ages from such datings.9 Taken together, these suggest that the 'Ubaid period ended c. 4000 B.c. rather than somewhat later as had been thought. There is no such series of dates on any phase of the Uruk period; however one can extrapolate from the

6 Gregory A. Johnson, " Local Exchange and Early State Development in South-western Iran ", Anthropological Paper No. 51, University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology (Ann Arbor, 1973).

7 Henry T. Wright, "A Consideration of Inter-regional Ex- change in Greater Mesopotamia 4000-3000 B.C." in Edwin Wilmsen, " Social Exchange and Interactions ", Anthropological Paper No. 46, University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology

(Ann Arbor, I972). 8 Frank Hole, Kent Flannery, James Neely, and Hans Helbaek,

" Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain ", Memoir No. I of the University of Michigan Museum of Anthro- pology (Ann Arbor, 1969).

9 Ingrid U. Olsen, Radiocarbon Variation and Absolute Chronology (Nobel Symposium No. 12, New York, I970).



EARLY FOURTH MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHWESTERN IRAN 131

better dated Early Dynastic period. Such extrapolation and the few available Uruk determinations suggest that the Middle Uruk period began about 3400 B.c. Thus, what has been called the Early Uruk covered the surprisingly long span of 600 years. This can be subdivided into two portions. The later is the Early Uruk period proper, in which such forms as the bevel rim bowl and the straight spouted jar appear throughout the lowlands in quantity. We consider the ceramics from Warka Eanna XIII to be the type assemblage.10 The earlier subdivision, which may be called the Terminal 'Ubaid period, is one of considerable diversity and it is impossible to speak of a type assemblage. It is on this Terminal 'Ubaid period that we wish to focus for the rest of this paper, though we shall refer to Early Uruk developments when relevant.

The Transition from 'Ubaid to Uruk in Highland Luristan We focus here on the valleys of Khorramabad, Kuh-i Dasht, Rumishgan, and Tarhan. The small

rockshelter of Kunji Cave faces west across the Khorramabad Valley. The valley floor is about I200 m. above sea level, while the cave is about Ioo m. higher at the top of a steep talus and near the base of a limestone cliff. The cave measures about 4 m. in height, 18 m. in width and 28 m. in depth. Because of a large rockfall during the Pleistocene period, only the front half of the cave was occupied during the Late and Post-Pleistocene periods. Excavations have been 'onducted at the cave by Frank Hole of Rice University in 1963 and by John Speth, of City University, New York, in 1969. Fortunately, the occupational layers in which we are interested were relatively undisturbed by the animal burrows which elsewhere in the cave destroyed important features.

During the transitional period after the end of the 'Ubaid, a series of at least four small circular arrangements of stone along the edge of the rock fall were built. From these constructions the floor sloped downward towards the south side of the entrance. A thin layer of yellow clay which contained almost no artifacts was deposited in front of these stone arrangements. A low terrace or wall of rough stones marked the front of this relatively clean area. Below this wall was a thicker deposit of yellow clay which contained a number of broken ceramic vessels, described below. The wall or terrace later collapsed down the slope on top of the clay layer, sealing the ceramics from later disturbance. There were few artifacts other than ceramics in this sealed layer. Similar ceramics were also found in disturbed layers in other portions of the cave. The activities carried out in the circular stone arrangements are not at present known, although they may have served as animal pens, or shelters for small groups of people, or both.

The clay body of the ceramics from the sealed layer was tempered with crushed straw. Minor inclusions of crushed limestone and sand could have been accidental. Most vessels are probably wheel- turned. The surface colours are very light brown to gray. The larger examples have a coarser paste and scraped or smoothed surfaces. The smaller examples have a fine paste and are often slipped and burnished. It is not yet possible to say which bases match which upper bodies. In the following descrip- tions the number in parentheses preceding each statement refers to a unified numbering system used for forms from all the sites. The following bowl rims occur in the sealed layer.

(i) Simple Round Lip Bowls (Fig. 6a, b). The upper body of these open forms is conical. The rim is bent slightly outward. The form is often burnished.

(5) Simple Beaded Lip Bowls (Fig. 6n, o). These shallow open vessels have a heavy thickening on the outside of the rim. Few examples are burnished. The second example is atypical.

(7) Small Incurved Bowls (Fig. 6m). This shallow form has a markedly closed rim with rounded lip. The sides are relatively thick. Few are burnished.

(9) Small Incurved Beaded Lip Bowls (Fig. 6i, j). These have a globular body with a slight closing of the rim. The lip is thickened on the exterior. The form is usually burnished.

10 A. von Haller, "Vierter Vorlaufiger Bericht iiber die von der Notgemeinschaft der Deutschen Wissenschaft in Uruk Unternommen Ausgrabungen ", Abhandlungen der

Preussischen Akademie Der Wissenschaft: Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 6 (1932), PP. 38-42.




