Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin, Upper Khuzestan Plain, Greater Susiana, Iran 9781407309323, 9781407339139

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
Acknowledgments
Contents
List of Maps
List of Figures
List of Tables
CHAPTER 1: Introduction
CHAPTER 2: Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana
CHAPTER 3: Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain
CHAPTER 4: The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain
CHAPTER 5: Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations
CHAPTER 6: Summary and Conclusion
Bibliography
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2
APPENDIX 3
APPENDIX 4
APPENDIX 5

Citation preview

BAR S2347 2012 MOGHADDAM LATER VILLAGE PERIOD SETTLEMENT DEVELOPMENT IN THE KARUN RIVER BASIN

B A R

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin, Upper Khuzestan Plain, Greater Susiana, Iran Abbas Moghaddam

BAR International Series 2347 2012

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin, Upper Khuzestan Plain, Greater Susiana, Iran Abbas Moghaddam

BAR International Series 2347 2012

ISBN 9781407309323 paperback ISBN 9781407339139 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407309323 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

To Negin & Mani

i

ii

Acknowledgments This work would not have been possible without the help of numerous people and organizations. My greatest debt is unquestionably to Professor Daniel Potts. It was his sponsorship, total support, encouragement and advice that enabled me to tackle this huge task. I cannot thank him enough. I am greatly indebted to the many people who have contributed to my research by joining me in the field. In particular, thanks are due to Negin Miri, Shahrbanu Soleymani, Dr. Margareta Tengberg, Afshin Lazar Doosti, Behzad Faryadiyan, Alireza Khosrow Zadeh, Abolfazl Àli, Mohammad Taghi Atai, Hassan Ali Arab, Gholam Shirzadi, Syros Jabbar Zadeh, Hamid Reza Qorbni, Ali Maleki, Shahram Abdolvand, Rahim Salamati, Said Parsaiian, Omid Fartash, Abd al Hamid Rezaii, Jalal Karimi, Yaqub Zallaghi, Ahmad Shokrallahi and Behrouz Khalaj Pour. Special thanks are due to Professor Shapur Malek Shahmirzadi, my teacher at Tehran University. I received my introduction to the archaeology of Deh Luran and Khuzestan plains from him in 1992. I am further indebted to Dr. Abbas Alizadeh, who has had a major influence in familiarizing me with the Susiana specific archaeological problems during the Chogha Bonut project in 1996, to Mrs. Firooze Sheybani, for her efforts in expanding my skills as a field archaeologist, and to Mr. Jebreil Nokandeh, with whom I began my carrier in Khuzestan, for his kind support and encouragement, and his discussions with me regarding his unpublished survey results from the Mehran Plain. I had a brief, and yet highly informative opportunity to work with Tony Wilkinson and Nicholas Kouchoukos in our 2002 season in Khuzestan. Their knowledge and experience has informed me greatly, allowing me to synthesize a broad spectrum of ideas into a cohesive whole. I thank both of them. Thanks must also go to Dr. Margareta Tengberg, Dr. Marjane Mashkour and Miss. Azadeh Mohaseb, Mrs. Karyn Weaseling, Dr. J. Connan and Mr. Rahmat Naderi for their invaluable help studying the excavation material. I am grateful to Miss Mohaddeseh Mansouri Razi and Mr. Said Parsaiian for drawing sherds and objects finds during the course of our excavation. A number of people offered their help while we were in the field. I wish to thank Mr. Seyyed Nour al Din Mir Marashi, a local guard from the Cultural Heritage Organization at Shushtar for his support during our various fieldwork seasons, our friends in the nearby villages to our dig, including, Mr. Sheykh Saddam Agili and his extended family, in the village of Shebat Tuleh, Mr. Hosyn Qoli Kiani, head of a Bakhtiyari nomad family near Tall-e Abu Chizan, and Mr. Yasser Hamid, to whom I am indebted for his compassion and local support. My sincere thanks also go to Mr. Thomas Ellicott, Dr. Edna Wong, Dr. Bronwen Dyson, Dr. Bernadette McCall and Dr. Fiona Kidd for their help with the English text and German translation. I would like to thank the staff of the Inter-library Loans office at the University of Sydney’s Fisher Library. Through their excellent service, I was able to access some of the references I required that were not held in Sydney. Thanks are also due to the staff of the Archaeological Computing Lab (ACL) at the University of Sydney, especially to Andrew Wilson. I wish to express my gratitude to Mr. Jalil Golshan former research deputy of the Iranian Cultural Heritage Handcraft and Tourisms Organization (ICHHTO) and the former Director of the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (ICAR), Prof. Masoud Azarnoush, for granting the permission and funding to do the fieldwork. I also wish to acknowledge the support of the local administrations in Shushtar, Ahwaz and Shush, in particular Mr. Hosyn Arastou Zadeh, the head of the Shushtar ICHTTO. Special thanks go to Mr. Naser Chegini, former director of ICAR, for his kind support and encouragement. The investigations in the Eastern Plain were funded by the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (ICAR) and the Near Eastern Archaeological Foundation (NEAF) of the University of the Sydney. I am grateful to all people in ICAR and NEAF, especially to Profs. M. Azarnoush and D. T. Potts for their help and favorable consideration of my grant applications. I wish to thank all my family, especially My Mother Mrs. K. Amini and my brother, Prof. A. Moghadamnia, for their unwavering support and encouragement.

iii

Contents CHAPTER 1.Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 Space (Geographical Framework)....................................................................................................... 1 Time (Chronological Framework).......................................................................................................3 Prehistoric Archaeology in Greater Susiana: a review........................................................................ 3 Previous Studies: achievements and problems....................................................................................5 Mehran Plain........................................................................................................................................ 5 Deh Luran Plain...................................................................................................................................5 Susiana Plain........................................................................................................................................5 Eastern Khuzestan Plains.....................................................................................................................7 Study Area: The Eastern Plain.............................................................................................................7 Previous Research in the Eastern Plain and Background of the Present Project................................. 8 Research Objectives............................................................................................................................. 8 Research Strategy..............................................................................................................................10 Structure of this work........................................................................................................................ 11 CHAPTER 2. Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana

Summary of Previous Views on the Social Organization of the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana..............................................................................................................................12 Political Economy and the Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana..............................................................................................................................16

CHAPTER 3. Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain............................................................. 21 General Description ..........................................................................................................................21 Surface Characteristics of the Eastern Plain......................................................................................21 Deposition.......................................................................................................................................... 22 Human Interference and an Unstable Landscape.............................................................................. 25 Erosion Features................................................................................................................................ 30 Climate and Rainfall..........................................................................................................................32 Vegetation..........................................................................................................................................33 Further Observations: Modern Land Use and Population................................................................. 33 Modern Settlements...........................................................................................................................35 Ecological Niches Attractive to Nomads (ENAN) in the Region...................................................... 41 Summary............................................................................................................................................ 42 CHAPTER 4. The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain................................43 Introduction........................................................................................................................................43 Techniques and Methodological Considerations............................................................................... 43 Definitions......................................................................................................................................... 46 Digital Data Integration Database (DDID)........................................................................................46 Part one: A history of the settlement landscape after the fourth millennium B.C....................46 Primary and Secondary Settlement Phases........................................................................................46 Susa III Settlements (3100-2600 B.C.)..............................................................................................47 Elamite Period (2600-539 B.C.)........................................................................................................ 48 Middle Elamite Phase........................................................................................................................ 49 Neo Elamite Phase............................................................................................................................. 51 Achaemenid Period (521-325 B.C.)..................................................................................................51 Parthian Period (324 B.C-250 A.D.).................................................................................................. 53 Sasanian Period (250-640 A.D.)........................................................................................................ 53 Islamic Period (Early and Middle Islamic era ca. 640-1100 A.D)....................................................55

iv

Part Two: Later Village Period settlement Landscape of the Eastern Plain.............................. 57 Introduction........................................................................................................................................57 Settlement Description.......................................................................................................................58 Summary and Conclusion..................................................................................................................65 Late Middle Susiana (5000- 4600 B.C)............................................................................................. 65 Late Susiana 1 / Susiana d, phase (4600-4200 B.C).......................................................................... 67 Late Susiana 2/ Susa A.......................................................................................................................69 Uruk phase.........................................................................................................................................70 CHAPTER 5. Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations................................. 72 Introduction........................................................................................................................................72 Part One: Tall-e Abu Chizan and its Environs.............................................................................74 Exposed Sections around the Site...................................................................................................... 77 Site Catchments and Resource Niches..............................................................................................82 Vegetation .........................................................................................................................................83 Clay.................................................................................................................................................... 83 Water..................................................................................................................................................83 Chipped Stone Source........................................................................................................................84 Bitumen..............................................................................................................................................84 Internal Spatial Organization............................................................................................................. 84 Topographic Characteristics and Site Taphonomy............................................................................ 84 Part Two - Controlled Sampling Survey (CSS)............................................................................. 87 Introduction........................................................................................................................................88 Aims................................................................................................................................................... 88 Methodology...................................................................................................................................... 88 Controlled Sampling Survey Catalogue............................................................................................89 Part Three- Excavations................................................................................................................ 112 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 112 Methodology.................................................................................................................................... 112 Area A ............................................................................................................................................. 113 Area B.............................................................................................................................................. 121 Area C.............................................................................................................................................. 126 Area D ............................................................................................................................................127 Summary.......................................................................................................................................... 129 CHAPTER 6. Summary and Conclusion..............................................................................................138 Bibliography.........................................................................................................................................140 APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection...................................................................................... 151 APPENDIX 2. Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan by Margareta Tengberg................... 248 APPENDIX 3. Observations on the Faunal Remains of Tall-e Abu Chizan by Marhjane Mashkour and Azadeh Mohaseb......................................................................................256 APPENDIX 4. Chipped Stone from Tall-e Abu Chizan.......................................................................267 APPENDIX 5. Radiocarbon Dates from Tall-e Abu Chizan................................................................ 279

v

List of Maps Map 1.1 Map 1.2 Map 2.1 Map 3.1 Map 3.2 Map 3.3 Map 3.4 Map 4.1 Map 4.2 Map 4.3 Map 4.4 Map 4.5 Map 4.6 Map 4.7 Map 4.8 Map 4.9 Map 4.10 Map 4.11 Map 4.12 Map 4.13 Map 4.14 Map 4.15 Map 4.16 Map 4.17 Map 4.18 Map 4.19 Map 4.20 Map 4.21 Map 4.22 Map 4.23 Map 4.24 Map 4.25 Map 4.26 Map 5.1 Map 5.2 Map 5.3 Map 5.4

Map Showing the Extent of the Greater Susiana Map Showing the Location of the Eastern Plain Map Showing the Location of Major Later Village Period Sites, their adjacent ecological niches attractive for Nomads and bitumen sources in the Greater Susiana Map showing the Geological and Geographical Features of the Eastern Plain Gargar Irrigation Organs Soil Map of Khuzestan Modified from the Latest Khuzestan Soil Map Produced by Agriculture Ministry of Iran 1370 (1991) Modern Showing the Distribution of Modern Settlements across the Eastern Plain Natural Resources and the Investigated Areas to the Eastern Plain Susa III Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Old Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Middle Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Neo Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Achaemenid Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Parthian Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Sasanian Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Early Islamic Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Middle Islamic Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Map of KS 1539 Map of KS 1580 Map of KS 1593 Map of KS 1617 Map of KS 1626 Map of KS 1638 Map of KS 1648 Map of KS 1650 Map of KS 1655 Map of KS 1656 Map of KS 1657 Map of KS 1658 Late Middle Susiana Phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Late Susiana 1 Phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Late Susiana 2 Phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Uruk Period Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain Map showing geological features around Tall-e Abu Chizan Six major topographic zones at Tall-e Abu Chizan Topographic Map of Tall-e Abu Chizan, Showing the Location of the Squares Surveyed through the Controlled Sampling Survey, Excavated Areas and the Kilns at Area D Plan of the Exposed Kilns Recovered at Area D

vi

2 9 18 22 26 35 38 44 47 49 50 50 52 52 54 54 57 58 59 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 64 65 66 68 69 70 72 85 113 127

List of Figures Figure 2.1

Photo Showing Modern Natural Setting around Sarab Maimeh District, opposite to the Hakalan Cemetery ( A. is taken by the author in July 2002, B. After Haerinck and Overlate 1996, fig 60)

19

Figure 3.1

Photo Showing the Location of Canyons around Tall-e Abu Chizan (View from 2.4 kms SW of the Site). Photo showing the location of Old and New Salamat Villages Elevation Map of the Mianab Plain Four Proposed Changes affected the Landscape of the Region along the Gargar River Grazing Lands in the Gullies around Modern Villages in the Study Region Average Precipitation of Different Areas in the Khuzestan Province Rainfall Variability between 1993 and 2003 in the Ram Hormoz Area Location of the Ecological Niches Attractive to Nomads Nucleated Early Islamic Site of Karevansara (KS 1654) and its Linked Qanat System Location of Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) on the Landsat Image of the Study Region Location of Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) on a Terrace-shaped Fan adjacent to the Southern Slopes of the Zagros Mountains Landscape around Tall-e Abu Chizan, View from Zagros Foothills Photo Showing the Chah-e Naft Sefid Canyon Three Distinct Topographical Zones of the Naft Sefid Fan Current Channel Activity in the Areas along the Major Ephemeral Stream Courses of Darreh Omm Saleh, Darre Hasan Shahi and Darreh Naft Exposed Section to the Northeast of the Site Exposed Section to the Southwest of the Site. Photo shows a channel cut, clearly visible in the left hand side of the “Picked Island” in the exposed section to the northwest of the site and five channel shifts through time The High Points (Picked Islands) around Tall-e Abu Chizan Exposed Section to the Southern of the Site. Distinct Types of Qanat Shafts in the Southern Section are visible. Image Showing the Location of a Well Discovered near the Zagros Foothills as well as 13 Transects around the Site, Surveyed during 4 Different Seasons and the Location of the “Bedded Gravel Path”, Recorded near the Northeast Sector of the Site Salty Pathways Created by Animal Footprints at Tall-e Abu Chizan Parallel Strips of Soil at the Stripped Ridge Zone

23

Heavy Collapsed Load in the Dewclaw Zone The Old Gully to the West of Tall-e Abu Chizan Lump of Clay attached to the Exterior Rim of a Vessels An Example of the Tunneling Erosion Process at Square J9 Sherd Density in Area A Stratigraphy of Area A Rodent Holes Visible across the Surface and even in the Balks of Area A-Layer 20 Heavily compressed Deposits in Area-Layer 17 A Broken Bituminous Vessel Recovered from Area A-Layer 14 Stratigraphy of Area B

86 87 108 109 114 115 115

Figure 3.2 Figure 3.3 Figure 3.4 Figure 3.5 Figure 3.6 Figure 3.7 Figure 3.8 Figure 4.1 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2 Figure 5.3 Figure 5.4 Figure 5.5 Figure 5.6 Figure 5.7 Figure 5.8

Figure 5.9 Figure 5.10 Figure 5. 11

Figure 5.12 Figure 5.13 Figure 5.14 Figure 5.15 Figure 5.16 Figure 5.17 Figure 5.18 Figure 5.19 Figure 5.20 Figure 5.21 Figure 5.22 Figure 5.23

vii

24 27 29 30 32 32 41 56 73 74 74 75 76 77 78 80

80 81 82

84 86

116 118 121

Figure 5.24 Figure 5.25 Figure 5.26 Figure 5.27 Figure 5.28-5.30 Figure 5.31-5.32 Figure A1.1-A1.8 Figure A1.9-A1-39 Figure A1.40-A1-49 Figure A2.1 Figure A2.2 Figure A2.3 Figure A3.1 Figure A3.2 Figure A3.3 Figure A3.4 Figure A3.5 Figure A3.6 Figure A3.7 Figure A3.8 Figure A4.1 Figure A4.2 Figure A4.3 Figure A4.4 Figure A4.5 Figure A4.6 Figure A4.7 Figure A4.8

1x1 m Squares at Area C The Exposed Kilns Located on One of the Ridges at Area D after Excavation Area D-Kiln D2 Area D-Kiln D2 Objects from Area A, B and C. Slag and wasters were recovered among the ashy deposits beside the features 1 and 10 of the Area C Late Middle Susiana Pottery Catalogue Late Susiana Pottery Catalogue Uruk Pottery Catalogue Stages of water floatation employed to extract archaeobotanical remains at Tall-e Abu Chizan Example of Crops and Wild Species Identified at Tall-e Abu Chizan Dung-like Conglomerates of Charred Organic Material (Area C, Layer 1, Feature 2) Bone Collection from the 1st Season of Excavation at Tall-e Abu Chizan Identified Bone Fragments from the 1st Season of Excavation at Tall-e Abu Chizan Crystal Formation and Bone Fracturing, Area B, Tall-e Abu Chizan Close Up of Concretions on Bone in Figure A4.3 Bone Point from Area A, Tall-e Abu Chizan Species Composition for each Area based on MinAU- Tall-e Abu Chizan (excluding rodent) Mandible-Possible Wild Boar from Area B of Tall-e Abu Chizan Upper Molar of an Indian Gerbil (Tatera indica) from Area A, Tall-e Abu Chizan Blades from Area B, Area C and CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Blades from Area C and CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Blades, Bladelets, Arrowheads and Flakes from Area B, Area C and CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Bladelets and Bladelet Cores from Area C and CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Blade and Flake and Blade and Bladelet Cores found during CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Flake Cores found during CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan Stone Hoes found during CSS at Tall-e Abu Chizan Stone Hoes found during CSS, Tall-e Abu Chizan

viii

124 126 128 128 130-135 136-137 160-175 176-237 238-247 254 255 255 257 257 260 260 262 262 263 265 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278

List of Tables Table 1 Table 2.1 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Table 3.4 Table 3.5 Table 3.6 Table 3.7 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Table 5.5 Table 5.6 Table A1.1 Table A2.1 Table A2.2 Table A3.1 Table A3.2 Table A3.3 Table A3.4 Table A3.5 Table A3.6 Table A3.7 Table A3.8 Table A4.1 Table A5.1

