|
·
The one geographical difference between Iran
and Mesopotamia
is that Iran
is not united by one or few major rivers; therefore, the communication
between the valleys is less and so is the spread of technologies (greater
time-lag). In consequence, we face greater regional particularisms,
while opportunities for the development of bigger cities are less.
·
Moreover, one should keep in mind that Iran,
especially Elam
and Susiana,
were in touch with Mesopotamia
thanks to the numerous mountain passes, and therefore present influences
from that region.
·
For the time classification, as I’ve
just noted, regional particularisms are strong. I will try to make those
classifications clear by drawing parallelisms with Babylonia
and Assyria,
but keep in mind that “’Ubaid” and “Uruk-Jamdat Nasr” are only there for
reference, but do not apply per se to the Iranian cultures, unless
otherwise specified
|
|
Because of
the climate, the tribes of the Deh Luran plain, which were goat
herders, would move to the higher mountains for the summer to find
pastures, although evidences of former river-beds seem to indicate that the
water supply was more important at that time. Thus the earlier sites are
only occupied for a part of the year until the irrigation techniques
allowed to stay in the valley the whole year.
Once this
occurred, they were keener on producing pottery, too fragile for the constant
travels those people had to undertake each year before. However, late
Neolithic man did not settle as he kept traveling a lot, an important
factor for the spread of ideas and technologies, which allowed the
steadily-growing population to live on naturally poorer grounds than they
used to.
We’ve
already talked about pre-‘Ubaid cultures at Ali-Kosh (see
chapter 1).
The site was abandoned at around 5700-5600, but we can pick up the
developments in the neighborhood at Tepe Sabz a couple of centuries
later. Pisé is used for houses and buff-ware appears (a
development paralleled in Susiana);
agriculture is then more efficient with a great variety of plants;
there are evidences of the use of irrigation. At the top levels, bent
nails, seals and copper are all proof that we’ve reach the ‘Ubaid to
Uruk transition.
This can
also be witnessed at Tepe Mussian and the neighborhood, between the
Duwairij and the Tib rivers. This site reveals an occupation that starts
after the abandon of Ali-Kosh to then overlap with Tepe Sabz. Typical
greenish ‘Ubaid ware was found, as well as some dark sherds of Hajji
Muhammad or early Eridu-‘Ubaid. This means that, in this region, we face
a complete sequence from aceramic Bus Mordeh at Ali-Kosh to Uruk at Tepe
Sabz and Mussian (with some seals found there as well); most Uruk finds
are reminiscent of those from Babylonia.
Another
major district lies some 80 km eastwards. The system of rivers must have
carried more water than in the Deh Luran plain, which would explain the
apparition there of a city the size of Susa.
The pottery allows us to distinguish 5 sequent cultures known as Susiana
a-e, the latest contemporary with another culture identified as Susa
A. Those cultures cover the period we are currently examining, namely
‘Ubaid to Jamdat Nasr.
Susiana
a ware was characterized with what
has been called “basket-work” patterns, cross-hatching and incisions.
This ware follows chronologically that of Ali-Kosh and is contemporary with
that of Tepe Sabz. It is a proof of the continuity from the earliest
pottery known to that of ‘Ubaid. Susiana b, because of its likeness to
Halaf and Hajji Muhammad, suggests some major movements of populations
at that time that brought those techniques in this district, and may be
contemporary with Eridu 14, while Susiana c is linked with early ‘Ubaid and
Susiana d with the developments of Gawra 13.
Therefore, Susiana
e-Susa A coincides with the end of ‘Ubaid-early Uruk, with a pottery
displaying Babylonian influences, even if indirect (both ware being
different, but some unusual features can only be explained by the existence
of the concurrent Uruk). This red ware displays the great skills of its
makers, in terms of firing, forms and decoration, the last depicting
for us a vivid image of the everyday life in an ever-modern style.
Stamps
and button seals also parallel the
developments in Gawra12-13, as does the metal work, while the
relative abundance of it suggests that it was present in greater quantities
in their environment than in Babylonia.
Linen also shows great skills that can
only have been learned through centuries of practice. In sum, Susiana
e-Susa A may have started early in the 4th millennium to
culminate at about 3500.
The ware
of Susa B’s greatest characteristic is the sudden change of shapes,
alike to those found in Babylonia (Uruk 17-6), resembling metal vessels,
while the seals were more in the continuation of the former period, quite a
logical development since Iran was in advance compared with Babylonia in
that regard. The naturalistic representations are finer than they used
to be.
The next
stage, Susa C, announces the beginnings of writing
|
|
As usual, I did
not try to translate everything here, but I wanted to underline a certain
number of points (again subject to changes as I come across more recent
information.)