The following jar rims are present in the sealed layer: (i) Fine Jars (Fig. 6c-h). The lower body of this form is probably globular; the upper body is concave

with a slightly flared rim. It is often burnished. Several sherds of this vessel form, unfortunately from disturbed contexts, have black or dark brown painted designs. Some (Fig. 6g, h) have two horizontal bands, one near the rim and one near the point of maximum body diameter. Various vertical elements are placed between the two bands. One rim (Fig. 6f) has a chevron design reminiscent of Siyalk II11 and Godin VI.12

(4) Flared Neck, Round Lip Jars (Fig. 6k, 1). These also have a globular body, but the sides are thicker. On this body a high, narrow, constricted neck is added, as can be clearly seen in the second example. Few of these are burnished. Several body sherds suggest a smaller low necked jar form, but rim sherds of such jars have not been found in the sealed layer.

A variety of base forms occurs.

(I) Flat Bases (Fig. 6p, q). Some are scraped and some are wheel finished. (2) Ring Bases (Fig. 6r, s). These are clearly wheel finished. (3) Pedestal Ring Bases (Fig. 6t). This base flares downward. It has a distinctive flattened vertical lip.

Preliminary counts of the total sample of 446 rims from the disturbed parts of the excavations by Speth, taken as a whole, revealed that 56 per cent were of the six categories defined above on the basis of the sample from the sealed layer. Counts of the rim sherds from both the sealed yellow clay layer and from the total sample are presented in the following table.

CERAMICS FROM KUNJI CAVE

Sealed Layer Total Sample

(I) Round Lip Bowls 21 57 (5) Simple Beaded Lip Bowls 2 20 (7) Small Incurved Bowls 2 34 (9) Small Incurved Beaded Lip Bowls I3 44 (I) Fine Jars 13 83 (4) Flared Neck Jars 9 30

Total Counts 60o 251

In summary, the ware from Kunji Cave can be divided into two types, a thin burnished type, used for small to medium sized bowls and jars, and a thicker unburnished type, used for medium to

large sized bowls and jars. A ceramic assemblage similar to that from Kunji Cave has been reported by Goff'3 from the Central Mound of Baba Jan, 70 km. to the north-west of Khorramabad. Four bowls from Baba Jan also occur at Kunji Cave, (i) Simple Bowls with Round Lip,14 (5) Large Simple Bowls with a Beaded Lip,15 (7) Incurved Bowls with a Round Lip,le and (9) Small Incurved Bowls with a Beaded Lip.17 In addition, there are (8) Large Incurved Bowls with Rounded Lip and Impressed Strip or cordon round the vessel below the rim,18 (Io) Incurved Bowls with a Heavy Beaded Lip,19 and

(1i ) Incurved Bowls with a Beaded Lip, sometimes slightly flattened, and an impressed strip.20 The latter example could be categorized as a neckless jar. Among the jars from Baba Jan are (I) Fine Jars, some examples of which are painted in a fashion similar to the painted examples from Kunji,21 and

(4) Flared Neck Round Lip Jars.22 In addition, there are (2) Neckless Jars with Beaded Lips.23 A

straight spout, presumably from a jar,24 and ring or disc bases25 complete the illustrated assemblage.

I1 Roman Ghirshman, Fouilles de Sialk I (Paris, 1938), pl. 69: S 1695.

12 T. Cuyler Young, Jr., op. cit., fig. 7: 1. 1x Clare Goff, " Luristan Before the Iron Age ", Iran IX (x971),

PP- 313-51. 14 Ibid., fig. 7: 1. 15 Ibid., fig. 7:25-7. 16 Ibid., fig. 7: 2-6. 17 Ibid., fig. 7: I1.

18 Ibid., fig. 7: 17- 8. 19 Ibid., fig. 7: 12. 20 Ibid., fig. 7: 9-20. 21 Ibid., fig. 7: 14-16. 23. 22 Ibid., fig. 7:7-8. 28 Ibid., fig. 7:24. 24 Ibid., fig. 7:30. 25 Ibid., fig. 7:7-8.




In summary, all Kunji vessel shapes are represented at Baba Jan. However, at Baba Jan a number of other vessel shapes are reported including some larger or heavier forms with supporting impressed strips. Most of these are made with a straw-tempered clay body similar to that from Kunji, but there are a few examples of other wares including heavy grit and mica tempered wares. This greater diversity is probably a result of the more diverse activities carried out on a village or town site as opposed to a small special function site like Kunji Cave.

Goff26 has defined the broad outlines of Terminal 'Ubaid and Early Uruk settlement patterns in the highland valleys of Luristan. Each larger valley contains one or more larger centres covering 3-10 hectares and most valleys contain one or more smaller village sites covering about I hectare. These sizes suggest that valleys would have had only a few thousand settled inhabitants. However, the existence of a site like Kunji may indicate the existence of a fully transhumant population even at this early date. Goff has suggested that there are geographical variants in ceramic style within Luristan at this time.27 If so, this suggests that the inhabitants of the different parts of Luristan interacted relatively infre- quently, and that there was little overall political integration.

Period VI at Godin Tepe provides some evidence of the development of this ceramic complex. Young28 notes a decline of the finer painted ceramics during the course of this period. The ceramics from Kunji Cave at Baba Jan are most similar to those from Godin, operation B, Layers- 2o and 21, late in Period VI. The parallels have been noted by Goff. However, most of the forms have antecedents in the earlier portion of Period VI, though these are often painted. Additional data from Godin should elucidate this development. In any event there does seem to be a highland antecedent for the ceramic complex found at Kunji and Baba Jan.