Relative Chronology of the Greater Susiana During the Village Period Statistic Information Provided by the Local Iranian Nomads Affairs Organization regarding the Nomadic Population of the Khuzestan Province General Plant Species of the Eastern Plain Land and Soil Description of the Study Region. Modified from the Latest Khuzestan Soil Map Produced by Agriculture Ministry of Iran 1370 (1991) Modern Settlements in the Eastern Plain Eastern Plain Settlement Types Total Population for Different Sectors of the Eastern Plain Road Types in the Eastern Plain Contrast in the Variety of the Local Products between the Irrigated and Dry Farming Zones of the Eastern Plain List of the Employed Cartographic Material for DDID Late Middle Susiana Phase Settlements Late Susiana 1 Phase Settlements Late Susiana 2 Phase Settlements Uruk Period Settlements Descriptive Summary of the Pottery and Chipped Stone Collection of 66 Squares Surveyed during the Controlled Sampling Survey of Tall-e Abu Chizan. Size Terms Used in this Study to Refer to the Cultural Material Found during the Excavation Excavation Elevation Points in Area A Excavation Elevation Points in Area B Distribution of Sherds in Area B Excavation Elevation Points in Area C Fabric Differences between 6 families at Tall-e Abu Chizan and Chogha Mish LMS Pottery Archaeobotanical Remains from Area A, Season 2005 Archaeobotanical Remains from Areas B and C Minimum Number of Anatomical Units (MinAU) for all Assigned Species, Tall-e Abu Chizan Maximum Number of Anatomical Units (MinAU) – includes all fragments, Tall-e Abu Chizan Incident of Concretions (MaxAU excluding loose teeth) Including Erosions. For All Contexts, Tall-e Abu Chizan Incident of Gnawing (MaxAU excluding loose teeth and small mammals) for All Areas, Tall-e Abu Chizan Incident of Burning (MaxAU excluding loose teeth) from All Areas, Tall-e Abu Chizan Analysis of Species by Context (Tall-e Abu Chizan). MinAu (excluding rodent) Epiphyseal fusion evidence for post-neonatal mortality for Ovicaprids and cattle Measurements taken from all bones and species, Tall-e Abu Chizan Flint Color Diversity in the Tall-e Abu Chizan Stone Tool collection Radiocarbon dates from Tall-e Abu Chizan Area A

ix

2 20 33 34 36-37 39 39 39 40 46 67 67 68 71 90-103 112 114 121 122 123 152 251 252-253 259 259 260 261 261 262 263 266 267 280

x

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

This study aims to re-evaluate the previous understanding of the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana by focusing mostly on settlement and landscape. This is addressed from the perspective of the small and previously least explored plain known in this study as the Eastern Plain. By providing a picture of the previously unknown prehistoric human occupations in the Eastern plain through an examination and assessment of recent survey and excavation results and contextualizing this information with the results of previous research carried out in the Greater Susiana plains, it is hoped that this study will contribute to our understanding of human occupation and settlement pattern between ca. 5000 and 3500 B.C. in southwestern Iran. This chapter aims firstly to define the spatial and temporal frame of this study. The history of the major prehistoric research activities in the south-west lowland plains of Iran will be reviewed briefly, addressing their achievements and shortcomings. The current study will be placed in perspective through an in-depth discussion of research objectives and strategies. Finally, the overall structure of this study will be presented.

al. 1999: 180). These boundaries have formed a distinct, and to some extent unique, region in southwest Asia that provides access to the three distinct environmental zones of the highland Zagros, lowland Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf. Recently, Malek Shahmirzadi has used the term “Cultural Khuziyan” for this area (Malek Shahmirzadi 1997: 406). Emphasizing the geographical similarities between the different plains of southwestern Iran, he used the available chronological evidence (Voigt and Dyson 1992; Hole 1987b; Alizadeh 1992) to define a holistic, geo-cultural approach to the region. He defined the region of Khuziyan as “a vast cultural zone in southwestern Iran that extends from Pashmi mountain foothills in the Ilam province in northwest to Gachsaran area in southeast near the Persian Gulf shorelines. It is divided from Mesopotamia by the Tigris and Arvandrood (Shat al-Arab) in the west and from the Iranian central plateau by the Zagros Mountains in the north” (Malek Shahmirzadi 1997: 406). “Greater Susiana” is another term that has been applied to this region (Kouchoukos 1998: 80). Greater Susiana, which was previously seen as an adjunct to Greater Mesopotamia, defines a distinct region in southwest Asia, which is geographically and somehow culturally different than the rest of what is known as Greater Mesopotamia. Studies in other parts of the Near East have also excluded individual regions, which were already labeled under “Greater Mesopotamia”, as smaller cultural units (cf. Wilkinson 2000: 222-223). The prevailing view in most of the general studies on southwestern Iran is that the Susiana plain is geographically an extension of the lower Mesopotamian Plain. However, this is not entirely correct. Geographically, it is a distinct and markedly unique interface zone that lies between lowland Mesopotamia and the highland Zagros. It can be considered as an “ecotone” which is a transitional area between two adjacent ecological ecosystems bisected by several rivers, foothills and plains formed by tectonic uplift and alluvial deposition. Climatically, it is capable of sustaining both dry and irrigational farming. Strategically, it has easy access to all three zones (lowland Mesopotamia, highland Zagros and Persian Gulf). It also has access to the foothills and highland pastures together with their vast resources: wool, stones (of different types), wood, bitumen, tree fruits, metal ore, gypsum etc (see Pollock 1999: 40, box 4). The proximity of Greater Susiana to the marshlands and their diverse ecosystem of plants, faunal species and productivity in the south and southwest is still largely neglected (see also Hole et al. 1969: 10-22; Neely 1974: 22; Baeteman et al. 2004-2005: 156; and for a comprehensive study on Lower Khuzestan Plains

Space (Geographical Framework) The area from the small valley of Mehran in the northwest to the Zuhreh valley in the southeast constitutes the “Southwestern Lowlands of Iran” (Map 1.1). In the past, different approaches and terminologies have been applied to this region which was considered part of the “Assyrian Steppes” (Flannery 1965: 1247; Carter 1971: 11). The marked geographic, environmental and economic contrast between these steppes as a “single developing ecosystem” (Hole and Flannery 1968: 198), and the immediately adjacent regions - the Zagros inner valleys in the north and east (Lurestan and Fars) and the lowlands regions of southern Mesopotamia as well as the northern low-lying plains of the Persian Gulf - has long been recognized and this region has long been considered a suitable area in which to study “man’s exploitation” of the environment since the early periods (Ibid: 148-9). More broadly, these steppes can be defined as a zone of transition between the adjacent ecological systems of the highlands and the lowlands. Broadly speaking, the Southwestern lowlands are defined by the first folds of the Zagros Mountains to the north and several low, outlying folds in the south including Jebel Hamrin and the Dezful, Haft Tape, Shaur, Ahwaz, Kupal and Gachsaran anticlines. Towards the south and southeast, the region is hemmed in by the Persian Gulf. The Zagros Mountains and the aforementioned anticlines run in a parallel, northwest - southeast direction. Several smaller and larger plains were created here as a result of tectonic uplift and alluvial processes (cf. Hamzehpour et

1

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 1. Map showing the extent of the Greater Susiana.

Dyson (Dyson 1965: 6) proposed a more detailed description of southwestern Iran which was further amplified by Carter (Carter 1971: 8-12), whose approach provides a more meaningful basis for studying the plains of Khuzestan by facilitating a framework for analyzing inter-valley cultural interaction during the Elamite era. She divided the Khuzestan plains into three groups: the Lower Plains situated between the Tigris marshes and coastal plains and the outer chain of Jabal Hamrin in the west to Behbahan; the Middle Plains stretching from Deh Luran to Ram Hormoz including the Deh Luran, Central Khuzestan and Ram Hormoz plains, situated mostly within the Assyrian Steppe; and lastly the Upper Plains, located to the north of the inner chains from Shushtar to the east of Ram Hormoz plain and the high valleys between Malamir and Qaleh Tul (Carter 1971: 326-329 and figs. 1-2).

see Heyvaert and Baeteman 2007). Lastly, the cultural development of Greater Susiana was, in Nissen’s words “quite distinct from that of Mesopotamia” (Nissen 1988: 87). Adams divided southwestern Iran lowlands into three zones. The first is the lower plain or old shore line, which extends from the Persian Gulf to the south of Ahwaz. It has limited evidence of human occupation, at least before the Christian era (Adams 1962:110). The intermediate zone is a neglected plain of “widespread salinity, poor drainage, and extensive dune formation” with “nothing to attest a significant occupation prior to Alexander’s conquests” (Ibid: 110). Finally, a third zone consists of the Upper plains to the north of the intermediate zone, where the surface gradients constitute a region with remarkable drainage capability and agricultural potential (Adams 1962: 110). In his words, “gross descriptive categories like ‘semiarid steppeland’ and ‘dependence on large-scale irrigation agriculture’ may be as inadequate for a deeper historical understanding as they are for the contemporary planner” (Adams 1962: 109).

Considering all the abovementioned approaches to the geographical boundaries of the southern western lowlands, it becomes clear that it is most important to consider the entire chain of northwest-southeast oriented plains in the “Southwestern Lowlands of Iran” or “Greater Susiana”

2

Introduction as an inter-connected unit which provided a suitable environment for the development of human societies since, at least, 6000 B.C (cf. Adams 1962: 109; Hole et al. 1969: 2; Hole et al. 1971: 252-254; Hole 1977: 3-9, 1989: 29).

levels of the region (Kouchoukos 1998: 74, Table 3.1) and this study follows the chronology of the region proposed by him as regards the Later Village Period. Note that in our chronological table, the proposed chronology (Dittmann 1984: 64) for settlements in the Behbahan and Zohreh sectors of eastern Susiana is used in lieu of the generally accepted chronology of the Susiana plain.

Time (Chronological Framework) The specific time span of this study stretches from the Late Middle Susiana to about the middle of the Uruk period (late 5th to mid-4th millennium B.C), (Table 1.1), the period that is here designated the “Later Village Period” (Hole 1987b: 55, table.2). Chronologically, the Village Period extends from ca. 8000-4000 BC (Hole 1987b: 29), 6500-3800 B.C (Sumner 1991: 547) or 70004000 BCE (Kouchoukos and Hole 2003: 53). There are two main reasons for concentrating on this period. Firstly, data from the Eastern Plain is particularly abundant at this time. Secondly, the settlement and social changes in this period have the subject of extensive and intensive study for the last four decades. While these studies have made fundamental contributions to a better understanding of Susiana’s prehistory, there are still some key issues regarding this time span that need to be evaluated by new evidence and studies.

Prehistoric Archaeology in Greater Susiana: a review The long history of archaeological studies in Greater Susiana has made this region the most studied and one of the best known regions in Iranian archeology. From the late 19th to the early 20th century archaeological investigation in the Susiana plain, carried out by the English and French mission (Loftus 1857; Dieulafoy 1893; de Morgan 1894, 1900, 1902, 1912; Gautier and Lampre 1905), was focused on revealing ancient monuments and excavating large mounded sites and was limited mainly to extensive excavation of ancient monuments and ruins at Susa (Malek Shahmirzadi 1986, 1987, 1990; Chevalier 1997; Abdi 2001). Unearthing elaborate objects to enrich the Louvre was perhaps one of the main goals of the French delegation, who had a monopoly over the archeological investigation of Iran at that time (Mousavi 1996: 6; Abdi 2001: 54). Unfortunately, such an approach, which was the product of the prevailing archaeological thought of the time, was accompanied by destructive methodologies as well. As a result many valuable prehistoric and historical layers at Susa and elsewhere were destroyed without adequate documentation. Nonetheless, it needs to be acknowledged that it was these primary activities that eventually led to the more scientific, rather than object-oriented, investigations at Susa and neighboring sites from the mid-20th century onward (Ghirshman 1952, 1953 , 1954, 1964; Le Breton 1957; Steve and Gasche 1971, 1990; Perrot 1978; Dollfus 1978, 1983a, 1983b, 1985).

The term “Later Village Period” was proposed by Hole to define an important phase of cultural developments also known as the “Chalcolithic” period (Hole 1987b: 31). It is already clear that there are distinct differences between the material culture – specifically the ceramics - of this time and the succeeding “Uruk” period which are in turn indicative of “other changes that are hard to detect archaeologically” (Hole 1987b: 31). Although, to some scholars, the “Later Village Period” seems to be “a lumping together” of different phases (Nissen 1988: 87), it will be shown that this long span of time (ca.1500 years from the Late Middle Susiana to sometime before the Late Uruk period) represents a distinct period which is an important transitional phase in the cultural history of the region.

In the 1940’s D. McCown, a student of Henri Frankfort, pioneered the comparative, stratigraphic study of Iranian archaeological assemblages (McCown 1942). He was mainly interested in clarifying cultural developments and interactions in a broader cultural and geographical scale. In the 1950’s, Louis Le Breton tried for the first time to assemble the “much neglected, disperse and vague, unsystematic and often seemingly contradictory” information that was available from the early excavations at Susa in the form of a relative sequence or chronology (Le Breton 1975: 4). Le Breton’s work resulted in the establishment of a local chronological sequence, which was enriched and modified by later excavations at Susa and other sites in Susiana. It also provided a basis for later survey projects to be undertaken within a relatively secure chronological framework.

Moreover, some of the Susiana Uruk-related material seems to belong to the “Village Period”. Recent C14 dating of Uruk material in different parts of the Near East confirms that it does not all date to a single, clear horizon (Wright and Rupley 2001: 120-120, see also Hole 1994: 122). The different sizes of Uruk settlements in the core area of Babylonia and those in southwestern Iran challenge the notion that the “same level of organization, or urbanity” existed in both regions (Nissen 1985: 39-40). It should be noted, however, that it is not within the scope of this study to deal with the detailed chronological issues relating to the Village Period in southwestern Iran which have already been the subject of numerous studies (e.g. McCown 1942; Le Breton 1947; Johnson 1973; Dollfus 1978-1985; Weiss 1978; Wright 1978; Voigt and Dyson 1992; Hole 1978, 1979, 1987b; Pollock 1983; Dittmann 1984, 1986; Delougaz and Kantor 1972; Alizadeh 1992). Kouchoukos comprehensively reviewed and illustrated the chronological relationships between the stratigraphic

Beginning in the early 1960’s the Greater Susiana alluvial plains became the subject of more systematic and problem-oriented archaeological and ecological research. Many attempts were made to understand the cultural and natural contexts and circumstances under which various 3

Later

Period

Village

4 I (Levels 5-6)

I (Level 4)

GAP

II (3m-n)

GAP

III (Levels 3-1)

I (Levels 17-13)

Trans. (12-11)

II (10-4)

Dollfus, 1983 Djowi

I (28-?)

II (Levels 27-11)

III (Level 10)

Bandebal

Surkh (5700-5400)

CMT (5400-5200)

Sabz (5200-5000)

Khazineh (5000-4800)

Mehmeh (4800-4600)

Bayat (4600-4400)

Farukh (4400-4200)

Susa A

Sargarab

Early Uruk

Middle Uruk

Hole et.al.1969; Hole 1977 Wright 1981; Neely &Wright 1994 Late Uruk

Pre-ceramic

7800-7200

Buz Mordeh (7500-6700)

Ali Kosh (6700-6300)

Table 1. Relative Chronology of the Greater Susiana During the Village Period.

Formative Susiana

7200-7000

Mohamad Jafar (6300-6000)

Susiana a

Susiana b

Susiana c

Susiana d

(Acropole I 27-25)

Susiana e/Susa A

(Acropole I 24)

Jaffarabad

Period

Archaic Susiana 1-3

Early Susiana

Susiana 1-2)

Susiana (Middle

Early Middle

(Middle Susiana 3)

Susiana

Late Middle

Late Susiana 1

Late Susiana 2

Terminal Susa A

Acropole I 23-22

Acropole I 21-19

Acropole I 18-17

Le Breton, 1957; Johnson, 1973

Sefid (6000-5700)

7000-6000

6000-5700

5700-5100

5100-4700

4700-4200

4200-4000

Terminal Susa A

Early Uruk

Middle Uruk

Late Uruk

Delougaz and Kantor, 1996; Johnson 1973

Deh Luran

Village

Initial

Period

Village

Early

Period

Village

Middle

Period

Village

Late

4000-3900

3900-3700

Period

3700-3500

Village

3500-3300

Dates B.C.

Post

Period Hole 1987

Susiana

Table 1: Relative Chronology of the Greater Susiana.

Taqi

Cheshme Morad

Do Tulun

Sohz 1

Sohz 2

Early Chogha Sofla

Late Chogha Sofla

Post Chogha Sofla

Darwish Ahmad

Mahammad

Late Sohz 1

Late Sohz 2

Post Sohz

Uruk

Dittmann 1984;1986 Zohreh Behbahan

Behbahan-Zohreh

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Introduction developments and human-nature interactions took place (Kouchoukos 1998: 75-89). The Archaeology of Western Iran (Hole 1987), which partly deals with the archaeological problems of the region and is considered one of the bestknown road maps available or in Nissen’s words “a mine of new information and new insights” (Nissen 1988: 87) on the archaeology of western Iran, was partly the result of long term archaeological investigations in this region. Pioneering work in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s in the Deh Luran and Susiana plains greatly facilitated our understanding and knowledge of the settlements and occupational history of this important region from the 8th millennium B.C. onwards (Johnson 1987: 283-291).

recorded several 5th and 4th millennium settlements (Khalilian and Nokandeh 1997). Unfortunately, the results of this survey have not yet been published. Thus, as will be discussed later, the two ends of the southwestern lowlands (the Mehran plain in the northwest and Zuhreh plain in the southeast) remain relatively unknown. Recently, a broad archaeological and geomorphological survey project was planned for the Mehran plain, which was unfortunately cancelled due to the dangers posed by the remaining IraqIran War mine fields in this area (Alizadeh 2003: 3). Deh Luran Plain Deh Luran is an exceptional case in terms of Iranian archaeological investigations. There the focus of archaeological reconnaissance and excavation shifted from “site” to “site and region”, an obvious reflection of the impact of New Archaeology on the scholars working in this region (Binford 1964). This new approach was accompanied by multidisciplinary investigations (Hole et al. 1969; Hole 1980; Wright 1981; Neely and Wright 1994). The results of the relatively brief Deh Luran investigations are very significant compared to what we have as a result of over 100 years of archeological work in the nearby Susiana plain.

The Islamic revolution of 1979 in Iran resulted in a long hiatus in archaeological field investigations and excavations in Iran. This, nevertheless, provided a long study period for scholars who were thus able to shift their efforts and energy from fieldwork to the revision and interpretation of the results of previous research (cf. Wright 1981; Dollfus 1983a and b, 1985; Pollock 1983; Dittmann 1984, 1986; Hole 1987; Alizadeh 1992; Neely and Wright 1994; Haerinck and Overlaet 1996; Delougaz and Kantor 1996; Wright and Carter 2003; Kouchoukos and Hole 2003).