Before ‘Ubaid, a characteristic of the life of the tribes in Iran is
that they used to live in semi-permanent dwellings, as they would wander
higher in the mountains in summers, and agriculture would develop later
than in the rest of the Near East. This is notably true in Luristan,
as the evidence found on the site of Tepe Guran shows us.
There, most levels precede ‘Ubaid. Still, from the 12th level
onwards (up to the 22nd and last), we start to find correlations
between the ware there and that of early Eridu, although they may not have
been contemporary (which let us believe that we may find earlier remains
around Eridu than those find in the city proper); that from the 14th
(red burnished and slipped) is reminiscent of Sialk I, of which I’ll write
about a little later.
In the last valley north, always in Luristan, is Tepe Giyan,
which has the particularity to show clear connections with prehistoric Assyria and Susiana, on top of its own traditions: that can be
explained by the location, near the Hamadan-Tihran thoroughfare. From there
on, it was easy to access Mesopotamia.
North-west we have Azerbaijan, the early occupation of which is
relatively unknown, although it appears that the handicraft of those first
settlers was relatively primitive compared to the Iranian sites we’ve
already considered, which may be explained by the fact that their link with
Mesopotamia was a tenuous one.
Still relatively close to Khuzistan (SE) lies the province of Fars. There are 2 mounds in a good pasture land but
with little running water, Bakun A and Bakun B, the first
being the latest. We don’t know how old Bakun B is: only the last levels
have painted pottery. Although the settlers were certainly a simple peasant
folk, they displayed good crafts in button and stamp seals, stone vases and
pottery; this was actually very comparable with that of Susa A, as here too thin-walled and delicate ware is
sensitively decorated with both geometrical and naturalistic designs. This
ware must be from around 3500.
It is also to be noted that they are more sites in the same plain,
indicating that this ‘Ubaid-early Uruk period was a prosperous one for the
farmers and herders of the region.
Let’s turn now to our last two sites of this chapter on the early
cities in the Near
East,
before turning our attention to other prehistoric civilizations in eastern Mediterranean. I’ve
already been referring to Tepe Sialk a few times along the
way. It is a site quite exceptional for its pottery, and was ideally
situated on the trade route to the Elburz and western Iran. It is therefore not a surprise to find traces of
influences both from the west and the east.
Already in the first levels, in Sialk I (out of IV; pre-‘Ubaid) we
find both unpainted and painted ware. In Sialk II (from early to
mid-Ubaid), we find, in architecture, the famous thumb—prints on the
mud-bricks, as in Eridu level 15.
This period doesn’t break continuity with Sialk I.
Sialk III is an important new stage: the city lies now south of the old
mound, and, although there is still no break in continuity, the progresses
are evident in almost every field. Sialk III covers some stage of the
‘Ubaid and, at the end, the Uruk-Jamdat Nasr period.
The rooms in the houses are now far more spacious, but still
irregularly constructed. The pottery is now turned on the wheel, and the
patterns are now more complicated and intricate, and can be compared, to
some extent, to that of Mesopotamia, with shapes reminiscent of those found
in Eridu or Gawra 13, notably the design of one sherd, men dancing,
matching a seal found there. There are also greyish ware (late ‘Ubaid) and
other features paralleled in Bakun A and Susa A. All this comes as a proof that most of Sialk
III couldn’t have happened before late ‘Ubaid
The last period, Sialk IV, marks a sharp break, which may be
explained because, after the sack of the city at the end of Sialk III, the
site would have remained uninhabited for a little while. The painted and unpainted
vessels with long spouts found there suggest that we are dealing with a
culture contemporary with the latest of the Jamdat Nasr.
There’s been a major discovery at Sialk IV: that of a collection of
inscribed tablets, some probably inventories of sort, representative
of a local language. Typical of the Jamdat Nasr period, seals have been
found. The dramatic increase of the number of lapis-lazuli discovered at
that stage may be a sign of the increase of importance of Sialk as
commercial center.
At last, we come to Tepe Hisar, on the south size of the Elbruz, at about 1300m above sea level. It was also
connected to the trans-Caspian trade. The whole sequence found there has
been divided into 3 periods, I, II and III. Hisar I and early II are very
close in all points to Sialk III, with the first dominated by painted
pottery and the second by an increasing of grey ware, heralding the
equivalent of the Uruk-Jamdat Nasr period. After the early Hisar I, red and
brown pottery was wheel-turned and decorated with simple geometric and naturalistic
designs, the later beginning, unlike the fashion at Sialk, to be deformed
slightly. The houses are still
poorly built, while the metal work, in the contrary, is pretty rich and
diversified.
*****To be perfectly honest, this part is ONLY based on the
CAH, as so far, I have found no more information on those cities. Since I’m
arriving to the end of the first volume, I hope to have more time to look
for updates in a near future*****
|