The Transition from 'Ubaid to Uruk on the Deh Luran Plain This small lowland plain in the foothills of the Kabir Kuh, the last massive ridge of the Zagros, had

a long and complex settlement history during the 'Ubaid period. Its closest affinities during the later stages of this history were with the larger Susiana plain of central Khuzistan.29 Deh Luran is about 90 km. south of Kuh-i Dasht, and I Io km. north-west of the Susiana plain. An unprecedented settlement density on the plain was reached in the Bayat phase equivalent to Late Susiana c on the Susiana plain. In the succeeding Farukh phase, equivalent to Susiana d, there was a slight drop in settlement density (Fig. 2). Ceramics perhaps equivalent to the succeeding Susa A have been found only on a portion of Tepe Musiyan and on a few sites to the east of this large centre. The formerly densely occupied west portion of the plain was abandoned.

N

Deh Luran

km.

1 I 9

'• -J" ,,•i!:i:::..

~ I

Survey

* Terminal 'Ubaid Settlement

o Suso A Related Settlement

45 Site Number Edge of Present Flood Plain

Fig. 2: Susa A and Sargarab sites on the Deh Luran Plain.

26 Ibid., fig. 4, page I45. 27 Ibid., fig. 4, page I43.

28 T. Cuyler Young, Jr., op. cit., p. 6, Table III. 29 Clare Goff., op. cit., p. I45-

12




For the succeeding Terminal 'Ubaid period, intensive survey by Neely has revealed only two sites. One former settlement, Sargarab, is located high on the piedmont slopes of the plain close to the moun- tain wall. This is one of the few known settlements on the piedmont proper before to Sasanian times. The other settlement, Chakali, is about 5 km. downstream from the first at the juncture of the plain and the piedmont.

Sargarab, numbered DL 169 in Neely's 1969 survey, stretches for 190 m. along a narrow ridge defined by two dry gulleys immediately east of the present Ab-i Garm or Sargarab stream (Fig. 3). The ridge averages 35 m. in width and 15 m. in height above the present level of the stream. The site covers about

o. 7 hectares. A short distance above the site, the Ab-i Garm issues from a series of sulphurous hot springs. Though the vapours are noxious and even native-born Deh Luranis dislike the taste of the water, the springs are among the few year-round water supplies on the plain and are still frequented by Luri transhumants. Two km. to the north is the mouth of a gorge which is a commonly used route up into the higher pastures of Dinar Kuh, Ab Danan, and Kabir Kuh. Approximately 3'5 km. to the north-west is the beginning of a Sasanian or Early Islamic roadway still used today.

Chakali, numbered DL-19, is c. 16o x 250 m. with a maximum height of c. 3"5

m. It covers about 4 - o hectares. It is about 500 m. east of the present bed of the Ab-i Garm at a point where the water has lost much of its noxious gas and where it can be easily used to irrigate the plain. There has been settlement at this location in almost every period since the aceramic period.30

The stone foundations of Sargarab have been revealed by erosion (Fig. 3). The sides of the piedmont spur on which it sits were terraced with rough stone walls. The accessible north-east upper end of the spur was protected by a rough stone wall with a narrow stepped entrance flanked by standing rough slabs. Within this space were a succession of four or more open spaces bounded by stone-footed rooms. Additional rooms are situated on the terrace walls below these courts. In the erosion gulleys flanking the architecturally terraced site are traces of dams and canals. Those to the east of the site are probably contemporary with the Terminal 'Ubaid occupation at Sargarab. One of the springs may have flowed through the gulley when the site was occupied, and rain fed agriculture is also possible.

The ceramic assemblage from this site is similar to those previously discussed from the highlands. Most of the vessels have a clay body tempered with straw and some crushed calcareous rock: a few special types have only straw, and a few large vessels have mostly rock. The interior surfaces and rim areas usually exhibit wheel-scoring, but the lower exteriors of some forms have been scraped. Slipping is common but burnishing and painting are both rare. The firing is sometimes poorly controlled and partially oxidized dark or red cores are common while surfaces are usually very light brown or green. The bowl forms attested at Sargarab are as follows:

(i) Simple Round Lip Bowls (Fig. 7a). One is slipped. (2) Simple Fine Bowls (Fig. 7b). Some of these have lower body scraping, some are slipped, and some

are lightly burnished. Note the distinctive recurved tapered rims. (3) Simple Flat Lip Bowls (Fig 7c). This may be an extreme variant of the beaded rim bowls noted

below. (4) Simple Flat Lip Bowl with Impressed Strip (Fig. 7e). This unique vessel was lightly tempered with

straw and sand, its surface was carefully smoothed and it was thoroughly oxidized in firing. In these technical features it approaches Terminal Susa A vessels discussed subsequently.

(5) Simple Beaded Lip Bowls (Fig. 7f). Many exhibit lower body scraping and some are slipped. Most beading is on the exterior of the rim, but some is oblique to the rim and might better be termed Bevelled Lip (Fig. 7g).

(6) Simple Beaded Lip Bowls with Impressed Strips (Fig. 7h). (7) Incurved Round Lip Bowls. (8) Incurved Round Lip Bowls with Impressed Strips (Figs. 7i). (9) Small Incurved Beaded Lip Bowls (Fig. 7d). This small vessel is slipped.