For the first time in Iranian archaeology, hypotheses related to the impact of climate on the locations of early agricultural villages were tested. In addition, geromorphogical studies were carried out to better understand the factors affecting site visibility. Furthermore, intensive archaeological surveys were conducted to explain early irrigation practices as well as the settlement patterns. Finally, attempts were made to explain specialization and matters related to early trade organization based on the excavated material (Hole 1962; Hole and Flannery 1968; Neely 1969, 1970; Hole et al. 1969; Kirkby and Kirkby 1969; Hole 1977; Kirkby 1977; Renfrew 1977; Neely and Wright 1994; Wright 1981). In comparison to the neighboring plains, the small plain of Deh Luran is well studied in terms of its early chronology, environment, population and subsistence.

In the subsequent decades, though on a very limited scale, Iranian archaeologists having benefited from previous studies revived archeological investigations in southwestern Iran using new approaches and also participated in some collaborative projects (Khalilian and Nokandeh n.d; Alizadeh 2003; Moghaddam and Miri 2003; Alizadeh et al. 2004; Moghaddam 2005, Moghaddam and Miri 2007). Previous Studies: achievements and problems There is no question that previous studies were products of their own time reflect contemporary ideas, theories and methods (Renfrew and Bahn 2000: 19). However, since our present archaeological knowledge of the region is almost entirely based on the previous studies, it is essential to address shortcomings and issues that are to some extent the results of previous approaches and methodologies, as well as noting earlier achievements. It should also be noted that some perceived shortcomings are the result of the aforementioned political situation which forced many scholars to abandon their fieldwork prematurely and leave many questions unanswered. Hole (Hole 1987a: 19-27) has broadly discussed the archaeological problems of western Iran. Here we will focus on those issues most related to this study. For ease of orientation, this review will move in a west-east direction across Greater Susiana, starting with the Mehran Plain in the northwest.

Susiana Plain In the Susiana plain, various archaeological surveys have been carried out by many scholars (Adams 1962; Hole 1969, 1985; Wright 1969; Carter 1971; Johnson 1973; Wenke 1976; Dollfus 1985; Schacht 1987; Alden 1987), the results of which form the main body of our dataset on the region while excavations mostly dealt with chronology and historical sequences. Susa, probably with its striking Later Village period finds, was mostly a “site of sustained efforts to elucidate stratigraphy” (Perrot 1978: 133-134). In 1978, while development and the role of human agency, cultural history and natural landscapes in Deh Luran were closely pursued, the Susa expedition was initiating another stratigraphic research program (Perrot 1979: 134). Soundings and excavations at Susa (Le Brun 1971; Canal 1978a and b)

Mehran Plain Starting from the northwestern corner of the region, there is a small and strategically located plain known as the Dasht-e Mehran where, in 1997, a team of Iranian archaeologists 5

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin and its satellite sites of Jaffarabad, Jowi and Bandebal (Dollfus 1978, 1983a and b, 1985) were undertaken in order to define the chronological sequence of the region. Unfortunately, the deposits at Susa most important for the Later Village period, including the cemetery and mud-brick platforms (massif funeraire and terrasse haute) were poorly documented (de Morgan 1900, 1912; de Mecquenem 1928, 1934, 1943), “tantalizingly fragmentary” (Pollock 1989: 283), far too coarsely excavated for modern purposes (Hole 1987a: 26) and “the excavation methods employed leave much to be desired” (Potts 1999: 47).

Adams’ work, which led to the recording of many prehistoric and historic sites on sheets based on available topographic maps and aerial photographs, influenced later surveys in the plain in many ways. This pioneering work was carried out in the extended plain between the Karkheh and Karun Rivers, once termed “Little Mesopotamia” (Hole et al. 1969: 358), which has since became known as the Susiana plain in the archeological literature of the region (cf. the early definition of “Susiana” as the region between the Karkheh and Dezful Rivers; Loftus 1857: 342-47; Menant 1887: 88). This geographical definition of the Susiana plain was followed by many people in the field and is particularly evident in later publications (Johnson 1973; Wright and Johnson 1975; Alden 1987; Carter 1971; Hole 1987b: 38). Many attempts have been made to refine Adam’s original survey, recording new archaeological sites and increasing data collection in this area (Kouchoukos 1998: 83).

A focus on chronological and stratigraphic issues in Susiana, both of which are undeniably important, served to limit broader investigations and regional approaches. Only Qabr-e Sheykheyn was excavated to test a hypothesis related to settlement changes in the Later Village period of Susiana (Weiss 1976: 172). No other archaeological sites or settlements were excavated with any distinct questions other than chronological ones in mind during this period in the history of Iranian archaeology. Chogha Mish, a paramount settlement in the region, was the object of extensive excavations for several seasons. As the excavators noted, “in contrast to Susa and to many sites in Mesopotamia, where Protoliterate remains were covered by thick later deposits, at Chogha Mish Protoliterate materials were to be found at or close below the surface. Moreover, the abundance of painted shards of many types indicated that this site would offer an excellent opportunity to test the relationship of the Protoliterate civilization to the cultures of preceding periods and to verify the validity of the prehistoric Susiana sequence as built up by a number of archaeologists on the basis of largely unstratified materials” (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 1). The main thrust of the mission was, therefore, concentrated on the Protoliterate period and as in the preceding period, again only addressed chronological/stratigraphic issues. Not having adequate questions formulated before or during excavating this important site resulted in the most controversial issue at Chogha Mish, namely, its alleged desertion for several centuries after Late Middle Susiana times, largely unsolved. There is no direct evidence to indicate that Chogha Mish, as a major center in the plain, was deserted between the Late Middle Susiana and Susa A period because, simply, “the relevant part of the site has not been excavated” (Hole 1987c: 88).

Adams’ survey (Adams 1962), however, was more than just a recording of sites as he offered an interpretive rather than a descriptive report, which became a paradigm since adopted by many of archaeologists involved in the study of this plain. Other surveys, however, are more questionable. For example, Dr. Gremliza’s informal survey in the Susiana plain involved non-systematic site recording and selective sherd-collection limited only to decorated ones (Gremliza 1962). Despite its flawed methodology, the results of this survey have been used by some scholars (Alizadeh 1992). All archaeological surveys in the Susiana plain since Adams’ work share certain features. Addressing these features helps highlight the insufficiency of the evidence currently available for interpreting and understanding landscape changes during the Later Village period in the region. Since the supposed economic context for most settlements was agricultural (cf. Hole 1987c: 81), sedentary settlements became the center of attention in addressing the cultivable capability of the plain. This approach simply eliminated vast possibilities provided by other existing natural resources in the intervening regions (Hole 1987c: 81). Subsistence economy was the main research objective and if there was inadequate agricultural capability in any given area, the objective shifted to pastoral economy. While assessing surface indications (artifacts), describing them in detail, presenting detailed maps and considering the geographical situation in which the sites are located are vital parts of any survey project (cf. Hole 1980), many of the published records of surveys lack adequate data on environment, as well as sketch plans and measurements (Johnson 1973 is an exception). Other obstacles in dealing with the Later Village period in Susiana plain include storage of field records and materials in different, often inaccessible locations and the lack of publication of field notes. Apart from Susa, Jaffarabad, Jowi and Bandebal, the only major published excavation report from Susiana is Chogha Mish. Although the results of the first five seasons of fieldwork at Chogha Mish have been published, they are largely devoted to the pottery and, as previously mentioned,

The Susiana plain has been intensively surveyed since the nineteenth century (Rawlinson 1839; Dieulafoy 1893; de Morgan 1900; Gautier & Lampre 1905; de Mecquenem 1943). After these early ad hoc investigations, for nearly two decades from 1959 to 1978 more efficient surveys were conducted in ten separate campaigns that resulted in the recording of over 1000 archaeological sites (Kouchoukos 1998: 80-84). In contrast to the surveys of the Deh Luran plain, which were carried out to answer certain archaeological questions (see above), the first serious surveys in the Susiana plain were carried out in response to regional development in the early 1960s (Adams 1962).

6

Introduction that part of the site which could provide evidence for the Later Village period was never investigated adequately. The second series of Chogha Mish excavation results is under preparation and it is expected to be interpretive (Alizadeh pers. comm.).

data. Nissen has briefly described the restrictions resulting in this rather limited investigation of the area as follows (Nissen, per. comm.): “….in those days we were working under heavy constraint both time- and space-wise. That means we were not to spend more than two weeks for the entire operation and within reach of the army post in Behbahan. … Since there was no bridge crossing river Marun, we would have been forced to take a very time-consuming detour. Since we had to be back in Behbahan every night, we would have had only slightly more than an hour for looking around. Only once did we manage to be taken by an army detachment across the river; hence sites BZ57 and 59 [were detected].

Qabr-e Sheykhayn’s excavation results were never published in detail and we only have a general picture about this site. Layers 12-17 of Bandebal, which are chronologically related to our study, have also only been investigated on a limited scale. Adams (Adams 1962) recorded 142 sites with trace of painted pottery, 115 of which were revisited a few years later by Hole (Hole 1969). The results of these surveys have not been published in detail even though they formed the foundation of many later interpretive works (cf. Hole 1987 b, c). Part of the Susiana survey collections was stored in the dark basements of Susa Castle and the Iranian National Museum in Tehran. Considerable ignorance during the Iraq-Iran war (1980-1987) and subsequent neglect render the reliability of these collections highly questionable.

The Zuhreh area was suffering even more from time constraints. Once we tried to stay overnight in Zuhreh in a German PRAKLA-camp, and were almost arrested the other day for not complying with the army’s rules. In the latter case, we were able to follow the river to an extent but because of the gorge-like nature we were sure that no settlements could have existed there, but we couldn’t exclude that further upstream some widening may have provided some space. However a week later when we looked around in the Gachsaran area (without finding anything!) we made friends with the oil people there who took us on a heli ride over the area. This revealed that Zuhreh river narrow gorge extended all the way, and was so narrow that it even was not qualified for a traffic route. [The area down to the south of the Zuhreh valley] was hardly accessible because of its swampy nature. Thus, only one site BZ60 was recognized on the edge. To penetrate into the swamps would have required more time and different equipment….”

Although all of these surveys provided valuable evidence about the number, size and location of sites and the changes in their distribution and density through time (Renfrew and Bahn 2000: 71-75), an over-reliance on data from surveys that were carried out by different teams with different objectives, methods and approaches fails to provide answers to many questions about critical transitions in human history (cf. Wright and Johnson 1975: 283). Eastern Khuzestan Plains In 1948 D. McCown visited the eastern plains “to explore the hitherto archaeologically un-surveyed area south of Ahwaz, and to locate a promising pre-Achaemenian site at which excavations might contribute evidence of Iranian relationships with Lower Mesopotamia” (Perkins 1949: 54). Tol Geser (Tall-i Ghazir) was the most promising site discovered and was briefly excavated by McCown during his investigation. This was followed up by studies of the material undertaken by Caldwell (Caldwell 1968) and Whitcomb (Whitcomb 1971). However, the detailed results of excavations at this site, especially in the prehistoric layers, were never published.

With all the abovementioned issues, it is not easy to provide a holistic framework for an ample understanding of the Later Village Period societies of southwestern Iran. In general, as Hole (Hole 1987: 32) pointed out, “our pictures are composed from evidence that was gathered without overall central purpose, so that regional gaps and chronological omissions are to be expected”. When reviewing the Later Village period evidence of the region, this lack of central purpose in previous attempts is clear and is largely responsible for the existing gaps in our knowledge and errors in the interpretations of this vital period. Nevertheless, by juxtaposing different available evidence, scholars have presented a variety of interpretations about what was happening in southwestern Iran at this time. These will be addressed in Chapter 2.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, two significant survey campaigns took place in this part of the region. The first was an apparently brief survey focusing on the late 5th and early 4th millennium settlements in the western part of the Ram Hormoz plain (Wright and Carter 2003). The second was the Oriental Institute survey and excavation project in the Behbahan and Zuhreh plains conducted by Hans Nissen and Charles Redman (Nissen and Redman 19701971). While the survey results are available (Dittmann 1984, 1986) the results of the team’s limited excavation were never published in detail. Thus, the surface collection of the region and the initial aim to trace signs of ancient trade are unsupported by any controlled stratigraphical

Study Area: The Eastern Plain The study area covered in this work lies between the Karun River in the east and the western edge of the Ram Hormoz plain. This area is called the Eastern plain in this study since it is the first plain located to the east of the Susiana plain (the land between the Karkheh and Karun Rivers). As noted above, the folded ranges of the Zagros lie to the north and northeast of this plain; the Karun River 7

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin to the west; low sandy hills to the south; and the western slopes of the Ram Hormoz plain to the east. The western part of the plain is separated from the rest of it by the Gargar River and is known as the Mianab plain (Map 1.2) (Moghaddam and Miri 2003; Moghaddam 2008 in press). After a salvage project in the Mianab plain (Moghaddam and Miri 2003) the Eastern plain was chosen for further archaeological investigations for several reasons. Firstly, the prehistoric remains of eastern Khuzestan in general and the Eastern plain in particular have been poorly investigated. Secondly, stretching as it were along a natural east-west route between the highland plains of the Zagros and the lowlands of Susiana. This area is of great importance in terms of communication and correlations between these two spheres in the past.

sounding two previously recorded sites (KS 1625, KS 1626). All of these studies took place in the Mianab plain and a small sector of the plain to the east of the Gargar River (Map 1.2). During the following seasons (January and February 2003 and January 2004), the eastern section of the Eastern plain was investigated entirely from the Gargar River in the west to the narrow Kondak stream in the westernmost limits of the Ram Hormoz plain. The initial survey of the eastern plain of the Gargar River confirmed the significant difference in natural conditions between this area and the Mianab plain. Aerial photographs showed it was mostly an area of bad lands with thousands of gullies, which greatly impeded the progress of the ground survey. Both natural agents and development projects were actively changing the cultural and natural landscape of the plain. In some parts around the east bank of the Gargar River, the area was undergoing extensive development involving fish farming; pipe irrigation-based farming and leveling. The initial aim of this season was thus to record all possible archaeological evidence in the eastern plain of the Gargar River and then to contextualize the findings with the data from the Mianab Plain.

Previous Research in the Eastern Plain and Background of the Present Project In the summer of 2001, the Shushtar Archaeological Team from the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (ICAR) conducted a salvage survey in the Mianab Plain. The results of this survey have been published in detail (Moghaddam and Miri 2003, Moghaddam 2005) and will not be discussed extensively in the present study. Nevertheless, since the Mianab plain is located within the geographical bounds of this study, the findings of the Mianab survey will be referred to and discussed where necessary.

Research Objectives Although still in their initial phase, archaeological investigations in the plains located to the east of the Karun River have already revealed the long history of human settlement. According to the survey data gathered in the above-mentioned seasons, the area seems to have been first occupied in the 5th millennium B.C. or the Late Middle Susiana Phase (Table 1.1)

In the winter of 2001, the team carried out its second season, excavating one of the Sasanian irrigation structures known as Andam-e Abgir-e Darioun near the remains of the Sasanian castle of Salasel, on the northern edge of Shushtar (Moghaddam 2002). During this season, a series of complementary surveys and soundings were also conducted in the Mianab plain and the plain to the east of the Gargar River (Moghaddam 2005). The aim of these soundings was to establish a reliable chrono-stratigraphy of the occupations discovered during the summer survey season and to evaluate the surface findings. The initial surveys revealed the great archeological potential of the plain that lies along the eastern bank of the Gargar River up to the western margins of the Ram Hormoz plain. As already noted, the only previous work in this area was the regional survey in the easternmost region of this area conducted by Wright and Carter in 1969 but not published until 2003 (Wright and Carter 2003).

Contrary to the evidence regarding the earlier Village period in the Susiana plain and adjacent areas to the west, which, at least in terms of ceramics, seem to be characterized by more Mesopotamian traits, the cultural features of the Later Village period in this eastern zone seem to be characterized by more local traits (Le Breton 1947: 88-89; Alizadeh 1992: 20-26; Wright 1998: 19), which may be a “reflection of ecological or economic changes” (Hole and Flannery 1968: 204). Nevertheless, to some degree as suggested by the ceramic sequence, the early stages of the Later Village period represent a homogenous and widespread cultural horizon in Greater Susiana. In terms of cultural developments, the Later Village period appears to have been an important intermediate stage between village economies and early state formation. The question that immediately arises would logically concern the mechanisms that underlay this important change. This difficult question has been the focus of many studies, particularly by H. Wright and his colleagues, in the Deh Luran plain (Wright 1981, 1987, 1994; Wright and Johnson 1975; Wright et al. 1975; Pollock 1983).

The third season of archeological studies in the Eastern plain took place from the late September to early November 2002 in collaboration with archaeologists and students from the Oriental Institute and the Department of Anthropology of the University of Chicago (Moghaddam 2003; Alizadeh et al. 2004). Based on the initial understanding of the region achieved in the two previous seasons, the third season was a short and fruitful one, focusing in particular on the evidence of ancient irrigation systems, re-examining the initial survey data, conducting some intensive surface survey and geo-archaeological investigations, as well as

The Eastern plain provides an appropriate location to monitor the long-term social changes of the critical Later Village period and its underlying mechanisms. This 8

Introduction

Map 2. Map Showing the Location of the Eastern Plain.

9

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin plain is restricted by natural boundaries, especially when compared to the extended plain between the Karkheh and Karun Rivers. In this regard, the Eastern plain is similar to the Deh Luran plain (see Wright 1981: 1 for the Deh Luran Plain). It is hemmed in by the Zagros highlands and lowland Susiana, a fact which suggests that some of the issues related to this period may have involved population movement and the exploitation of natural resources that were more accessible in some areas than in others. In addition, we might suspect that this area will have been characterized by a high level of socioeconomic interaction in the wider context of southwestern Iran (Chapter 2), with the valleys and plains of the inner Zagros, the Mesopotamian plain, the Persian Gulf and the lands further to the east (Flannery 1965; Carter 1971; Beale 1973, Nissen 1976; Oates 1978b; Dittmann 1986; Alden 1987; Wright 1987; Wright and Carter 2003, Carter et al. 2006)

main part of the Susiana plain since the middle of the 20th century (Le Breton 1957). Later excavations at Susa (Le Brun 1971, 1978), Chogha Mish (Delougaz and Kantor 1996), Sharafabad and other smaller sites (Johnson 1973, 1976; Wright ed 1979) and surveys in the Susiana and Deh Luran plains (Adams 1962; Alden 1987; Johnson 1973; Wright and Neely 1994) have, to some degree, clarified these previously little known phases, but the geographical extent of these studies was limited and the eastern plains of Khuzestan remained uninvestigated. To sum up, the present study specifically aims to deal with the following issues: 1) The nature of the Later Village Period distinct settlements in the Greater Susiana Plains. Which variables underlie their location? What were their roles in this period? 2) How did the Eastern Plain develop during the Later Village Period? What is the configuration of settlements in different phases? What was the nature of subsistence and political economy of settlements in the period in question?