(io) Incurved Beaded Lip Bowl (Fig. 7j).

so Hole, Flannery, Neely, and Helbaek, op. cit.



t'i

0 ?d

Ltj

z

z

o

c

d

tJ c

M L-4

ci

tti

nr

0-

H

Pd

z

C"

SARGARAB DL 169 , -- //m

qb/

tp.~

?•'

_\O 0" ?9

?Oo.• io~~ ml+++l • +

.. .

....................• .

000 .. .

.....0 .

? ' "? +?•'"" "? + +. .'

ro,•0 %' 0 •-

S~o o ?460 0 cup

o oj ................ o OGO

O Yo qqOCP d O QQ OG 0 00 00'~2 Dd 0 P0 v- a a a ai a 0 0

10 00 10.019 00o o.~O 0r

0040 ID 100 c p 0D~b 00 0 e,, a 000R 0 00O ) ca 9000 0 q a a o bc

a a q CA 0 4* coo* .......... 0

0 0 oootb 01-1 o

Fig. 3: The site of Sargarab (DL I69).




(1i ) Incurved Beaded Lip Bowls with Impressed Strips (Fig. 8a). These are very large and exhibit body scraping. The impressions on the strips tend to be circular rather than oval, possibly an earlier

characteristic.1' The following jar forms are attested at Sargarab.

(i) Fine Jars (Fig. 8b). These are smoothed but not burnished. One example has simple painted bands on the rim (Fig. 8c).

(2) Neckless Jar with Beaded Lip (Fig. 8e). Some approach the neckless ledge rim forms common in the subsequent Uruk manifestations in Central Khuzistan.32 The illustrated example has painted black bands on a red slip.

(3) Straight Neck Jar (Fig. 8d). All have rounded lips except for one which is slightly flattened. One jar has an attached oval nose lug.

(4) Flared Neck Jar with Rounded Lip (Fig. 8f, g). (5) Flared Neck Jar with Expanded Rim and Convex Lip (Fig. 8i, j). This common form is often slipped.

It occurs in small, medium, and large varieties. Some large examples are tempered predominantly with calcareous material. Two medium sized examples exhibit a burnished red slip with painted black bands (Fig. 8h) and two, a cream slip with similar bands.

(6) Flared Neck Jar with Expanded Rim and Concave Lip. Other jar parts include additional oval nose lugs and a fragment of a straight spout.

Specialized forms of interest include a shallow tray with slightly incurved sides and inwardly bevelled

lip (Fig. 81) and fragments of perforated strainers. The ceramic assemblage as a whole has few resem- blances to the earlier Susiana assemblages from the Deh Luran plain. Almost every feature is paralleled in the central Luristan ceramics previously discussed. The distribution of ceramic types in samples from three portions of the site of Sargarab are given in the following table.

CERAMICS FROM SARGARAB

Simple Bowls South-west Centre North-east Total

(i) Round Lip Bowls 2 - - 2

(2) Fine Bowls I6 - 3 I9 (3) Flat Lip Bowls 5 2 2 9

(4) Same with Impressed Strip I - - I

(5) Beaded Lip Bowls 24 io 33 67 (5a) Bevelled Lip Bowls 13 - - 13 (6) Beaded Lip Bowl with Impressed Strip 2 I - 3 Incurved Bowls

(7) Incurved Round Lip Bowl I - - I

(8) Same with Impressed Strip 2 I - 3 (Io) Incurved Beaded Lip Bowl 3 - 2 5 (11) Same with Impressed Strip 7 I 8 16

Jars (i) Fine Jars I I 4 16 (2) Neckless Jars with Beaded Lip I - 2 3 (3) Straight Neck Jars I 3 4 (5) Flared Neck, Expanded Rim, with Convex Lip 25 IO 22 57 (6) Same with Concave Lip I - - I Nose Lugs 2 - 4 6

Trays 5 - 4 9 Strainers II - -- I

31 Frank Hole, ed., Preliminary Reports of the Rice University Project in Iran I968-9 (Houston, 1969).

3s G. A. Johnson, op. cit., pp. 54, 181-2, pl. III L.




The only evidence that Sargarab was occupied after the Terminal 'Ubaid period is the presence of four fine sand-tempered Ledge Rim Jar rims in the north-east area of the site (Fig. 8k), which could be of Early Uruk manufacture. If so, they represent only a brief utilization of the site, as other diagnostic Uruk forms are not present.

One other artifact from Sargarab requires comment. From a terrace near the north-east corner of the site came a stamp seal made of a granular green stone (Fig. 4). The back of this rectangular seal is stepped up to a central ridge. The front portrays two dogs, recognizable from their curved tails, apparently pursuing two caprids, probably wild goats, recognizable by their curved horns. This fairly complex design has parallels in Gawra X133 and Susa.34

Fig. 4. Seal from Sargarab.

In the succeeding Early Uruk period proper on the Deh Luran plain ceramics continue in the tradition established at Sargarab, but new features are added. Straw and limestone tempered clay bodies are predominant, but sand tempered vessels occur. Some of the former bowl and jar forms continue, but some become more common such as the incurved bowl form and the jar with flared neck, expanded rim, and concave or grooved lip. Among new forms are the flat or bevelled lip bowls, often carinated, small globular jars with strap handles, ledge rim jars, and bevel rim bowls. Stylistic elements such as impressed strips and red on black painted motifs continue. However, among the former there is a shift from predominantly round impressions to predominantly oval oblique impressions. This ceramic complex has been recovered in the excavations at Tepe Farukhabad from levels below those containing typical Middle and Late Uruk assemblages, and its characteristics will be discussed at length in the forthcoming final report on the excavations at Tepe Farukhabad.