Apart from the geographical location of the Eastern plain, the evolution of settlement in this area during the Later Village period requires consideration. The available data indicates that human occupation in this plain started in the Late Middle Susiana phase (5000-4700 B.C., hereafter LMS phase). Previously, it was believed that the LMS phase was not well represented in the eastern region of the Susiana plain (Caldwell 1968; Wright and Carter 2003), even though such a view contrasts sharply with the evidence from the heartland of the Susiana plain and its westerly neighbors, the Deh Luran and Mehran plains. A lack of LMS occupation in the eastern region of Susiana plain seems even stranger when we consider that extended LMS sites have been reported as far as the Behbehan plain towards the southeast and the Zuhreh plain in south of the Upper Khuzestan plain (Nissen 1976; Dittmann 1984). Thus, there was a need to ascertain whether the LMS phase was indeed poorly presented in the Eastern plain or whether previous studies had simply failed to recognize it. Initial investigations showed the latter to be true. Accordingly, one of the objectives of this study is to focus on the possibilities open to LMS societies to expand to the east into the plains of the neighboring foothills.

Research Strategy To address these issues, archeological and geomorphological investigations and surveys were undertaken in the Eastern plain and excavations were conducted at one of the extensive prehistoric sites in the region, Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663). The results of previous studies carried out in Susiana and its neighboring plains form the foundation of the data utilized in the present study to achieve the goals that have been set out. Geomorphologically, the study area lies in an extensive drainage network that originates in the area around the modern town of Shushtar. In this sense, our study area is largely affected by natural landscape changes that are taking place constantly in the region. Therefore, an intensive study of the natural landscape characteristics of the region, which have affected settlements and the modes of subsistence in many aspects, formed a vital component of the field study. Moreover, human interference in the natural landscape and its consequences in this specific region need to be taken into consideration in the interpretation of the cultural landscape.

Another controversial phase is Susiana d (Le Breton 1957: 88-89) or Late Susiana 1 (LS1) (Alizadeh 1992: 21-26), covering the period 4700-4200 B.C. It is believed that during this phase the population of Susiana was large (Weiss 1977, Pollock 1983). However, we know little about its socio-economic characteristics even in the central region of the Susiana plain. The best evidence for this phase comes from Tappe Farukhabad, the second largest settlement of this phase in the Deh Luran plain (Wright 1981), and Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1977). Thus, our second aim is to evaluate LS1 occupation in the Eastern plain based on survey and excavation results.

Archaeological surveys of the Eastern plain and several limited trial excavations, as noted earlier, were conducted during 2001, 2004 and 2005. No regional analysis can succeed without an understanding of the location, chronology, and nature of the settlements involved. Based on surface collections and other indications, an account of ancient occupation and related artifact assemblages was synthesized. The data were then considered within the previously published framework of cultural and chronological development in the Susiana plain and adjacent regions. The evidence from numerous surveys and excavations in the region, especially those that specifically focused on the Later Village period, have been carefully

Again, our knowledge is limited regarding the later phases - Late Susiana 2, Terminal Susa A and Uruk - in the eastern regions of the Susiana plain. These distinctive phases have been known, under different names, in the 10

Introduction considered (Adams 1962; Hole 1969, 1985, 1987; Wright 1969, 1978; Johnson 1973; Weiss 1976, Dittmann 1984, 1986; Dollfus 1985; Kouchoukos 1998). In order to establish a clearer understanding of the nature of prehistoric settlement in the Eastern plain, KS 1663, the largest 5th millennium site in the area, was chosen for excavation. This strategy was aimed at better understanding the nature of the site and its chronology, and its position in the wider context of the region. Structure of this work Chapter 2: This chapter consists of a general review of the available evidence on the Later Village period (Middle Susiana to the Uruk period), its characteristics and interpretation. This includes a review of archaeological investigations in various plains of Greater Susiana, from Mehran in the northwest to Behbahan and Zuhreh plains in southeast, in order to provide the contextual base for this study. Thus, this chapter aims firstly to present the available data on the social organization of the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana and secondly to evaluate them in the context of political economy in order to examine how such an approach can provide a means to understanding the complexity of Later Village period societies in the region with particular reference to the distribution and nature of distinct settlements. Chapter 3: Geographical and geomorphological characteristics of the Eastern Plain are presented in this chapter. Having been in the region for at least 5 seasons enabled the author to experience firsthand the natural and human geography of the Eastern Plain. A general description will be given, followed by a discussion of natural erosion features and the results of human interference. Modern land use will be also examined. Chapter 4: This chapter reviews the new evidence of human occupation in the Eastern Plain from LMS to the Islamic era. All survey results since 2001 will be taken into account to explain changes in settlement patterns. The Later Village Period occupations will be described in detail. Chapter 5: This chapter focuses on Tall-e Abu Chizan, an extensive settlement in the Eastern Plain and its place in the wider context of the Naft Sefid alluvial fan system. The site’s environment will be discussed, followed by a discussion of the results of intensive survey and two campaigns of excavation. All studied material from the excavation (pottery, lithics, fauna, flora, bitumen and C14 results) will be presented. Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusions

11

CHAPTER 2 Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana This chapter aims firstly to present the available data on the social organization of the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana and secondly to evaluate them in the context of political economy in order to examine how such an approach can provide a means to understanding the complexity of Later Village period societies in the region with particular reference to the distribution and nature of distinct settlements. In this regard the location and landscape of tells, accessible natural resources, route networks and the environment play an important role. Although, as mentioned in Chapter 1, the presently available data about the Later Village Period societies of Greater Susiana are diffuse, nevertheless, gathering them in such a holistic approach can provide a basis for understand social, political and economical conditions during the Later Village Period.

It is clear that there have been many changes in various plains, brought about by agricultural intensification, since the 1960’s. Four decades of modern irrigation systems and the use of heavy machinery by various agro-industrial corporations, as well as the foundation of new settlements, have not only caused many ancient settlements to be wiped from the face of the landscape. It has also meant that vast areas of farmland have been opened up, turning the remaining ancient settlements into “islands”. This regrettable phenomenon is especially evident in the largest plain of the region known as the Upper Khuzestan plain, i.e. the land bounded on the west by the Karkheh River; on the east by the Karun River; on the north by the Zagros mountains; and on the south by the Ahwaz ridge which separates it from the Lower Khuzestan Plain (Wright and Johnson 1985: 25; for a detailed discussion and illustration see Kouchoukos 1998: 103-104). Finally, the nature of the plains of Greater Susiana is such that it has always attracted new settlers and continues to do so (see chapter 3). The possibility that this has been occurring for many millennia has been discussed by Hole who long ago postulated the intrusion of farmers from the Chogha Mami area into the small plain of Deh Luran (Hole 1977: 12-18).

Summary of Previous Views on the Social Organization of the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana In light of previous studies, much can already be inferred about the social organization of the Village Period in Southwestern Iran (cf. Hole 1987). These studies have provided the fundamental basis for further enquiries into human history in this part of the Near East, particularly how prehistoric societies organized themselves and modified the environment to suit their needs; how interactions between humans and nature resulted in the known spatial distribution of settlements across the landscape; the nature of population fluctuation throughout the time and space; the nature of relationships between and within settlements; the degree of integration between different modes of livelihood including the relative shares of agriculture, herding, mining and other land use strategies; and how fundamental concepts like organization of power and status, symbols, production specialization, colonization, exchange, social organization (in chiefdoms, complex chiefdoms and early states) can be investigated using archaeological evidence.

Apart from the aforementioned issues, as previously emphasized in Chapter 1, there are some serious problems regarding previous archaeological surveys carried out in the Susiana plain. Kouchoukos has stated “…. it is important to reemphasize two serious limitations of the survey data at hand. First, the settlement record is only a partial one. The sample of 264 surveyed sites probably accounts for less than half of the Village Period sites founded on the Susiana plain, and only about half of these can be assigned with confidence to specific archaeological periods. Second, estimates of site sizes are approximate, and no systematic observations have been made on the sizes of successive occupations at specific sites” (Kouchoukos 1998: 105). Nevertheless, archeological investigations in the region have revealed an occupational expansion on many plains in the region that were suitable for agriculture. Starting at the beginning of the Village Period and reaching its apogee in the middle of this period. Especially in the largest plain of Susiana, this process (population increase) coincided with a high degree of uniformity in ceramics, the emergence of large and extended residential sites with monumental buildings, specialized production sites, colonization of previously unoccupied areas, competition, social ranking and growing links between different regions over a wide area (Hole and Flannery 1968: 202-203; Kantor 1974: 16; Dollfus 1975: 61; Johnson 1987: 283-286; Flannery 1999: 45; Wright 2000: 211; Kouchoukos and Hole 2003: 53).

Although it seems that many of the plains in Greater Susiana have been archaeologically documented, according to the presently available data it is not easy to integrate them in order to understand the cultural and social character of the region as a whole and the interactions among them. Greater Susiana studies are profoundly indebted to the limited available evidence of the “old collections” (Kouchoukos and Hole 2003: 59), mostly from the Susiana and Deh Luran plains. Even in these two “archaeologically well known plains” our database has some very serious limitations. The most serious one is the modification of the natural and cultural landscape by development projects that is deeply harmful to the archaeological landscape. 12

Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period Signs of rebellion or conflict between different sectors of societies or economic systems - settlers and nomads have also been posited (Adams 1962: 110, 122; Wright and Johnson 1975: 285; Wright 1987: 142; Hole 1990: 7; Alizadeh 1992: 57, 2006: 4), and conflagrations at major sites such as Chogha Mish, the eventual desertion of this large administrative and religious center (Kantor 1976: 28) before the Late Village Period; the establishment of Susa (Wright 1984: 67; Hole 1987b: 42; Johnson 1987: 258; a “deliberate political move to Susa”, (Pollock 1989: 287); and settlement shifts from east to west (Hole 1987b: 39; Alizadeh 1992: 59-60; Kouchoukos 1998: 117) have all been noted . Many attempts have been made to explain the dynamics of settlement in relation to the principal modes of production, settlement hierarchy and the emergence of regional centers.

strong relationships between Warka, Nippur and Susiana, the expansion of transhumance or nomadism in the rural areas (Johnson 1987: 287) and the re-establishment of Chogha Mish as a major center (Johnson 1973: 109-111; Wright 1998: 194). In terms of subsistence economy, there appears to have been a gradual shift during the Later Village Period from a wheat-goat-dry farming complex to a barley-sheep-small scale irrigation complex (Hole et al. 1969: 368-369; Miller 1977: 51; Pollock 1983: 367-368). In terms of agricultural production, most of the plains in Greater Susiana probably received roughly 250 mm of rainfall, which is near the minimum necessary for dry farming (De Brichambaut and Wallen 1963: 10; Oates and Oates 1976: 111). Negligible salinization - thanks to excellent natural drainage and underlying gravels - was an environmental feature in most of Greater Susiana that favored agricultural productivity during the Village Period (Hole et al. 1969: 366). Therefore, it is likely that the inhabitants of this region practiced a form of dryfarming, supplemented by herding and hunting. In some areas, particularly in the western portion of the Susiana plain (around Susa and Abu Fanduweh), the natural position of the Karkheh River levee above the level of the plain facilitated irrigation agriculture in the later phases (Johnson 1973: 100), and can be considered one of the reasons for the development of settlement in the western sector of the Susiana plain from Late Susiana times onward, contrary to some scholars’ view that the migration of the river westward coupled with social problems were responsible for the westward shift of settlement from the Late Susiana period onward (Veenenbos 1958: 3439; Hole 1987c: 85; Kouchoukos 1998: 110). It is also possible that the westward shift of the Susiana settlements was a consequence of high risk cultivation in the areas that were affected by deep plowing, which was responsible for destroying the natural vegetation communities and causing serious erosion closer to Susa (Kouchoukos et al. 1998: 481).

Based on the available evidence from the Deh Luran plain, different survey results from the region and data from Chogha Mish, the first phase of the Later Village period (Late Middle Susiana phase) was a pivotal one in the socio-economic life of Greater Susiana. However, more is known about the later phases, the Late Susiana, Early and particularly Middle Uruk. Some of these later phases of the Village Period (Susa A/Late Susiana 2 and the phase later called Terminal Susa A) witnessed a remarkable decline in the number of settlements. Some scholars see this as a reason for speaking of system collapse in the region (Johnson 1987: 286), while some see the decline in Susiana society as an inevitable development in the new “context of competitive emulation” that was introduced into Susiana during the Uruk Period (Hole 1987c: 96). Susa was reduced to 5 ha in the Terminal Susa A Phase, while it was assumed to have been ca 15 ha in the previous phase (Hole 1987b: 63, table 9; for different observations see Dollfus in Pollock 1989: 289; Steve and Gasche 1990: 25) and new unpainted pottery forms replaced the earlier elaborate beakers and goblets. During the following Early and Middle Uruk periods, signs of growth in both settlement numbers and ceramic production appeared. In addition, a clear settlement hierarchy became evident once again. According to Johnson, “a three-level settlement size hierarchy was dominated by Susa with an occupation covering about 12 hectares” (Johnson 1987: 286). Underlining similarities between Susiana pottery and those of the Mesopotamia, he took this to be a sign of “increasing contact among a series of rapidly changing lowland polities” (Johnson 1987: 286). Around this time, notions of “center and periphery” and “heartland and hinterland” became much clearer in discussions regarding the social organization of Greater Susiana (Wright 1987; Johnson 1989). The Greater Susiana and Zagros inter-mountain plains were called “rural” areas, in which the trend of population growth differed from plain to plain (Wright 1979: 59; Wright 1987; Johnson 1987: 286; Henrickson 1994: 98). The last phase of our consideration, Middle Uruk, appeared to be a phase of state-level organization in the Susiana plain (Johnson 1987: 287), the decline of some rural settlements in the Zagros area (Johnson 1987: 287; Wright 1979: 50; Wright 1987: 149; Wright 1998: 193-4),

In the Deh Luran plain, Hole and Flannery postulated “two basic and temporally distinct patterns of subsistence”, which they referred to as “The Era of Dry Farming and Caprine Domestication”, and “The Era of Early Irrigation and Cattle Domestication” (Hole and Flannery 1968: 166-183). The latter stage was, without doubt, the period, which saw the fusion of increasing material production and social differentiation. Hole and Flannery stressed variables such as irrigation and cattle domestication in the rapid emergence of social complexity, population expansion and urban life (Hole and Flannery 1968: 181). Based on Helbaek’s comprehensive study, Wright outlined some key aspects of subsistence patterns during the fifth and early fourth millennium B.C in southwestern Iran, including specialized cultivation, irrigation facilities, secondary animal products, settlement hierarchy in simple (2-tier in small valleys) and complex (3-tier in larger 13

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin valleys) forms, population increase and craft production (Wright 1984, 1994; Helbaek 1969: 405-412). The difficult question was then raised: “What kind of sociopolitical organization did late fifth millennium societies have?”(Wright 1984: 53). While Wright had previously addressed the evidence of socially differentiated houses at Farukhabad (Wright 1981: 12-22, 65-66), he reemphasized chiefly symbolism or symbolic representation in form of complex stamp seals (“master of animal” Amiet 1966: 32- 49) and painted ceramics as indicators of the type of socio- political distinction found in a mortuary context at Susa (Wright 1984: 58).

and Wright 1994: 168), Neely and Wright suggested the existence of a three-level settlement hierarchy (Neely and Wright 1994: 168). As regards material culture, Pollock’s stylistic analysis of Late Susiana painted pottery suggests the elaborately decorated ceramics found in the Susa graveyards were prestige goods (Pollock 1983: 383). Neutron activation analysis (Berman 1987-1994) demonstrated that, compositionally, the Susa funerary ceramics were made at different nearby sites. This analysis pinpoints an important feature in the economic organization of the Susiana plain at the time when paramount rulers (if any existed) at Susa had no direct control over the highly elaborated ceramics being deposited in the graves there.

As regards the evaluation of the socio-political organization of Susiana society, Pollock has recognized that different sectors of the plain had different settlement systems (Pollock 1983: 371). Her observations elaborated previous views (Wright and Johnson 1975; Weiss 1976) and shed new light on the processes of political and economic centralization in the prehistoric Susiana societies. In essence, her study emphasized the role of “Chogha Mish as a center” a few centuries before Susa became the undisputed center on the plain. On the other hand, some scholars see no reason to attribute any political or economical status to such a center (Hole 1987c: 96), preferring to characterize Susiana’s settlement system as “a series of independent, shifting communities occupying a large territory in common, with little or no hostile competition” (Hole 1987c: 96). This consisted of Susa, its dominance guaranteed by its religious status in the Late Susiana phase, along with the “village and herding camp as economic units” and specialist communities: Khan’s houses, craft manufactories and possibly trading posts” (Hole 1987c: 92).

During the Mehmeh Phase in Deh Luran, settlements clustered on alluvial fans. Neely and Wright argued that this was due to the ease of channeling for irrigation over longer distances from fans (Neely and Wright 1994: 167168). Subsistence at this time was based on the cultivation of barley, wheat, lentils, vetch, vetchling, grass peas, and flax; the herding of sheep, goat and some cattle; and on hunting. Based on the size of the flax seeds recovered, Hole, Flannery and Neely suggested that irrigation agriculture was practiced during this phase (Hole et al. 1969: 361). The similarity of the ceramics of the Bayat Phase in Deh Luran, Susiana c in central Khuzestan, Eridu VIII and IXrelated communities in Southern Iraq and Gawra XVIIrelated communities in northern Iraq is quite evident (Le Breton 1957: Figs.4 and 6; Wright 1981: 68-69). This, as Wright emphasized, may indicate increased interaction throughout the lowlands at this time (Wright 1981: 69). In contrast, the ceramics of the Farukh phase are unlike any material in Iraq, but are very similar to Susiana d on the nearby Susiana Plain and to Tall-e Bakun AIII in the highlands of Fars (Wright 1981: 69). Discussing Kouchoukos’s (1998: 20-27) recent study of population growth during the Middle Susiana Phase, Alizadeh has stated that the “attention shift” from lowland Mesopotamia to highland Iran began in the Late Middle Susiana phase and continued into the early Protoliterate period due to “new socioeconomic and political developments that eventually resulted in the formation of state societies there in the late fourth millennium B.C” (Alizadeh 2006: 97).

Through the examination of several hundred mounded sites in the Susiana plain, scholars have detected a general hierarchical trend from the Susiana a to the Susa A phase (Le Breton’s 1957 chronology). This begins with small, centralized polity during the Susiana a phase to a pattern of autonomous units in Susiana d phase and finally a more dynamic pattern of centralization in the Susa A phase (Johnson 1973: 89; Wright et al. 1975: 130; Wright 1977: 387; Pollock 1983: 375; see also Kouchoukos 1998: 6972). Between Susiana c and Susa A times, Chogha Mish, Chogha Dosar (KS 0004), and Susa were extensive sites. Similarly, Musiyan and Farukhabad in the Deh Luran plain; Tall-e Geser (Ghazir) and Sartoli in Ram Hormoz; Tape Sohz In the Behbahan Plain and Chogha Sofla in the Zohreh Plain, , all show significantly greater size than the rest of the settled sites on those plains. Many earlier studies in the region sought to elucidate the early “ranked” societies represented by these settlement systems (Johnson 1973; Wright and Johnson 1975; Weiss and Young 1975; Wright et al. 1975; Nissen 1976; Wright 1981; Wright 1984; Pollock 1983, 1989; Hole 1983, 1984, 1990; Wright and Carter 2003). Thus, in the Deh Luran plain, where large settlements (e.g. Musiyan) were common (Neely

In the Deh Luran Plain, the evidence of flint knapping and sickles, drills, limestone celts and heavy grooved mauls shows that craft activities were common at this time. Ceramic production had strong ties with both Mesopotamia and highland Iran. Black-on-buff ceramic decoration of the Mehmeh Phase in particular, shows that the similarities between the Iranian plateau and Khuzestan had never been stronger. Nevertheless, it is believed that the Deh Luran Plain was marginal in terms of scale and centrality in relation to the larger and more central plains of southern Mesopotamia and Susiana during this phase (Hole et al. 1969: 362-363). 14

Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period Social differences were apparent during the Bayat Phase as well (Neely and Wright 1994: 170). The limited exposure at Tape Sabz was not sufficient to evaluate the architectural characteristics of this phase. Nevertheless, it provided limited evidence of status differentiation among the burials of the site in this phase (Hole et al. 1969: 363). In terms of subsistence economy, the most favored cereal was barley. This may have been due to barley’s greater tolerance of low rainfall and high salinity in soil and water (Hole et al. 1969: 363). Hole and his collogues suggested that human modifications to the landscape around villages with a long history of occupation, such as Tepe Sabz, increased salinity, causing the abandonment of such sites and the search by settlers for new locations with unspoiled soil and water resources (Hole et al. 1969: 364). Later, Kirkby elaborated on Hole’s observation by presenting the idea of changing efficiency of land use for food production through time (Kirkby 1973:145). Sheep become the dominant herd animal in this phase that also included goat, cattle, and pig. Hunting and seasonal transhumance were also practiced. Flint blades were common in this phase as well as hafted sickle blades. Limestone celts were not as common as before. Some of the ceramics show evidence of standardization in craft production. “Sherds of...salmon colored pottery from Tepe Sabz were literally indistinguishable from those at Chogha Mish, more than 100 km. away. They could easily have come from the same kiln in the same pottery making town” (Hole et al. 1969: 365). Jar sealings and cylindrical bead seals in this phase suggested “property-marking” for the first time in the Deh Luran prehistoric sequence (Hole et al. 1969: 365).

The easily irrigated land along the Mehmeh River was settled again in the Early Uruk period. Although Tepe Musiyan was abandoned, a new, large settlement (DL292) along a possible irrigation canal emerged in the west (Neely and Wright 1994: 173-174). During the Middle Uruk period, however, no single large center dominated the smaller, dispersed settlements which are characteristics of this era in Deh Luran (Neely and Wright 1994: 175). Other changes visible at Farukhabad include a scarcity of cattle and an increase in goat over sheep (Redding in Wright 1981: 258-260). Moreover, barley predominated over wheat for first time (Miller in Wright 1981: 228). Neely and Wright interpreted these changes as signs of increasing aridity in the area (Neely and Wright 1994: 175). Based on the evidence from Farukhabad, in the Middle Uruk phase, secondary animal products became increasingly important. Wright saw a close correlation between the increased number of spindle whorls and the elevated proportion of goat in the faunal sample, suggestive of fiber production (Wright 1981: 153-154). An increase in import and export activities and sealing was apparent in this phase as well (Wright 1981: 267, 274-375, 156). As mentioned in Chapter 1, the available information for the eastern plains of Greater Susiana is not comparable to that which is available for the plains of Susiana and Deh Luran. Nonetheless, work by Wright and Carter in the Ram Hormoz plain (Wright and Carter 2003) and Nissen (Nissen 1976) and his colleagues (Dittmann 1984, 1986) in the Behbahan and Zohreh region is available and provides some data on settlement development during the Later Village Period in the eastern end of Greater Susiana.

Studies at Tape Farukhabad revealed more details of economic and political processes in this, the second largest settlement of the region during the Farukh phase (Susiana d/ Late Susiana 1). Higher status people at Farukhabad were “controlling the large storage structures, consumed more beverages, and had preferential access to exotic chipped stone raw materials” (Wright et al. 1999: 72 Wright 1981: 65-66). Besides routine activities at Farukhabad, a notable activity in this phase was the extraction of bitumen from sources about 12 km away. As little bitumen seems to have been used at the site itself, the bitumen extraction was primarily for export purposes (Wright et al. 1999: 72).

In the Ram Hormoz plain, Wright and Carter observed a settlement system that had evolved from the mid-5th millennium B.C onwards (Wright and Carter 2003: 75).1 The evidence was taken to support Wright’s previous hypothesis of the role of “marginal lands” for refuge and overflow population from the “heartland of Susiana” (Wright 1987). No evidence was found which shed light on the correlation between settlement growth and interregional exchange (Wright and Carter 2003: 75). Questions surrounding the mechanics of early trade and relations between central and dependent settlements have been raised by scholars working in the Behbahan and Zohreh plains (Nissen 1976: 274). Their small size and apparent isolation may have been mitigated by their position on the overland routes between the middle and lower plains of Khuzestan, the Persian Gulf and the Marv Dasht plain in Fars. This prompted researchers to examine the role of raw material extraction, exchange and commodity movement from one major center to another or from village to village, within the local economy (Nissen 1976: 274-275).

The Late Susiana 2 phase in Deh Luran appeared to be a phase of drastic decline. Settlement dropped from twelve Farukh/Late Susiana 1 phase settlements to just three in this phase, suggesting to Neely and Wright that a threat from the west may have emerged at this time (Neely and Wright 1994:172). The decline in settlement was also related to the shrinkage of Musiyan from 9 ha in the Farukh phase to 5 in this phase (Neely and Wright 1994: Tables V6 and V7). Moreover, a drastic change in settlement organization, due to both political and environmental reasons, is indicated by the abandonment of the long-settled alluvial plain along the Mehmeh River at this time (Neely and Wright 1994: 172).

 This view is based, however, only on evidence from the western margin of the Ram Hormoz plain. 1

15

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin In an overall presentation of the Behbahan and Zohreh survey results, Nissen described a roughly 3-tier settlement hierarchy in this region: “Tepe Sohz was the largest with approx. 13 ha. and, a height of 9.5 meters, followed by No. 6 of our list with 8 ha. whereas all the others measured 1 ha” (Nissen 1976: 277; Dittmann 1984: 74). As he noted further, if all recorded settlements were occupied at the same time, then the sharp differentiation in settlement size could be interpreted as the “presence of a full-fledged central system with one center, a sub-center and several villages” (Nissen 1976: 277). Interestingly, the “central” site in the Behbahan plain was located in a strategic location in relation to the other smaller settlements, possibly regulating the irrigation facilities for the rest of the settlement system. Nissen identified a canal system which originated at Tape Sohz. Nissen believed that a connection between Susiana and the Marv Dasht plains appeared during the 5th and 4th millennia B.C. (Nissen 1976: 277; in Dittmann’s clarification, this happened during the Do Toluene and Sohz phases, Dittman 1984: 74) and as a result, he concluded that settlement in the Behbahan plain grew as a result.

matrices” (Feinman 2004:2). Earle has defined political economy as a part of traditional economies. According to this definition political economy, which is itself based on subsistence economy, “involves the ways that surpluses are mobilized and allocated to support political activities, lifestyle and operations of social institutions and their leaders? The mobilization of surplus requires a productive economy and its practical control. That control derives from command over quite specific activities involving production, distribution and even consumption” (Earle 2002: 9). Hence as also discussed by Alden, locationally specialized modes of production and distribution, such as regional exchange, are two key factors involved in complex political economies (Alden 1979: 5-6). These factors in turn imply the existence of an organization in which technology and the utilization of raw material, specialist labor, trade and power are structured. It is assumed here that one of the prime movers which had a significance influence on the regional development of Greater Susiana, especially during the Later Village period, was the existence of complex political economies that were not limited to the main and well known “domestic modes of production” (Sahlins 1972) such as agriculture and herding. Farmers in Greater Susiana (at least in the Deh Luran and Susiana plains) exploited the margins of seasonal streams and alluvial fans with their hydromorphic soils. This pattern of land use has a long history in the Near East (Hole et al. 1969:358; Hole 1977: 41; Sherratt 1980: 314; Miller 2003a: 127; Pournelle 2003: Chapter IV; Adams 2004: 43). As in the development of urban societies elsewhere in the Near East, factors other than agriculture, such as interregional trade, inter-city warfare and diplomacy, and central political organization are all important for understanding state development in Greater Susiana (Wright 1969: 122). However, what is distinctive in the later Village Period along the Zagros foothills and the Susiana lowlands is the pattern of utilizing natural resources, natural resource extraction and exporting them to other regions on a larger scale than that of household exchange in a subsistence economy. As Hole has noted, “There are a number of ways to assess relations among areas, apart from examining artefacts. For example, geographic factors may imply interaction for products that are not available locally. In such cases one may find sites near sources of raw material and along routes of travel. Another kind of interaction occurs when pastoral people move seasonally with the growth of fresh pasturage and equable weather. The presence of these mobile people also raises the possibility of interactions with settled farmers for agricultural products in exchange for animal products, and it raises the aspect of conflict in which the mobile herders raid the farmers” (Hole 1987a: 22).

Later, all prehistoric settlements in the Behbahan and Zohreh plains were abandoned in the late 5th/ early 4th millennium and were never resettled, according to Nissen (Nissen 1976: 277). This would be contradicted by the discovery of Bevel-Rim Bowl fragments on the surface of Arjan, however (Potts 2009: 5). Similarly, Dittmann suggested that the settlement of Behbahan was almost completely abandoned during the Late Sohz phase (roughly contemporary to Sargarab phase in the Deh Luran, end of Susa A and terminal Susa A Phase in Susiana, and Gap II and Bakun A Phase in Fars) (Dittmann 1984: 75). Thereafter, the Behbahan–Zohreh region was then considered as a contact zone between the two Elamite core areas of Susa and Fars (Dittmann 1984: 76). Political Economy and the Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period in Greater Susiana Social concepts such as political economy and social complexity are not always easy to investigate through archaeological remains due to the nature of excavated material and the “false dichotomy between the technological activities of early societies (viewed as significant and reconstructable) and social activities and structures (supposedly lost without trace...) that prehistoric archaeologists have often created (Renfrew 1974: 69). Nevertheless, most scholars who deal with ancient economic systems have employed Leslie White’s three fundamental concepts: production, exchange and consumption (White 1959: 237-260 see also Blanton et al. 1997). The term ‘political economy is adopted here “..in supporting the position that all economies (preindustrial as well as industrial) are in some manner embedded in specific cultural, political and/or social

In the previous section, we learned that crucial developments in human society led to increasingly complex social organization during the Later Village Period in the Greater Susiana Plains. However, such development did not appeared in a blink of an eye; it was rooted in cultural, economical and social developments from earliest times in 16

Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period the Village Period of the region and in turn such a crucial phase in the human history of the region did not simply end but continued to exert influence in succeeding phases too. Thus, it is clear that, this complex phase deserves to be evaluated carefully using a multi-disciplinary approach.

Currently, due to the limitations in the nature of the available data from Greater Susiana (cf. Chapter 1), it is not easy to fully exploit this approach. In fact, it is too early to undertake the kind of studies pursued by scholars for the Ubaid and then Uruk periods in Mesopotamia (Henrickson and Thuesen 1989; Algaze 1993; Rothman 2001) since comparably rich data does not exist for the Greater Susiana Plains. Nevertheless, this section endeavors to trace out very briefly the lines of evidence from different plains in Greater Susiana in order to identify any linkages between them by considering the nature of distinct tells in this region from Mehran in the northwest to the Zohreh valley in the south east. In so doing, the relative locations of tells, both in the landscape and along natural routes, and their access to natural resources during the later Village Period will be emphasized.

One way to investigate the growth of complexity is to investigate exchange/ trade. Was there any exchange of exotic commodities between different societies in the region? Previous studies have demonstrated that trade has a long history in the Near East (Renfrew 1977; Beale 1973). Nevertheless, it is difficult to investigate the nature of trade in the Later Village Period because of a lack of analytical studies using techniques such as Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis (INAA) on material gathered from the region. Thus, evaluating the role of economical interactions among the plains of Greater Susiana and beyond and linking these to the existing political structure is problematic.

The largest settlement (more than 16 hectars) recorded in Mehran plain, Chogha Ahowan (Map 2.1), dates from the Early Susiana to the Old Elamite (Nokandeh 2010). The Mehran plain has been called “a marginal area of the Diyala Region, the northernmost part of the Mesopotamian alluvium” (Wright 1981: 264). The strategic location of this extensive tell in the small plain of Mehran is clear. To the west, only a few kilometres away, the Diyala region is accessible via a 6 km long pass. Towards the north and northeast, Mehran is bounded by the extensive alluvial fans of the Zagros foothills. The largest fan near the site is located in its toe area is about 6.45 km long with a radius about 4.64 km. The main river systems in the plain are the Konjancham River, c. 4 km to the west, and the Gavi River, c. 3.46 km toward the east. Both descend from the Zagros and flow towards the Diyala region in Iraq. In addition to the pass leading towards the Diyala region, three main passes link Mehran with the valleys of the inner Zagros - specifically with the Malek Shahi district and Posht-e Kuh towards the northeast and the Deh Luran plain to the southeast (Map 2.1).

The geographical situation of the Greater Susiana plains in relation to neighboring regions (the Zagros highlands to the north/east, lowland Mesopotamia to the west and the Persian Gulf region to the southeast) implies some degree of differential access to natural resources. This in turn suggests that an approach advocated by Service, focusing on the access of the inhabitants of different geographical niches to different natural products, and the concomitant movement of these between regions, might be productive (Service 1962: 144-145). Sanders also emphasized the biophysical environment as a vehicle for economic symbiosis (Sanders 1968: 106), while Caldwell coined the term ‘Interaction sphere’ in seeking to describe interactions among societies rather than individuals (Caldwell 1977: 135-136). The need for symbiotic economic interaction among ancient societies with differential access to natural resources has been noted in many studies, especially with respect to southern Mesopotamia and its dependency on other regions for non-agricultural raw materials (Beale 1973: 133; Potts 1997: 70; Oates and Oates 2004: 178; also see Wright 2001: 133 for a more complex view).

Tepe Musiyan is by far the single largest mounded site on the Deh Luran plain about 17.31 hectars. (Neely and Wright 1994: 57), It has been explored briefly by French excavators (Gautier and Lampre 1905) and Rice University expedition group (Hole, Flannery and Neely 1969: 65-72). Occupation at the site extends from at least 7000 B.C to 1250 A.D In the 4th millennium B.C the site was abandoned (Neely and Wright 1994:57 and 66). It stands on the edge of the eastern sector of the plain close to the Dawairij River, which flows about 2.2 km to the northeast of the site. Musyian was one of the first sites in the Deh Luran Plain associated with a canal system (Neely and Wright 1994: 191). The site is not too far from the northern alluvial fan systems in Deh Luran and is also close to the well-known bitumen source of Ain Gir, about 9.3 km northwest of the site (Map 2.1).

Recent studies have demonstrated that the location and contextual characteristics of tells might provide insights into the character of early societies and economies (Wilkinson 2003: 100 and 107-108). While a shift in emphasis from site to the region is advocated by some (cf. Hole 1987a: 25) a tell, as Wilkinson has rightfully stated for the Bronze age of the Upper Mesopotamian region, “is not only the fundamental archaeological feature of the landscape of Upper Mesopotamia but it is also the most conspicuous. In part because of this conspicuousness, tells may have played a role as a memory bank for local communities” (Wilkinson 2003: 108). Taking this paradigm as a means to explain interregional interactions between different plains of Greater Susiana might be helpful. Where were individual tells located in the landscape? When were tells established and abandoned? Which natural resources were available to them? Which natural routes and inter-montane passes connected them to each other?

Although our evidence from Musiyan derives mostly from surface indications and the very brief sounding of the French mission, detailed studies at the second largest settlement on the plain, Tape Farukhabad, which was 17

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

s

Map 2.1: Map Showing the Location of the Major Later Village Period Sites, Their Adjacent Ecological Niches Attractive for Nomads and Bitumen Sources in the Greater Susiana Plain

inhabited during most of the Later Village Period, have been used to explain exchange in the region at this time (Wright 1981: 262-279).

1998: 68). Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to confirm this theory. Towards the south, the Deh Luran plain is hemmed in by the low ridge of Jebel Hamrin. The narrow passes along the Mehmeh River provided access to the Mesopotamia, while access to Mehran was possible via the narrow passes to the northwest and to the Upper Khuzestan Plains access was relatively easy via the much wider passages leading to the east. In the Susiana plain,3 Chogha Mish and Susa are the most well- known, large settlements of the Later Village Period (Map 2.1). During the Late Middle Susiana period Chogha Mish was about 15 ha in size. It fell sharply to about 2.5 ha in Late Susiana 1 times and grew to about 5 ha in the Late Susiana 2 phase. Occupation in Terminal Susa A and Early Uruk times at Chogha Mish is unclear, but the site flourished again in the Middle Uruk phase.

Like the Mehran Plain, Deh Luran also had very close ties to the Zagros Mountains where segregated economic niches in the landscape are well-documented from an early date. This is illustrated at two of the earliest “nomadic” cemeteries with highly furnished graves dating to the Later Village Period - Dum Gar Parchineh and Hakalan, respectively about 50.5 km and 57.5 km to the northwest of Musiyan (Vanden Berghe 1987; Haerinck and Overlaet 1996). Their contents (ceramics, metals, etc) would indicate some form of symbiosis between “nomads or villagers”2 of the highlands and the settlers of the Deh Luran plain, especially the long-lived settlement of Musiyan (Map 2.1). Kouchoukos (Vanden Berghe 1973, 1975 and Alizadeh 1992: 57) suggested that the appearance of such cemeteries during the Later Village Period was a response to “The increasing importance of sheep and goat in the Village Period economy” and was “consistent with trends documented elsewhere in western Iran” (Kouchoukos

The fluctuation in the size of Chogha Mish extension over time is to some degree related to the growth of Susa, which was founded on the western edge of the plain during Late Susiana 1 times. Originally covering about 3 ha, the site grew in Late Susiana 2/ Susa A times to about 15 ha, then dropped sharply in size in Terminal Susa A. It covered 12 ha in the Early Uruk and 25 ha in the Middle Uruk period, becoming the paramount centre in Susiana.