In this early Uruk period, settlement pattern changed markedly. Sargarab was abandoned. A small town of about 5 hectares grew up along the Mehmeh River on the west edge of the plain. Five small villages were scattered across the west half of the plain. Tepe Musiyan itself and the east half of the plain were apparently unoccupied, the reverse of the situation at the end of the Late 'Ubaid period.

In summary, communities producing Susiana ceramics declined or moved eastward. In the Ter- minal 'Ubaid period two communities using ceramics of highland affinity are established in a limited area of the plain: one is a well defended settlement near routes into the mountains; the other is a village suited for small scale irrigation. These communities grow, divide, and relocate during the Early Uruk period, and settlement spreads throughout the west half of the Deh Luran plain.

The Transition from 'Ubaid to Uruk on the Susiana Plain The Susiana plain (Fig. 5) reached its greatest 'Ubaid settlement density in the Susiana d period,

and the Susa A population was somewhat less. Susa itself with its central platform covered with large buildings and with an area no less than Io hectares was one of the largest centres in Greater Meso- potamia. The precipitous decline evidenced in the Terminal 'Ubaid period is at present completely unexplained.

"8 A. J. Tobler, Tepe Gawra II (Philadelphia, 1950), Nos. 158, I63.

34 Pierre Amiet, La Glyptique Mesopotamienne (Paris, 1961), pl. 5, Nr. o9g.




'OSUSA108 11 S

2691

6f

;i. r

J- fi': Khuzistan, Iran

67t ' /

' :':!.

/; t .•.. .•.usiana Survey 1970-71

412

, , 1"2

i ,, ... ;~i,

iiiiii. ti,. /

\ .

I . !. , . ,

KEY s Site Number: 1: Smell Center 94

i x. i ,• . ...

;;:;::: ?

Village Edge of Present F lood -.-.. ...."

Pi,

Highlandsr

Fig. 5. Terminal Susa A sites on the Susiana Plain.

We present as an example of what we call " Terminal Susa A " the ceramics collected by Johnson and Wright in 1972 from KS-269, a small unnamed site 13'5 km. south-east of Susa, first reported to us by Frank Hole in 1969. The clay body of these ceramics with the few exceptions noted below is untempered or tempered only with a fine sand. The vessels were wheel-made, judging from the internal structure of the clay body, but most surface traces of wheel-turning have been eliminated. The firing is well controlled and the vessels are completely oxidized. There are two distinct types of ware, as in Susa A itself: a buff ware often greenish in colour and a red ware often with a light buff slip. The following bowl forms are attested at KS-269.

(i) Simple Round Lip Bowls (Fig. 9a). The only example has incisions on its rim. (2) Simple Fine Bowls (Fig. 9b). These are somewhat thicker than those noted previously. The exteriors

seem to have been shaved down while the clay was leather hard, leaving a fluted surface. One example is slipped.

(3) Simple Flat Lip Bowls (Fig. 9c-e). These medium to large vessels, termed basins by Hole, Flannery, and Neely, are often oval in plan. Lower body scraping is common. The lip is often grooved. This form had been made with little change for centuries.35

(4) Simple Flat Lip Bowls with Impressed Strips (Fig. 9f-i). This stylistic variant of (3) is the hallmark of Terminal Susa A. It differs from the above only in that it is often slipped and that it has an applied strip or cordon with roughly circular impressions below the rim. Note the resemblance to the example from Sargarab (Fig. 8e).

A number of jar forms occur at KS-269. (i) Fine Jar (Fig. 9j). This is one of the few straw and limestone tempered vessels from the site. The few

examples of this vessel shape found at other Terminal Susa A sites on the Susiana plain were similarly tempered. The surface was smoothed but not slipped or burnished as were highland examples.

(3) Straight Neck Jar. The example has a rounded lip. The shoulder has bands and panels painted in a dark paint (Johnson, I973: Pl. 8d).

(4) Flared Neck Jar with Rounded Lip (Fig. gIk). Some of these well-made vessels are of a red-bodied ware, well known from Susa A sites.s3

(7) Heavily Flared Neck with Rounded Lip (Fig. 9n). (8) Heavily Flared Neck with Concave Lip (Fig. 90). These two new rim forms probably occur on large

jars. They are at present known only from the Terminal Susa A phase on the Susiana plain.37

35 Hole, Flannery, Neely, and Helbaek, op. cit., p. 127. 3* G. Dollfus, " Les Fouilles A Djaffarabad de 1969 "

1971 ", Cahiers de la Dilegation Archeologique Franfaise en Iran I Paris,

1971). 37 M. J. Steve and H. Gasche, " L'Acropole de Suse: Nouvelles

Fouilles ", MDAI XLVI (Paris, 1971), P1. 34: 1o.




Other ceramics made with the Susiana clay body are a rough conical spout, also shaved like the Fine Bowls, an oval nose lug, and some animal figurine fragments. The following table presents rim counts.