  Vanden Berghe 1973, 1975 and later on Alizadeh 1992:57 concluded that a lack of arable land and contemporary settlements nearby indicate that Dum Gar Parchineh and Hakalan were used by nomads in the late Chalcolithic period. The author has seen reasonable arable land adjacent to Hakalan during a short visit in 2002 (Fig. 2.1). It would be worthwhile conducting an intensive survey of the Sar Ab-e Maimeh district, the nearby village and its surroundings, to evaluate the ‘nomadic’ hypothesis. 2

  All dimensions for sites on the Susiana plain are extracted from the Susiana Archaeological Database designed by Nicholas Kouchoukos. This was available to the author after the collaborative project in Khuzestan in the fall 2002. 3

18

Social Organization, Political Economy and Landscape of Tells during the Later Village Period

Figure 2.1: Photo showing modern natural setting around Sarab Maimeh District, opposite to the Hakalan Cemetery (A. is taken by the author in July 2002, B. After Haerinck and Overlate 1996,fig 60). The location of these two settlements in the Susiana plain reveals some key aspects of landscape organization and power during the Later Village Period. During the first phase (Late Middle Susiana), Chogha Mish in the eastern sector of the plain was the paramount center, with an extensive settlement and complex, monumental architecture. It exploited alluvial soils and local water resources and had close ties to the Zagros piedmont. In the later phases, Susa was the major center in Susiana, along with Abu Fanduweh and Chogha Mish during the Middle Uruk (Map 2.1).

which stretches from the final phase of the prehistoric down to the present day” (Carter 1971: 256) . The available evidence from the small Behbahan and Zohreh plains to the south shows that during the Later Village Period, each had a large, extended settlement. The evidence for the later phases (Terminal Susa A and Uruk) in these two plains is not clear. With a size of c. 13 ha. and a height of 9.5 m, Tape Sohz (Tol-e Suhz) is the largest site in the Behbahan plain (Nissen 1976: 276-277) (Map 2.1). It is located in the north-central part of the plain in a strategic area that is very close (less than 2 km) to the Zagros foothills and would have benefited from proximity to an alluvial fan. The Marun River is about 3 km to the west. The major passes linking this plain with the surrounding regions include one from northwest which connects Behbahan plain with Ram Hormoz and eventually Susiana; one which connects Behbehan with the inter-montane valleys of the to the southeast; and one which leads to the Persian Gulf via the narrow plain of Zohreh in the south.

Further to the east, Tol-e Geser (Tal-i Ghazir) is the largest settlement in the Ram Hormoz Plain (Map 2.1). In terms of areal extent, Tol-e Geser is a complex site as it consists of a number of different mounds which were occupied in different phases (Wright and Carter 2003: 76). Wright and Carter thought that Mound A covered 1.2 ha from the 5th to the early 3rd millennium B.C alone (Wright and Carter 2003: 76; recently, some diagnostic Late Middle Susiana sherds have been found at the site, A. Alizadeh, pers. comm.). Carter estimated the total extent of the site at about 20-25 ha (Carter 1971: 256).

Tape Sohz was occupied from Middle Susiana to Late Susiana 2/ Susa A times (Nissen 1976: 276). Nissen suggests that of eight contemporary settlements in the Behbahan plain, Tape Sohz appears to have been the most important, with clear indications of water management, mass production (pottery), large-scale architecture (platform) and evidence of sealing (Nissen 1976: 276).

Tol-e Geser is on the edge of the stripped alluvial deposits of the Ala River system and has reasonable proximity to natural passes leading both to the foothills to the west (Susiana plain) and the Zagros to the north (Izeh). The site is connected to the south (Behbahan and Zohreh plains) by a very small valley. This ideal situation: a location on an alluvial plain with a moderate slope and accessibility to the Ala river and nearby springs, which is ideal for irrigation agriculture; close proximity to resources like gypsum (Wright and Carter 2003:65) and bitumen4 (Connan and Deschene 1996) and pasture; and a position on the main routes of contact with surrounding regions, ensured that Tol-e Geser had a “nearly unbroken history of occupation

The last area in this assessment, and the one closest to the Persian Gulf, is the narrow riverine valley of Zohreh. Nissen’s brief survey here identified 15 prehistoric settlements. Of these, Chogha Sofla is the largest settlement at about 15 ha (Map 2.1). The site is located at the head of the main route coming from the north (from Behbahan and the inner Zagros valleys of Do Gonbadan and Fahliyan in the east) and heading to the southwest (to Hendijan and the Persian Gulf). The site was occupied from Early Susiana (locally known as Derwish Ahmad)

  The best known bitumen source, known as Mamatain (Map 2.1), is located about 37.3 km southeast of the site. This is famous in the history of petroleum exploration in the world because drilling of the first two wells in Iran started at Mamatain in 1905 (cf. Appendix 2). 4

19

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin An intensive study of the main communication routes linking the greater Susiana plains with the inter-montane valleys of the Zagros, concentrating on the location of certain settlements, and of modern certain ecological niches attractive to nomadic pastoralists - especially those used as winter camps - would be vital in understanding economic interaction zones present between them (see above discussion regarding Musian and the cemeteries of Hakalan and Dum Gar Parchineh). Using information provided by the local Iranian Nomads Affairs Organization, a schematic distribution of ecological niches attractive to modern nomads along the Greater Susiana Plain has been created, indicating the potential of such research if conducted in future (Map 2.1 and Table 2.1).

to Late Susiana/Terminal Susa A times (locally known as Post Chogha Sofla; (Dittmann 1984: Figs. 3-10). No signs of Uruk occupation have been reported from Chogha Sofla. Almost all of the aforementioned tells share certain features which can help us to understand the political economy and cultural landscape of Greater Susiana during the Later Village Period. Close proximity to important natural resources (water, soil, pasture, gypsum, bitumen etc), and access to the main interregional routes are common to all of these sites. These features highlight the importance of the nexus of both production and exchange. As Hirth notes, “Production and exchange are two sides of the same political coin and are used together by elites to accumulate resources and exercise control over their respective populations” (Hirth 1996: 207).

We have discussed the importance of the close proximity of distinct tells to natural resources, but it is difficult to determine whether this proximity to resources implies ownership and exclusive control of those resources or not. As Earle emphasized, “Ownership of resources creates relationships of power, allows control over the economy, and thus partly determines the nature of stratification in society” (Earle 2002: 9). If this is true in our region, then political economy, which entails “an analysis of social relations based on unequal access to wealth and power” (Roseberry 1989: 44), must be taken into account in future studies of the Later Village Period in the region.

Among the tells in the Greater Susiana plains, Susa, in the center of this region, was able to coordinate labour for ritual and economic purposes, playing both a political and a religious role as it continued to do in later periods as well (Hole 1990; Pollock 1983; Potts 1999). The rest of the above mentioned tells were, most likely, centers where the intensive production of goods, the mobilization of labour, the collection of tribute and interregional trade occurred (Rothman 1987: 88; Wright 2000: 209). Although the general outlines of the political economy of the Later Village Period are discernible in the light of the aforementioned evidence, much-needed detail will only be possible through further research.

Districts

Number of family

Number of herds

Season/date of move

Arrival & destination

Present in Khuzestan

Andika to Chahar Mahal Bakhtiyari

7-9 months

Andika

6000

350.000

April to highlands September to Lowlands

Lali

3500

170.000

April to highlands September to Lowlands

Lali to Chahar Mahal Bakhtiyari and Isfahan

7-8 months

Masjed Soleyman

882

40.000

April to highlands September to Lowlands

Chahar Mahal Bakhtiyari and Isfahan

7months

Andimeshk

3000

160.000

April to highlands September to Lowlands

Andimeshk-Dezful (Sardasht) and Zagheh-Khorram Abad-Chahar Mahal Bakhtiyari

7months

Table 2.1: Statistic information provided by the local Iranian Nomads Affairs Organization regarding the nomadic population of the Khuzestan Province. Thanks to Mr. Hamidreza Qorbani of the Azad University of Shushtar and Mr. Ahmad Mardasi, director of the local Nomads Affairs Organization at Shushtar.

20

CHAPTER 3 Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain

This chapter will describe key aspects of the geography of the Eastern Plain in order to provide a background for this study. It will start by addressing the natural geographic characteristics of the landscape, outlining depositional trends evident on the plain. The unique trajectory of landscape transformation catalyzed by human activities in the region, and the natural responses to it, will then be explored in order to explain such taphonomic processes. Lastly, the human geography of the Eastern Plain will be addressed in order to provide an overview of modern land use within the region. Much of the evidence presented here was observed by the author during field seasons from 2001. It is to be acknowledged that some of the propositions, especially in the case of the landscape transformation, are speculative, and that further studies will be necessary for their complete evaluation.

also conducted a study on the landforms of the region in the area near Dar Khazineh. More recently, in the third season of our investigations (Shushtar Archaeological Project) in the Shushtar area, Tony Wilkinson and Nick Kouchoukos brought a fresh approach to the interpretation the landscape of the region by re-evaluating previous studies, and by utilizing new techniques such as remote sensing and micromorphological and Geoarchaeological methodologies (Alizadeh et al. 2004). Another recent Geoarchaeological study directed by Herman Gasche, has been carried out in the Plains of Lower Khuzestan, was aimed at an investigation of the evolution of the plain in terms of links in existence between the Karkheh, Karun and Jarrahi Rivers and the depositional systems of the Persian Gulf (Gasche 2004/2005).

General Description

Surface Characteristics of the Eastern Plain

The Eastern Plain is a physical extension of the plains of Upper Khuzestan. It is situated between the Karun River to the west, the folded Zagros Mountains to the north, low sandy hills (Kupal Anticline) to the south, and the Kupal stream basin to the east. Tectonic shifts and alluvial processes have led to the formation of the Plain. It is approximately 60 kilometers in length, oriented along a northwest-southeast axis, with an average width of 10 kilometers (Map 1.2).

Topography, soil, flora, and drainage systems have created a highly dynamic geographic environment, with Eastern plain being the most eroded in the lowlands of southwestern Iran. The Gargar River drainage basin has precipitated extensive erosion within the western reaches of the Eastern plain. As a result of this, areas surrounding the Gargar basin are characterized by a slightly sloping triangular alluvial fan running in a general east to west direction along the southern edge of the Zagros piedmont.

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, a few geographical investigations were carried out in the Iranian southwestern alluvium (see Layard 1846; de Morgan 1894, 1900). Until the late 1960’s, however, the nature of the longterm processes of land formation present within the region was poorly understood. In the late 1950s, several developmental projects, the majority of them operated by the Dez Irrigation Project (DIP), undertook geographical studies in the region (see Veenenbos 1958; Subramanian and Van Osten 1959). These studies focused primarily on the agriculture of the region, with soil surveys providing information as to the requirements and potential of such activities mainly in the area between the Karkheh and Karun Rivers, and in small neighboring plains such as those of Behbahan and Ram Hormoz in the east, and the Deh Luran or Upper Karkheh plains in the west.

In the western sector of the plain, between the Gargar River and the village of Dar Khazineh, several low folds of the Zagros extend to below the level of sediment deposited on the plain. Further to the south, in an area where such features appear to be completely ‘submerged’ below the modern surface, there exists a remarkable ridge known as the Shagharidge, located at the site of the modern village of Shagharij-e Olya (Upper Shagharij) (Map 3.1). The northern sector of the plain is characterized by steep slopes, with a high degree of bedrock, ‘sandwiched’ in parallel layers and oriented from east to west (or vice versa), being exposed. Topographically, the western sector of the Eastern plain exhibits the lowest average elevation (34 meters above sea level/m.a.s.l.), with the eastern sector exhibiting the highest (74 m.a.s.l.). Factors such as its proximity to the Zagros Mountains, its isolation from the low depressions of the Southern Plain and the Persian Gulf region by the local anticline, as well its intersection by several ephemeral streams, have created a similar landscape within the Eastern plain to that present in the Upper Khuzestan plain (Kirkby 1977: 263-267). The

In addition to the aforementioned studies, a few projects were carried out exclusively in relation to archaeological issues. One such project, carried out by Michael J. Kirkby (Kirkby 1977) in the region of the Deh Luran and Khuzestan plains, pioneered the study of the geography of the region. Lees and Falcon (Lees and Falcon 1952) have

21

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 3.1 Map showing the Geological and Geographical Features of the Eastern Plain only clear difference between them is the lack of perennial streams in the Eastern plain. Summer crops thus require irrigation, with the growth of their winter counterparts being hindered by inconsistent rainfall. Two major drainage channels emanating from the mountains and intersecting the area are the Darreh Naft in the north, and the Darreh Haddam in the south. These rivulets contain water only during the rainy months of January, February and March and are saline (Map 3.1).

The most prominent feature is, however, the alluvial fan, described in detail below. Deposition Alluvial Fans: The alluvial fan, as a distinctive element of the landscape, is a major landform present in the Eastern plain. The action of streams upon the slopes of the region is one of the primary agents through which such graded courses are developed. Streams carry a vast amount of debris, such as sand and gravel, from the adjacent mountains to the lowlands. Larger stones are generally deposited at the apex of the alluvial fans, with progressively finer deposits, ranging from small stones, to

The plain displays a number of different geographical features, including the low folds of the Zagros Mountains along its northern and northeastern flanks, alluvial fans, eroded features, saline areas, sandy hills and lagoons. 22

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain silt and then to clay, being apparent as such fans approach the delta.

Fig. 3.1: Photo Showing the Location of the Canyons Around Tall-e Abu Chizan (View from 2.4 kms SW of the Site).

Four main processes contribute to the formation of alluvial fans: Fluvial processes, in which the flow of debris occurs; Aeolian processes, during which the power of wind and environmental conditions form dunes, sand seas and sand sheets on a regional scale; Stabilization processes, which are directly related changes on the surface as a result of soil formation and the growth of vegetation; Dissection processes, occurring when climatic or base level changes take place (Harvey 2004: 15-19). The Eastern plain is composed of several small and large alluvial fans stretching from west to east. They are roughly cone-shaped, with their apices developing at points where watercourses emerge from the mountains. Three major, extended fans are roughly oriented towards the Karun River (Map 3.1). Satellite images indicate that sediments deposited by such watercourses, which drain the southern slopes of the Zagros, form three main wadis. For ease of identification, these three major wadi systems of the Eastern Plain will be referred to by their local names. From northwest to southeast, the three zones are named Dar Khazineh, Ab Gonji, and Naft Sefid (respectively marked by D, A, N on) (Map 3.1) With a radial extent of about 13 kilometers, the alluvial fans of the Dar Khazineh Zone exhibit a gently sloping incline (Dar Khazineh-Kuh–e Shah: 280m; Tall-e Khayyat: 378m). Much of this fan has been destroyed as a result of incisions created by the more recently formed Gargar channel. Lees and Falcon (Lees and Falcon 1952) describe some of the geological features of this zone, emphasizing the build-up of sediment, followed by erosion initiated by the rejuvenation of the Gargar river system. Alluvial fans present in the Ab Gonji Zone are flatter than those from the Dar Khazineh zone (Ab Gonji-Kuh-e Siyah: 327m). The streams in this zone seem to have had a lower level of flow, and to have carried less sediment than those of the Dar Khazineh and Naft Sefid zones. It thus appears that the processes of fan development within the Ab Gonji Zone are currently inactive. Within this zone the distance between the apex and the base level of the fans is short, with the radial extent of c. 11 km. This zone consists primarily of larger gravel particles, which mostly occur in the northern deposits. The rock fragments are partially overlain by pebbles and cobbles. The apices of alluvial fans within the Naft Sefid Zone stem from the Zagros folds to the north (Naft Sefid- Kuh-e Pa Gach: 189m; Kuh-e Qal’eh Gabri: 425m). As in other zones, several canyons cut through the frontal scarp of the Zagros. Canyons within the Naft Sefid zone, however, appear to extend much deeper into the range. The three largest canyons in this zone (from west to east) are Om Saleh, Hasan Shahi, and Naft Sefid. The deepest, Naft Sefid, possesses saline water, and is contaminated by several nearby oil seeps. This will be discussed in greater 23

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig. 3.2: Photo Showing the Location of Old and New Salamat Villages.

of deposition were observed: Sheetflood and Streamflood. Sheetflood was observed when a large quantity of water emerged from the Hasan Shahi canyon (Darreh) (Fig. 3.1). The flow of this torrent was short in duration, impacting only upon an area within close proximity to the mouth of the canyon on the adjacent plain. Although most of the flow was trapped in deep channels, shallow channels enabled small amounts to reach the level of the plain. Tremendous amounts of deposit, mostly mudflow, were thus accumulated upon the surface. Sheetflood can be hazardous to human occupation within the region. This is evidenced by the evacuation and relocation, c. half a kilometer away, of the village of Salamat after heavy sheetfloods in 1979 (Figure 3.2). Sheetfloods in the late fifth millennium BC may have obscured the surface of ancient deposits at Dar Khazineh (For further details see Chapter 4).

detail in Chapter 5. It has already been observed that the formation of certain geographical features within the study area has occurred as a result of both tectonic and depositional activity, with high sedimentation forming low gradient alluvial fans. Other forces have, however, contributed to the formation of landforms on the Plain. The development of alluvial fans, both generally and in the study area, is characterized by a period of build-up in which the plain is covered by layers of sediment deposited by mountain streams. Coarse sediments are the first to be deposited, at the base of the fans. Further from the apex of the alluvial fan, the sediments are comprised of smaller stones, with lighter sediments, such as silt or clay, being deposited at its furthest extents. This phenomenon is visible across the Eastern plain, although it is more readily observable in areas exhibiting lower levels of agrarian activity. In some areas of the Eastern Plain, sediment build-ups have led streams to shift their courses, resulting in deposition at progressively lower levels of the Plain. This process continues to evolve to reach equilibrium.

Another type of deposition, more common in the Eastern plain, is Streamflood. This form of deposition was clearly visible immediately after rain, predominantly in deep channels. As with sheetflood, this process is irregular and can occur suddenly. After heavy rain in the region, the deep channels were initially filled with varying amounts of water. The center of the channel bed would subsequently

During excavations in January and March 2005 at Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663), heavy rains provided an opportunity to observe such depositional processes. Two classifications

24

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain be filled with sand and gravel, with mud, silt and clay accumulating along its banks. In some instances, channel walls affected by water fluctuations exhibited the remnants of fine deposits.