CERAMICS FROM KS-26938

(i) Simple Round Lip Bowls I (2) Simple Fine Bowls 3 (3) Simple Flat Lip Bowls II

(4) Simple Flat Lip Bowls with Impressed Strips 13 (I) Fine Jars I (3) Straight Neck Jar with Round Lip I (4) Flared Neck Jar with Round Lip 8 (7) Heavily Flared Neck with Round Lip 3 (8) Heavily Flared Neck with Concave Lip 3

There are several items on other clay bodies. There are three straw tempered bevel rim bowl fragments, two ledge rim jars (Fig. 9m, p), and a small neckless flat lip jar (Fig. 9q), also straw tempered, and a sand tempered clay sickle fragment. All of these are probably later than the Terminal Susa A period. This ceramic assemblage contrasts strongly with those previously discussed. The recently reported excavations on the Acropole of Susa39 indicate that it is a development out of Susa A.

The diagnostic bowl shapes are rare in contemporary highland assemblages, though the method of decoration is somewhat similar. That such a development out of lowland tradition is not merely a local development is demonstrated by Caldwell's report of a similar assemblage of unpainted Susa A forms from Tall-i Ghazir on the Ram Hormuz plain 90 km. south-east of the Susiana plain.40

Johnson's 1970-71 survey of the Susiana plain revealed only twenty-two Terminal Susa A sites covering a total of 33 hectares, indicating about 6ooo people. In contrast, Susa A occurred on about forty-one sites covering about 59 hectares. These Terminal Susa A sites are divided into at least three discrete clusters (Fig. 5), two of which are dominated by small towns of about 5 hectares in area. The period was thus one of decentralization as well as one of declining settled population.

The succeeding Early Uruk period is not well represented either by excavated samples or surface samples from single occupation sites. Hopefully this deficit will soon be eliminated by the work of the French Mission on the Acropole of Susa. In the interim we can note that the statistical studies undertaken by Johnson indicate the following to have been characteristic of the ceramic assemblage of the period. Sand is increasingly used as a tempering material and straw is used primarily for specialized shapes. The bevel rim bowl, primarily the tapered rim variety known as the " proto-bevel-rim bowl " was commonly used. Neckless Ledge Rim Jars, Flared Neck Expanded Rim Jars with concave or

grooved lip, Flared Neck Jars with High Expanded Band Rim, and Jars with long Straight Spouts are all common.

Population increases greatly during this period. There are fifty sites covering 97 hectares. Perhaps 20,000 people were settled on the plain. Susa emerged as a large centre once again, and there is a variety of evidence indicating that it is the centre of a small state.41 This state was probably far more powerful than any of the contemporary polities of the highland valleys or the marginal lowland valleys.

Conclusion This paper has focussed on what we have called the Terminal 'Ubaid Period in south-western Iran.

Between c. 4000-3700 B.C. highland communities used pottery with a crushed rock or straw temper and lowland communities used pottery either untempered or with fine sand tempers. However, there are

a8 These counts differ somewhat from those in Johnson 1972, Table 35, because we have subdivided " round rim bowls " into categories (2) and (3), and " flared rim jars " into categories (4) and (7)-

39 Ibid., Alain Le Brun, op. cit. 40 J. R. Caldwell, op. cit. 41 Gregory A. Johnson, op. cit., p. 101.




certain broad similarities in ceramic complexes. First, the potter's wheel is in general use. Second, functionally similar series of large basins, bowls, and jars are used everywhere, perhaps as a result of similar domestic tasks and organizations. Third, similar stylistic embellishments, such as impressed strip applique and red slip, are widely used. Though each valley and plain seems to have a local pottery tradition, sites of the period can be easily recognized everywhere.

The available data on site size and spacing indicate that the collapse of the lowland groups coupled with the growth of highland centres left lowland and highland enclaves closely matched in terms of population. A few communities with highland technologies appear on a marginal lowland plain. If these represent actual immigration, then the possibility of inter-regional conflict must be con- sidered.

Is there evidence for such phenomena elsewhere in Greater Mesopotamia ? In southern Iraq there is little evidence of the Terminal 'Ubaid period of any kind. Though it was here that Woolley first recognized a Terminal 'Ubaid assemblage in what he termed the Ur-'Ubaid III Graves,42 the assemblage has not been widely recognized in either excavation or survey, perhaps because the period was one of low population densities. The best evidence appears to be that from a survey of the Nippur area by Robert McC. Adams. Here a channel of the Euphrates was first occupied at the end of the 'Ubaid and was completely abandoned in the Late or Middle Uruk period.43 The decline of this settlement enclave might have resulted from a river channel shift.

In northern Iraq little survey data of any sort is available. However, the excavations at Tepe Gawra reveal evidence of unsettled conditions during the transition from 'Ubaid to Uruk.44 Late 'Ubaid Gawra XII suffered from raiding in spite of its defensible position and protecting blockhouses. Succeeding Gawra XIA was dominated by a massive central redoubt. It is interesting to note that the ceramics of Gawra XII are of Northern 'Ubaid fabric, form, and design, with clear lowland affinities, while the ceramics of Gawra XIA are burnished brown and grey wares with few local antecedents. Though the technical and stylistic proto-types of these wares have yet to be demonstrated, the situation is reminiscent of that on the Deh Luran plain.

In the highlands there are two widely separated manifestations which may be Terminal 'Ubaid in age. To the south-west on the Marv Dasht of Central Fars, the Lapui Red Wares,45 first recognized from Layer V of Tall-i Bakun A,48 share many forms with the Terminal 'Ubaid Ceramics previously discussed, though the ware itself is distinct. However, the relative chronological placement of the Lapui communities is unknown, making both external comparisons and the assessment of local demographic trends difficult. To the far north-west, on the Upper Euphrates near Elazig in south-central Anatolia, the Late Chalcolithic ceramics from Fatmah-Kalecik47 and other yet unreported sites show a surprising similarity to the Terminal 'Ubaid materials of Luristan. The clay preparation, firing, and vessel forms are like those from Kunji Cave and Baba Jan. The relative chronological placement of these ceramics and the demographic trends during their period of use are unavailable at present. The distance between this area and Luristan, or even the Mosul Plain is sobering. However little is known of south-western Anatolia, and future work may document a broad zone with similar ceramic techniques from the Central Zagros to the Anti-Taurus during the Terminal 'Ubaid Period.

These broader problems aside, this brief survey suggests that the root of south-west Iranian state and urban development lies in a period of contracting lowland settlement, leading to equally small highland and lowland societies. There are widespread suggestions of conflict. To go beyond these simple propo- sitions requires additional background work on the absolute chronology, on a better technical understanding of ceramics, and on surveys involving closer examination of the terrain to estimate population. Several small excavation programmes would be useful. All the Uruk phases in Luristan require better definition. Elsewhere the Terminal 'Ubaid and Early Uruk proper require better definition. Such

4 Sir Leonard Woolley, Ur: The Early Periods, U.E. IV (Phila- delphia, 1956).

43 Robert McCormick Adams, personal communication. 44 A. J. Tobler, op. cit. "6 William Sumner, Cultural Development in the Kur River Basin

(Ph.D. thesis, Philadelphia, 1972).

46 Alexander Langsdorf and D. E. McCown Tall-i Bakun A, OIP LIV (Chicago, 1942).

4 Robert Whallon and Henry T. Wright, " I968 Fatmah- Kalecik Excavations: Preliminary Report" in "1 968 Cahsmalan" Middle East Technical University Keban Project Publications I, Publication No. I (Ankara, 1970).




local excavations would produce faunal remains useful in the elucidation of the impact of new transport animals such as the ass and the onager as well as of new herding techniques. Some means must be devised to recover the material remains of unsettled nomadic groups, who may have first begun to play an independent political role in this period. Only when some of this work has been undertaken can we answer the intriguing questions of social and political process.




CATALOGUE

Fig. 6: Ceramics from Kunji Cave

(a) Round lip bowl (L-I/6) :48 straw temper, paste 5 YR 6/6, burnished.

(b) Round lip bowl (L-I/3): straw and limestone temper, paste 7.5 YR 6/4, burnished.

(c) Fine jar (N-I/2): straw temper, paste 5 YR 7/6, burnished.

(d) Fine jar (L-I/ -): straw and limestone temper, paste Io YR 7/3, burnished.

(e) Fine jar (F-6/I): no visible inclusions, paste 5 Y 7/2, slight burnish.

(f) Fine jar (H-5/I): no visible inclusions, paste Io YR 8/4, slight burnish, paint Io YR 3/2-

(g) Fine jar sherd (N-1/2): straw and limestone temper, paste 7.5 YR 6/4, burnished, paint 'o YR 4/x. (h) Fine jar sherd (L-5/5): straw and limestone temper, paste 7.5 YR 7/4 paint 2.5 YR 4/2.

(i) Small incurved beaded lip bowl (L-I 6): straw temper, paste 7.5 YR 7/5, burnished.

(j) Small incurved beaded lip bowl (L-I/4): straw temper, paste 5 YR 7/6, burnished.

(k) Flared neck jar with round lip (N-I/6): straw temper, paste 7.5 YR 7/4.

(1) Flared neck jar with round lip (L-I/6): straw and limestone temper, paste 7.5 YR 7/4-

(m) Small incurved bowl (L-I/4): straw temper, paste io YR 8/4-

(n) Simple beaded lip bowl (L-I/4): straw temper, io YR 5/4-

(o) A typical beaded lip bowl (L-I/6): straw temper, paste Io YR 6/4, burnished.

(p) Flat base (N-I/2): straw temper, paste 5 YR 5/3-

(q) Flat base (L-i/4): straw and limestone temper, paste 2.5 YR 6/4, burnished.

(r) Ring base (L-I/4): straw and limestone temper, paste 1o YR 8/3, burnished.

(s) Ring base (N-I/2): straw and limestone temper, paste 2.5 Y 8/3-

(t) Pedestal ring base (L-I/3): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 YR 7/6 burnished.

Fig. 7: Ceramics from Sargarab

(a) Round lip bowl (191):49 straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 2.5 YR 6/2, surface 5 Y 7/3.5, slip 2.5 Y 8/2.

(b) Fine bowl (155): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 2.5 YR 3/1, surface 5 Y 8/I. (c) Flat lip bowl (213): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 YR 6/5, surface 2.5 YR 7/4, slip Io YR 8/3-

(d) Incurved beaded lip bowl (99): straw and limestone temper, paste Io R 4.5/4. surface 2.5 YR 6/4, slip

xo R 7/3.