The collapse of the channel accelerated the pace of geographical change within the region. One result is that stream courses began to cut deeply into their beds. It is clear that the alluvial fans are sub-aerial features, and that the avulsion of the Gargar channel cut off areas previously formed by the accumulation of lighter sediments like silt and clay. The creation and subsequent collapse of the Gargar channel thus led to the development of a new base level for local drainage systems. The earlier surface level of the plain experienced an immediate increase in erosion, especially in the area around the Gargar extension (cf. Lees and Falcon 1952: 32-33). Further consequences, discussed below, have added to the complexity of the landform processes.

These observations in the Eastern plain suggest that all depositing agents were, to some degree, involved in the formation of alluvial fans within the region. In the Naft Sefid Zone, the fan deposits have formed primarily as a result of Streamflood, while in the Ab Gonji Zone the deposits have accumulated primarily through sheetflood. In the Dar Khazineh Zone, the depositional processes of both sheetflood and stream flood have played an active role. Erosion is the second most visible surface characteristic present on the Eastern plain. It is, therefore, important to understand how and under what circumstances such an erosive environment developed.

Currently, the Gargar River is a master (trunk) stream for the drainage systems of the Eastern plain. It forms an integral component of the system, with numerous branches and subsidiary watercourses leading off it. The base of the river is concave. Stratigraphic and morphologic evidence points to the existence of a close relationship between a master stream and its tributaries (Blissenbach 1954: 176179; Small 1989: 44).The Gargar and its many tributaries have impacted upon the grade, shape, elevation and, ultimately, the overall landscape of the region.

Human Interference and an Unstable Landscape Ancient Shushtar was historically one of the four major cities in Khuzestan and is very well known for its extensive irrigation infrastructure, the majority of which is likely to have been built during the Sasanian period (Map 3.2). From north to south, the main elements of Shushtar’s irrigation infrastructure are as follows: Band-e Mizan, a semi-dam, which was built to divert the flow of the Karun River to the newly built Gargar canal; the Darioun irrigation system, with its complex entrance and canal network; the Shadorvan Bridge, which had a dual function in raising the water level and facilitating the flow of water into the Darioun canals; the waterfalls and their mysterious labyrinths; the Gargar channel; Band-e Mahibazan,1 the complex function of which is poorly understood.

In hydrological terms, the local base level of the alluvial fan needs to satisfy all discharges emanating from it. Tributaries are thus forced to adjust their base level according to that of the master stream. Any changes in the base level of the master stream result in a commensurate change in its tributaries. In the short-term, this would affect the proximal tributaries, with subsequent shifts in the grade, a result of factors such as depth, slope, and hydraulic characteristics, precipitating long-term changes among all streams along the alluvial plain.

Wilkinson encountered major difficulties in determining those landscape changes that had been caused by human intervention, and those that had been caused by climatic factors (Wilkinson 2003: 41). For the Eastern plain, though, humans played a fundamental role through the creation of an enormous irrigation infrastructure. Recent observations in the region support previous narrative accounts claiming that the Gargar River was in fact an irrigation channel, likely to have been dug during the Sasanian period (Moghaddam 2002; Alizadeh et al. 2004: 80; Moghaddam in press). These studies have also indicated that the newly formed channel shifted its flow from a manmade barrier at Band-e Mahibazan, south of Shushtar, to the natural bed shortly after the fall of Sasanians (Moghaddam in press). This event resulted in significant environmental and taphonomic changes.

It is worth noting that the upper part of the Gargar stream lies on solid sandstone bedrock. This feature is traceable along the river section a few kilometers to the south, and is clearly visible in solid rock fractions of the Band-e Mahibazan. This resistant layer of sandstone and mudstone thus prevents many tributaries from entering the Gargar. This feature has been cleverly utilized to create the artificial waterfalls of Shushtar. For this reason, fluctuations in the level of the Gargar would not change the base level of tributaries in this region. However, the accumulation of sediments (mostly silt and clay) in the remainder of the Gargar basin, from Shushtar to the Band-e Qir, enables tributaries to adjust their base level in response to shifts in that of the Gargar. The aforementioned zones of Dar Khazineh, Ab Gonji and Naft Sefid exist as major separate catchments, encircling their individual basins in a general northeast to southwest direction, following an approximate north-south alignment towards the modern Gargar River. Evidence exists in support of the theory that the area along the Zagros foothills, which now contributes water and sediment to the modern Gargar River, had previously existed as the drainage basin

  An unusual and a very tight meander in the present Gargar stream is vividly visible on satellite images and aerial photographs. Its exposed body is about 570 m long and 14 m wide across the Gargar with eastwest direction. It has been famous as a major blockage for the vessels to reach Shushtar in 19th century (Selby 1844: 241, Layard 1846: 59, Cruzon 1890: 521, Bloss Leynch 1891: 593-594). 1

25

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 3.2: Shushtar Irrigation Organ

the Mianab Plain shows, a series of bluffs, roughly parallel to and crossing the modern Karun River, are oriented from Hesam Abad in the northeast to Elleh-Sarimeh in the southwest. This feature provides a remarkable correlation with settlement patterns in the region, especially in the northwestern part of the Mianab plain (see also Chapter 4). To the west of this levee line, Elamite and later historical s

of the Karun River (Moghaddam 2002; Moghaddam and Miri 2003; Alizadeh et al. 2004: 80-81; Moghaddam 2005a 426-427; Moghaddam 2007: in press). Under this circumstance, the major separate catchments may have discharged their flow a few kilometers further than their modern discharge points, although these may have changed through time. As an elevation map (Fig. 3.3) of

26

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain

Figure.3.3: Elevation Map of the Mianab Plain. sites are present, while to its east prehistoric sites have been recorded (Moghaddam 2005a: 514-450). While no direct conclusions can be drawn from the evidence, it appears that the Karun River has shifted its course approximately 6 km towards the southwest. This may account for the use of the term “Old Karun” on the settlement pattern maps (See Chapter 4). A comprehensive geomorphological study of the region is currently being conducted by Kevin Woodbridge from the Geography Department of Hull University, England, which will hopefully improve our understanding of this issue.

streams from the Zagros Mountains to the Karun River was examined during a Geoarchaeological reconnaissance of the region (Alizadeh et al. 2004: 81, Fig. 13). Three distinct irrigation and drainage phases for the Mianab plain were proposed. In the first phase, during which the Karun River existed as the master stream within the wider drainage basin, the Zagros-originated streams flowed primarily toward the Karun. During the second phase, the Gargar channel appeared in the plain, preventing streams to the east from flowing into the Karun River. The third phase, explained later, was characterized by the incision and dissection of the Eastern plain.

Aside from changes in the flow of the Karun, the flows of streams in the region have been further studied since our initial surveys. An earlier hypothesis discussed by Moghaddam (Moghaddam 2002) regarding the flow of

Initial evidence and data have been augmented through further research in the region, allowing for a more complete understanding of the nature of landscape

27

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin transformation after the collapse of the natural system existing there (Moghaddam 2008 in press). Thus it is now believed that the modern landscape of the region is the result of several geomorphologic episodes, as mentioned previously, likely to have been precipitated by a number of early hydraulic projects. Major landscape transformations in the region were initiated by both the Parthians and the Sasanians. Subsequent natural and political circumstances caused changes in the irrigation system, such as a dry period that occurred in the late Sasanian era (Ca. 500-650 A.D.) (Butzer 1958: 121-127; Wenke 1975-76: 81-82), or the fall of the Sasanian empire in 641 A.D, resulting in the widespread suspension of the maintenance and management of irrigation systems. During the subsequent phase, some of the main infrastructure collapsed, including the Darioun Entrance site (Andam-e Abgir-e Darioun) (Moghaddam 2002), and probably Band-e Mahibazan (Moghaddam 2008 in press). Lastly, changes in water supply and sediment deposition resulted in changes in the configuration of the alluvial fans, leading to greater erosion and deposition in the plains to the east of the Karun River (see below).

It is, however, possible that there were no remarkable streams at the time when the Gargar was constructed in the northern sector of the plain. Further observations may shed more light on this matter. Critical phases in the development of stream courses and the drainage system of the Eastern plain are likely to have occurred following the collapse of the Band-e Mahibazan and the resulting shift of the Gargar channel to a new natural bed. The chronology of this collapse has not yet been absolutely determined although, as mentioned earlier, it may have occurred at the end of Sasanian period. Other significant evidence existing in support of this is presented below: Archaeological data from the Mianab plain indicates the linear alignment of sites along the Gargar channel, as well as a few hundred meters to the east of the modern Gargar River, particularly during the Islamic period (Moghaddam and Miri 2003: 103-104). Controlled soundings at these sites could provide evidence as to the precise date of their occupation. The eastern area of the Gargar River was densely populated during the early Islamic era, a fact that may have undermined the stability of the land prior to the collapse of the Band-e Mahibazan. The configuration of the Islamic settlements, which dates to before the 14th century A.D., and their distribution pattern along an east-west corridor in this area are worth emphasizing (Moghaddam and Miri 2007: 48-50).

The present discussion focuses on the conditions present within the northern sector of the Mianab plain, where one of the main foundations of the irrigation infrastructure was installed. Band-e Mahibazan is likely to have had an important role in raising the level of the Gargar, shifting the water to an earthen channel or to channels in the plain. It should be noted that the bed of the Gargar channel was higher than the base level of the eastern streams to the south of the Band-e Mahibazan. As a result, the eastern streams had no direct connection to the newly built Gargar channel during the first phase. At present heavily dissected areas on both sides of the Gargar River inhibit an evaluation of the reaction of eastern stream flows to this sudden change.

The Band-e Mahibazan itself experienced several phases of restoration up until the Qajar period. Safavid and Qajar coins were uncovered among the mortar of currently exposed ruined foundations from the structure. Placing contemporary coins into mortar was a common tradition in Iran, a useful tool in determining the chronology of secondary constructions, the different phases of repairs and the possible time of collapse, although one may argue that this evidence may suggest a later date for its construction, during the Safavid or Qajarid periods (Wilkinson, pers. comm.). However, the restoration of the existing – in this case, Sasanian - monuments and infrastructure was a common tradition practiced throughout the Islamic period, during the reign of both the Safavid and the Qajar. This tradition is attested to at other monuments in the area, including the Shadorvan weir, Waterfalls, and the bridges of Boleti and Lashgar.

The Sasanians are likely to have installed a wastewater capture channel in the area between the eastern stream flow and the newly built Gargar channel. This point is located a few kilometers south of Band-e Mahibazan. Figure 3.4 illustrates an interesting event that impacted upon the landscape of the region. The stages can be summarized as follows: 1) Gargar channel was established to the right angle of the modern Gargar (the Gargar River) 2) To the northeast and between the new Gargar channel and the eastern streams, a wastewater channel was dug. The linear traces of this feature are clearly visible on the CORONA images (Fig. 3.4)

In the southern end of the Mianab plain, the extended Middle Islamic town of Askar Mokarram/Mukram (KS 1622) is located along both banks of the modern Gargar River (Map.4.9). At least one huge bridge has been identified as having existed in the middle of the town (Khosrowzadeh et al. in Moghaddam 2005b: 101, Layard 1846: 63-64). The location of this bridge indicates that the Gargar River ran through the middle of the town, when it was no longer an early Islamic Arab military camp but a fully-fledged Islamic town during the 10-11th centuries A.D., encompassing an area of about 130 hectares.

3) Following the collapse of the Band-e Mahibazan, the Gargar channel became a meandering river 4) The local base level was affected by these changes, with the waste collection channel being dominated by the eastern streams.

28

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain

Fig. 3.4: Four Proposed Changes affected the Landscape of the Region along the Gargar River We must further consider the effect of large earthquakes in the region in 840 AD (Ambraseys and Melville, 1982: 5; Christensen 1993: 113). These disturbances may have played an even greater role in the destruction of the Gargar Channel and, in particular, Band-e Mahibazan than any other factors at the time.

Schwartz 1896: 351-358) would have probably happened between the 10th and 15th centuries A.D. Following this, the Gargar watercourse began to cut across the plain. The action of the river upon the plain has created a series of bluff ranging between 8 and 12 meters in height along the modern Gargar River (also see Alizadeh et al 2004.: Fig. 12). This phenomenon caused the erosion of streambeds to the east of the Gargar River and, to some extent, resulted in the formation of the new drainage basin.

The collapse of the Mahibazan semi-dam, and the subsequent changes in the Gargar channel, were also recorded in the early Islamic sources as Masruqan (see

29

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Although the effects of this period of collapse upon the drainage characteristics of the Eastern plain were many, as a result of rapid large-scale changes to the plain, the geological characteristics present on the both banks of the Gargar River likely will help to illustrate of the aforementioned consequences of the collapse phase (Fig. 3.4). To the north and northeast, just near the Zagros foothills, shale and siltstone formations underlie the plain, with a tendency to produce higher water drainage. This promotes, to some degree, low infiltration rates and high levels of overland flow. The nature of erosion within the upper segments of the plain near the Zagros foothills is linked to the presence of fractured rocks along several canyons. This feature is responsible for the development of a dendritic stream pattern within the drainage system.

Clearly, the above argument is not definitive, and there is no doubt that future geomorphological assessments will inform present interpretations. Thus, not all of the features of erosion and deposition discussed may be directly related to the action of the Gargar. It is, however, likely that all of the features of the landscape have contributed to its development, with the Gargar, in particular, being considered as one of the major catalysts for taphonomic processes. Erosion Features As mentioned above, the entire landscape of the Eastern plain is being progressively graded. The action of the drainage network upon it continues to develop through the capturing of rivers within the new Gargar basin. This principle can be applied to features throughout the study area. Listed below are a variety of changes that have resulted from, or that have been affected by this process.

In general, the level of water that drains into the eastern plain of the Gargar River is higher than that flowing to the Mianab plain. Sparse vegetation, soft alluvial fan soils, the force of the base level drainage system, and random periods of sudden intense precipitation have all contributed to the formation of the Eastern Plain drainage basin . Watercourses provide significant benefits to residents of the region, with vegetation being concentrated along their banks. Settlements in such areas are, however, at risk of being impacted upon by certain hazards.

Intersection: The intersection process follows from the previously described deposition process, and is largely dependent upon changes in the feeder channels. While the fan aggrades, the feeder channel incises into the fan surface to form a fan head trench. The incised channel then continues to spread out into the area around the middle of

Fig.3.5: Grazing Lands in the Gullies around Modern Villages in the Study Region

30

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain the fan (Bull 1977: 256; Small 1989: 46-47). This event is most discernable in some of the areas in the region, including the Dar Khazineh and Naft Sefid Zones.

wadis Gullies in the Eastern Plain were typically carved out by ephemeral flows from rainstorms. While the role of substrata, vegetation and main streams has been significant in forming the gullies of the Eastern plain, the tendency of the gullies to meet mainstream systems, most significantly the Gargar River, at their base level has been primary in their creation. It appears that gullies located near the Gargar River have simpler, single thalwegs2 in comparison to others, such as at Darreh Naft and Darreh Haddam. All gully heads are, however, dendritic in shape.

Rainfall, although occasional, is also an important factor. Thus, the Eastern plain landforms are partly the work of running rainwater, which rapidly changes the landscape. As a result, the Eastern plain is intersected by a series of roughly parallel streams that emerge from the southern ranges of the folded Zagros, passing firstly through the shallow canyons in the north and northeast before continuing their way towards south and southwest. This process continues until the particles suspended within the stream channel are discharged. It is through this process that the level of such intersected areas reaches that of the Gargar base level.

In the higher grounds of the Eastern plain, mostly in the Dar Khazineh and Naft Sefid Zones, the gullies form deep cuts in the surface, a result of the upward shift of headwater regions near the foothills of the Zagros. The areas around the main streams of the Darreh Naft and Darreh Haddam gullies have largely been formed as a result of subsidence. In the rest of the region an increase in runoff and discharge, or the branching of barriers or ridges, has resulted in the creation of a number of major gullies.

Dissection: The alluvial fans of this region are mostly dissected. There are several factors that are involved in the dissection of alluvial surfaces including: an increase in precipitation; the destruction of vegetation by grazing; a decrease in the available sediment load; diastrophic movements that uplift one portion of the fan with respect to another; the lowering of the trunk stream or lateral migration of the trunk stream into the fan base (Blissenbach 1954: 179-181). It is mostly likely that the lowering of the trunk stream and the alteration of the natural river channel from the Karun valley to the new Gargar Channel in the Eastern Plain drainage system directly affected the dissection of the major part of the plain.

In the Naft Sefid Zone, as a result of intense hydraulic action during the wet season, and its higher elevation, the locations gullies often change, with older gullies characteristically being located where flows are no longer active. This provides an ideal opportunity for agricultural activities reliant upon dry conditions to take place. Areas alongside gullies are also used as farmland, in a similar manner to narrow channel-side strips identified in other parts of the Upper Khuzestan plain (Kirkby 1977: 285). To some extent, narrow gullies also provide grazing lands for local herders (Fig. 3.5). Furthermore, local wildlife is also more active in gullies than in other areas. Wild boar, hyena, gray foxes, rabbits, hedgehogs, owls, moon rats and small insects provide a few examples of the animals that live in and beside the gullies.

Duricrusts: As a result of the lack of appropriate vegetation in the Eastern Plain, discussed below, the occurrence of duricrusts and the disruption of the wetland surface sods by animals is a major erosive factor. The best example of this event is documented in the area around Tall-e Abu Chizan. During periods of high precipitation, local residents and, to some extent, the Bakhtiyari nomads practice intensive grazing. For the local people, aside from sheep and goat herding and patchy agriculture, cattle breeding provide a considerable source of income. In their seasonal migrations, in response to the spatial distribution of fodder, water and grazing land, nomads regularly enter the wet zones of the Zagros foothills. This accelerates the process of erosion, with cattle leaving large footprints (with an average depth and diameter of c. 3-6 cm) on the wet surface. Shortly after early periods of dry weather, the area is filled with irregular white salty patches. The immediate result of this process is the erosion of surface soils. This may not have resulted directly from the activities of the Gargar River, although areas affected by Duricrusts are easily removed by taphonomic processes, primarily those initiated by the new Gargar River.