(e) Flat lip bowl (141): rare straw and sand inclusions, paste 2.5 Y 7/5, surface Io YR 7/4-

(f) Beaded lip bowl (92): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 2.5 YR 6/2, surface 5 YR 6/5, burnished white slip 2.5 YR 8/4.

(g) Bevelled lip bowl (214): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste .5 YR 6/5, surface 5 YR 6/4, slip Io YR 7/3-

(h) Beaded lip bowl (398): straw and limestone temper, reduced core paste Io R 5/2, surface 2.5 YR 6/2, slip io R 7/2.

(i) Incurved round lip bowl (454): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 2.5 YR 6/4, surface

Io R 6/3, white slip 2.5 Y 8/3-

(j) Incurved beaded lip bowl (I): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 1o R 5/5, surface Io R

5/6 to 6/8.

4a The numbers in parentheses are marked on the sherds. The letter number combination preceding the slash designates a grid square: the number following the slash designates a locus

in that square. 16 The number in parenthesis is Neely's serial catalogue number.




Fig. 8: Ceramics from Sargarab

(a) Incurved beaded lip bowl (124): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 Y 6/2, surface 5 Y 7-5/2.

(b) Fine jar (473): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 Y 7/2, surface 5 Y 8/2 to 6/3-

(c) Fine jar (80): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 Y 6/2, surface" 5 Y 8/2.

(d) Straight neck jar with round lip (381): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 YR 5/3, surface 5 YR 5/4-

(e) Neckless jar (394): limestone and straw temper, paste Io YR 7/3, surface Io YR 6/3, paint 2.5 YR 4/3, red slip.

(f) Flared neck jar with rounded lip (356): straw and limestone temper, reduced core, paste 5 YR 4/I, surface 7.5 YR 6/3.

(g) Flared neck jar with rounded lip (19): straw and limestone temper, paste 10 YR 7/3, surface 2.5 YR 7/6, slip Io YR 8/3.

(h) Flared neck jar with expanded rim and convex lip (81): limestone and straw temper, paste Io YR 4/3,

surface 5 YR 6/4, burnished red slip Io R 5/4, black paint. (i) Flared neck jar with same (389): straw and limestone temper, paste 5 YR 5/5, surface 2/5 YR 5/5,

white slip 5 Y 8/I. (j) Flared neck jar with same (I6): straw and limestone temper, paste 2.5 YR 6/6, white slip 5 Y 8/4. (k) Ledge rim jar (366): sand temper, paste io YR 7/3, surface 2.5 Y 7/2. (1) Tray (353): straw temper, reduced core, paste 2.5 YR 3/I to 5/6, surface 2.5 YR 6/6, slip 5 YR 7/2 to 8/3.

Fig. 9: Ceramics from KS 269

(a) Round lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste 7.5 YR 6.5/5, surface io YR 8/3-

(b) Fine bowl: rare limestone and sand inclusions, paste 7.5 YR 7/5, surface o YR 8/3, light slip.

(c) Flat lip bowl: rare sand and limestone inclusions, paste Io YR 8/5, surface 2.5 Y 8/2.

(d) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste 2.5 Y 8/3, surface 2.5 Y 8/2, D. c. 40 cm.

(e) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste io YR 8/3, surface Io YR 8/4, D. c. 58 cm.

(f) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste 2.5 Y 7/3, surface io YR 7/3, vessel oval in plan, average D. c. 55 cm.

(g) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste io YR 7.5/4, surface 2.5 Y 8/3, light slip. D. c. 6o cm.

(h) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste 7.5 YR 7/5, surface Io YR 8/3, D. c. 38 cm.

(i) Flat lip bowl: no visible inclusions, paste 7.5 YR 8/5, surface Io YR 8/4, D. c. 52 cm.

(j) Fine jar: rare straw and limestone inclusions, paste Io YR 8/4, surface Io YR 8/3.5.

(k) Flared neck jar with round lip: no visible inclusions, paste 2.5 YR 6/6, surface 2.5 Y 8/1, red slip.

(1) Flared neck jar with round lip: no visible inclusions, paste 7.5 YR 7/4, surface 2.5 YR 8/2, possible slip.

(m) Ledge rim jar: no visible inclusions, paste 5 YR 8/4, surface Io YR 8/4, light slip.

(n) Heavily flared neck with round lip: no visible inclusions, paste 2.5 Y 7/3, surface 2.5 Y 7-5/3-

(o) Heavily flared neck with concave lip: no visible inclusions, paste 5 YR 7/6, surface Io YR 8/4, sand grains impressed into interior surface.

(p) Neckless jar: straw temper, paste 7.5 YR 8/5, surface io YR 8/3. (q) Ledge rim jar: no visible inclusions: paste io YR 7/4, surface Io YR 8/4.




Fig. 6. Ceramics from Kunji Cave.




Fig. 7. Ceramics from Sargarab.




Fig. 8. Ceramics from Sargarab.




Fig. 9. Ceramics from KS 269.



Early Fourth Millennium Developments in Southwestern Iran

Documents

Transcript of Early Fourth Millennium Developments in Southwestern Iran