Tunneling: Tunnel erosion is commonly identified throughout the Eastern Plain. Tunneling takes place when the cut off stress applied by flowing water expands into an existing passageway (Bryan and Jones 1997: 211). In the Eastern plain, this sort of erosion occurs when, after heavy rain, running water is trapped in narrow gullies. In the Naft Sefid Zone, in the area close to the Zagros Mountains, several land collapses have been observed. Such collapses are likely to have been caused by cavities or sinkholes formed as a result of the inability of hydraulic forces to transport sediments to lower zones of the region. Badlands: Another erosional feature in the Eastern plain, badlands are created as a result of the extension of gullies, as well as by the impact of both vegetation and geomorphic processes. It is likely that activities at the base level of the Gargar system, and at the two other major streams of Naft and Haddam, have directly impacted upon the formation of badlands in the Eastern plain. This feature exists as a

Gullies: It is not surprising that narrow yet relatively deeply incised stream courses, difficult to cross or to ascend, exist as the major land surface erosion feature present on the Eastern plain. These streams are found mostly in the area adjacent to the Gargar basin in a north-south direction, and in the areas around the three aforementioned major

  Line connecting lowest points: a line connecting the lowest points of successive cross sections through a river channel or valley (Encarta 2006). 2

31

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Figure 3.6: Average precipitation of different areas in Khuzestan

major threat to the ecosystem of the Eastern Plain, being highly detrimental to vegetation growth. Climate and Rainfall There is no direct climatological data available for the Eastern plain itself. The current statistics supplied by the Iranian Meteorological Organization (IRIMO)3 have been derived from neighboring zones. The figures given here are therefore based primarily on the data from areas such as Masjid-e Soleyman and Ram Hormoz. The proximity of the Eastern plain to the Zagros foothills may account for the fact that weather conditions there tend to be influenced by the Zagros rather than by the lowlands.

Figure 3.7: Rainfall variability between 1993 and 2003 in the Ram Hormoz area.

The maximum temperature in summer can reach up to 50° C. The average temperature is about 28.7° C during the dry season, and between 14° and 16° C during the wet season. During the wet months, and between December and February, cold nights with frost do occur. This is typically followed by heavy mists close to the surface the following morning.

is generated by intense storms in the winter months from January to March. The average precipitation of different areas in Khuzestan including the eastern plain is illustrated in Figure 3.6.

The hot dry season extends from May to October, with the wet season occurring between November and April, during which the majority of rainfall occurs. The climatic data from Khuzestan indicates that most of the precipitation

The overall rainfall average is about 320-360 mm per year. The mean value of the rainfall recorded by IRIMO over a long period in the neighboring Ram Hormoz plain, which has similar conditions to the Eastern plain, shows a significant variability in precipitation in this region. Figure 3.7 illustrates the variability between 1993 and 2003 in the

  http://www.irimo.ir

3

32

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain Ram Hormoz area. The available data also indicates that, during this 10-year period, the wettest month was January with an average of 92.5 mm, with the driest month being September, with an average of 0.08 mm of rainfall. The year 2003 had the lowest overall rainfall.

No

Plant Name

Growing Spots

1

Acantholimon

Zagros Pediments

2

Alfalfa

General

3

Alhagi maurorum

4

Amaryllidaceous

General

Plants, such as halophytic, Alhagi maurorum and tamarix, provide a dense cover in saline areas, as well as in areas cut by gullies in the Naft Sefid Zone, and in lagoons beside the Karun River near the village of Hasan Arab. Sporadic salt-cedar trees, known locally as Konar, with deep roots in the ground, are found along ephemeral stream terraces and in some gullies (Table 3.1). The most common plant forms in the region are the low grass variants that begin to grow immediately following the rainy season. A number of these plants are listed in Table 3.1. At the beginning of spring, in late February, the plain exhibits a dense cover of such ephemeral plants. By the end of March the green surface of the plain transforms into an almost barren land where only sporadic plant growth is visible in gullies and in abandoned stream channels. In the cultivated areas close to the Karun and Gargar Rivers, where irrigation is practiced, different weed species grow abundantly.

5

Ampelopsis vitifolia

Dar Khazineh Zone

6

Anthemis

General

7

Anthropophagous

Near Farmlands

8 9 10

Aquatic Arenaceous Asteraceae

Streams-prone Areas Low Sandy Hills in the South Naft Sefid Zone

11

Astragalus

General

12

Baker

Naft Sefid Zone

13

Blepharis Persicus

General

14

Calotropis specigers

Beside Streams

15

Capsolla

Naft Sefid Zone

16

Casuarinal

Close to Karun

17

Cichorium

General

18

citrullus colocynthis

General

19

Dalbergia

Close to Zagros

20

Erenophilous

Saline areas

21

Fagonia

Mianab Plain

In regards to the relationship between vegetation and the erosion of the plain, it is worth noting that during the excavation seasons of 2005 and 2006 it was observed that heavy precipitation occurred during the intense stormy periods when there was minimal vegetation cover. As a result, rainwater streamed across the surface and gullies as sheetfloods and as streamfloods. Torrents created by the downpours would flow into bare channels and gullies, disrupting their walls and surfaces. Ephemeral streams flow predominantly during such periods, with the accelerated flow exacerbating erosion. Unfortunately, erosion within the gullies impacts upon the growth of the most resistant plants, such as Tamarix, through the exposure of their deep roots.

22

Fluiatile

Beside Streams

23

Foeniculumiller

General

24

Gmnocarpos

General

25

Hairmous

Beside Streams

26

Naft Sefid Zone

28

helophytic Heysarum elymaiticum Hobacciferum

29

lichens

Close to Zagros

30

limonium

Naft Sefid Zone

31

lycium shawii

Beside Streams

32

Malvacoac

Naft Sefid Zone

33

Marsedenia erecta

General

34

Marsileal

General

35

Origanum Vuleare

Naft Sefid Zone

36

Peziza

General

37

plantago major

General

38

populuseuphratica

Beside Streams

39

prosopiscineratia

Naft Sefid Zone

40

Ranunailus

Naft Sefid Zone

41

Rhazqastricta

General

42

Rhazya stricta

Mianab and Ab Gonji Zone

43

Sisymbrium Officinal

Naft Sefid Zone

44

Tamarix galliea

Lagoons/Gullies/Wetlands

45

Tribulus Terrestris

Naft Sefid Zone

46

Triniexslud

Beside Streams

47

Umbellifera

Naft Sefid Zone

Vegetation

27

Further Observations: Modern Land Use and Population Water Sources: There is no evidence of any fresh water sources, such as ground water, brook or ponds, in the entire Eastern plain. Most of the water in the region comes from several rocky canyons in the north, containing a large amount of minerals and oily solutes. This water also engages with the saline topsoil. The level of the water table is lower in the Ab Gonji Zone than in the other two zones, and is approximately 12-15 meters in depth. In most areas of the Naft Sefid Zone, it is at a shallow depth of 6-7 meters. At the site of the modern villages of Salemiyyeh and Shajirat, the water table is quite high in the low-lying segments of the Naft Sefid Zone to their south. In the vicinity of the south sandy hills (Kupal Anticline), annual rainfall, soil characteristics (Maps 3.1 and 3.3; Table 3.2) and a lower infiltration rate

Naft Sefid Zone Naft Sefid Zone

Table 3.1: General Plant Species of the Eastern Plain (identified by Dr. Hamid Rezaii)

33

No Vegetations

Yearly Grasses - Sporadic Konar Trees - Dry Farming and Seasonal Pastures Dry Farming and Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Shallow Soils-Gravels and Exposed Rocks- Lithic Lepto Sols- Some parts: Bakhtiyari Conglomerate Shallow to Deep Soils with Heavy Textured and Small Gravels- Gypsic Regosols Shallow to Deep Soils- Gypsic Regosols- Calcaric Regosoles- (Gypsiferous and Saliferous Marls)

Deep Soils with Heavy Texture - Calcaric Cambisols Deep Soils with almost Heavy Texture- Calcaric and Gypsic Regosols Deep Soils- Heavy Texture with Calcite MaterialsHaplic Calcisols Deep and Heavy Texture Soils- Calcaric CambisolsHaplic Calcisols

Picked Hills- Calcite and Sand Stones- Steep:30-40%-Elevation: 800-1000m

Low Hills with Rounded Mounds- Red and Gray and Calcite and Silt marns Aghajari Formation- Steep: 20-30%- Elevation:500-650m

Low, Folded and Weathered Hills- Weathered Land (Limestone and Calcite Marnes)- Gachsaran Formation- Steep- 20- 25%- Elevation: 350-500m

Fluctuated Plateaus- Steep: 3-5%

Low Fluctuated Platue-Steep:1-2%

High Terraces and Plateaus with Low to High Inequality and Erosion- Gypsic Material- Steep: 2-4%

Pediment Plains with Moderate Steep and Fluctuation- Steep: 1-2%

Pediment Plains Moderately Flat- Steep: 1-05%

Higher terraces that masked by sand dunes

Flat Pedimental Plains with Moderate Steep. Steep: 2-3%

Flood Plains

Flood Plains- Steep: 1-0.5%

Flood Plains-Saline and Limited Ground Water Resource-Steep: >1%

Old Flood Plains-Steep:1-2%

Low Saline Plains and Prone Area. Salty Ground Water - Steep>1

Depression , saline limitation in underground water

Low Sandy Hills

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

34

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

No Vegetations

Accidental pasture, deserted lands

Pasture - Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Salt-tolerated Plants- Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Salt-tolerated Plants- Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Dry farming and Pipe-based Irrigation Agriculture

Moderate Grass Land - Dry Farming (cereal) - Seasonal Pastures Moderate Vegetation of Mostly Dry Farming - Seasonal Pastures

Yearly Grasses - Seasonal Pastures- Patchy Dry Farming

Moderately Covered with Yearly Grasses and Densely with Konar Trees - Seasonal pastures

Table 3.2: Land and Soil Description of the Study Region. Modified from the Latest Khuzestan Soil Map Produced by Agriculture Ministry of Iran 1370 (1991)

Calcaric Arenosols

Deep soil with heavy texture, Gleyic and sodic

Gleyic Solonchaks- Calcaric Fluvisols

Heavy Soils- Salic Fluvisols- Haplic Solonchakes

Sodic and Gleyic Solonchaks

Deep Soils with Heavy Texture- Somehow SalineCacaric Cambisols (Saline Phase) Calcaric Fluvisols Deep Soils with Heavy Texture - Calcaric Cambisols (Saline Phase)

Deep Soils with lihgt Texture Calcaric Arenosols

Shallow to Deep Soils Lied on Small Gravels and Calcite Material- Calcaric Regosols

Moderately Covered with Yearly Grasses and Densely with Konar Trees- Seasonal Pastures

Shallow to deep Soils - Gypsic Regosols ( Saliferous Marls)

Low folded and Weathered Mountains- Gachsaran Formation - Steep 30-50% -Elevation: 750-1100m

2

Yearly Grasses, Sporadic Konar Trees and Seasonal Pastures

Lithic Leptpsols - Calcaric Negosols- Gypsiferous Marls

Low Folded Mountains- Aghajari Formation/Marn Silt - Steep 40-70% -Elevation: 800-1300m

1

Land Use

Soil Classification

Land Description

No. on Map 3.3

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain

Map 3.3: Soil Map of Khuzestan Modified from the Latest Khuzestan Soil Map Produced by Agriculture Ministry of Iran 1370 (1991). See Table 3.2 for the key have resulted in the collection of water in vast flat areas or ponds. This phenomenon has been reported in different areas throughout the plains of Upper Khuzestan (Gremliza 1962: 13), in the Susiana plain; Hole et al. 1969: 17), and in the Deh Luran plain. In the eastern plain, with the exception of a few artificially constructed ponds near the Gargar River, no permanent ponds have been reported. During the dry season, the aforementioned pond area transforms into one of the most salinated areas of the Eastern plain.

influenced the establishment of four settlement groups: those formed as new suburbs for the town of Shushtar, subsequently developed into larger townships; those that depend on the Karun and Gargar Rivers, constituting the main group; those developed in close proximity to roads within the region; agrarian settlements dependent upon arable land, pastures and other natural resources (Map 3.4). Aside from these factors, the ancient Darioun/Darian canals and the old Gargar/Masruqan canal systems have been instrumental in the development of the Qa’leh (Castle) system. This is a system in which landowners established farming collectives along a series of canals. At least eight such villages, located mostly in the northern part of the Mianab plain, incorporate Qal’eh as a part of their name, indicating the fact that they were initially constructed as Qal’eh villages (Table 3.3). Gremliza (Gremliza 1962:56) has also briefly described this particular form of village in the Dezful area. In the Mianab plain it appears that these villages had less connection with other communities, in contrast to those recorded by Gremliza in the Pilot Area of Dezful (Ibid). Interestingly, a number of these villages are located close to the Karun River, including the villages

Modern Settlements The hierarchy of the modern settlements in the Shushtar Township (Shahrestan), as with other shahrestans in Iran, is separated into different units of administration, including towns, suburbs, districts, villages, and hamlets, with the latter two being confined to rural areas. Population density throughout the Shahrestan is determined primarily by factors such as the availability of water, arable land, roads, civil facilities and other natural resources such as pasture lands and stone quarries. These fundamental factors have 35

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Village/Town Name Ab Gonji Abbasabad Abu Alimeh Abu Amood Abu Tabareh 1 Abu Tabareh 2 Aghabgi Alam Alhoda Arab Asad Arab Hasan Bahmanabad Band-e Qir Basetiyeh Beh Bid Beyt-e motalleb Boher-e Olya Boher-e Sofla Boneh Ajam Buraki Chahar Gaveh Cham Faraj Cham Konar Dar Kazineh Darreh Bid Delfiyeh Deylam Deylam-e Jadid Ebadat 1 Ebadat 2 Elleh Band-e Qir Elleh Haj Abd Al-Ali Elvaniyyeh Enayeh Garab Gavmishabad Ghafel Ghalim Ghanem Gholroomezi Habib Abad Haddam 1 Haddam 2 Haj Khasaf Halaleh Manzel Hamdaniyeh Hesamabad Jali’eh (Askar Mukram) Jaliyeh Kaediyeh Kargeh Karvansara Khozayneh (Salamat) Kohyesh Konar Helaleh Kondak 3 Kondak Isa Longor-e Jadid Longor-e Qadim Mahamid Mahdiyeh Manhoush Marireh Mashhadi Mehdiabad Mohammad Mojriyeh Naghishiyat 1 Naghishiyat 2 Naiimabad-e Bozorg Naiimabad-e Kouchak Nasir Nubegan Nur Ali Nur Mohammadi Omm Safayeh 1 Omm Safayeh 2

No. on Map 3.4 66 8 112 53 100 99 17 2 28 29 96 49 54 62 95 89 90 97 5 23 71 58 63 106 40 42 41 101 102 48 22 103 43 57 1 84 30 64 19 75 85 83 44 68 86 24 91 77 93 94 104 76 82 67 110 111 4 18 69 33 35 65 74 11 73 36 45 46 10 10 26 114 60 3 108 109

Road Type ENAN1 1 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 1 3 3 1 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 2 3 0 0 1 2 3 1 2 2

yes no no no no no no no no no no no no yes no no no no yes no yes no yes no no no no no no no no no no no no no no   no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no   no no no no no no 0 0 no no yes no no no

No. of Houses

13 0 10 20 16 15 19 3161 121 235 1 61 46 56 7 18 1 8 0 41 13 29 67 19 19 116 67 9 9 13 39 8 5 24 690 16 26 37 70 7 6 33 7 8 9 63 41 22 8 20 8 81 7 10 6 19 157 120 31 9 37 1 8 269 1 24 36 9 0 0 37 2 17 516 5 6

No. of Families 20 0 10 25 19 20 23 357 138 274 2 63 70 67 8 27 2 12 0 56 15 35 76 19 27 164 100 9 10 13 45 14 5 32 772 24 39 75 104 8 9 43 7 20 12 81 67 36 10 30 9 108 17 17 7 21 191 131 57 11 57 2 10 294 2 30 45 9 0 0 46 7 24 628 11 9

36

Total Population 59 0 133 151 161 166 169 2450 927 1893 12 453 415 361 40 132 10 113 0 316 91 180 482 193 175 945 574 84 80 119 283 103 52 185 5094 123 246 448 538 64 71 270 64 107 88 469 363 218 68 160 75 590 89 84 119 151 1131 842 307 72 347 11 49 1703 4 263 317 66 0 0 282 47 136 3441 74 62

Running Water

no 0 no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no no yes yes yes yes yes no 0 yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes no yes yes no 0 0 yes no yes yes yes yes

Deserted by Flood

  yes                                 yes                                                                 yes                                 yes yes            

Area n ha. 7.4 1.7 11.6 12.2 7 5.9 4.3 56 34.2 63 1.1 12.6 19.9 14.8 3.5 7.8 2.5 7.7 5.2 25.8 6.8 9.7 38.3 9.4 31.9 77.8 18.4 5.8 6 4.9 11.1 7.1 1.7 9.8 83.52 8.8 22.6 18.5 16 10.3 6 20.6 2.1 5.8 7.9 14.5 19.2 14.8 4.8 12.3 5.4 44.8 8.4 5.7 7.4 9.5 39 40.2 15.9 12.4 37.3 1.1 8.6 43 0.3 19.9 39.7 3.3 1.3 1.1 19.2 1.8 11.8 99 5.3 3.2

Person per ha. 7.9   11.4 12.3 23 28.1 39.3 43.7 27.1 30 10.9 35.9 20.4 24.3 11.4 16.9 4 14.6   12.2 13.3 18.5 12.5 20.1 5.4 12.1 31.1 14.4 13.3 24.2 25.4 14.5 30.5 18.8 61 13.9 10.8 24.2 33.6 6.2 11.8 13.1 30.4 18.4 11.9 32.3 18.9 14.7 14.1 13 13.8 13.1 10.5 14.7 16 15.8 29 20.9 19.3 5.8 9.3 10 5.6 39.6 13.3 13.2 7.9 20     14.6 26 11.5 34.7 13.9 19.3

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain Omm Serajineh Panj Mili Pirgoori Qal’eh Abd Alhoseyn Qal’eh Garreh Qal’eh Haj Mohammad Hoseyn Qal’eh Khan Qal’eh No Qal’eh Seyyed Qal’eh Soltan Roghayveh Sabzi Salemiyyeh Samideh Samirat Sanijeh Sarimeh Seh Boneh Seh Boneh Olya Seyyed Dakhil Seyyed Hasan Shagharij-e Olya Shagharij-e Sofla Shahitat Shajirat Shebat Tooleh Sheleyli-e Bozorg Sheleyli-e Kouchak Shorayf Sofan-e Olya Sofan-e Sofla Tebti Teckto Valiabad Yabareh Yasarat Zabari 1 Zabari 2 Zahiriyeh Zahoabad

92 61 55 12 78

2 2 2 1 2

no yes yes no no

28 4 42 55 5

46 7 53 70 7

268 44 289 403 31

yes no yes yes no

         

25.8 1.3 18.1 5.4 2.2

10.3 33.8 15.9 74.6 14

13

1

no

21

23

149

yes

 

12

12.4

25 6 9 59 105 34 107 39 79 87 50 21 20 72 88 37 37 113 98 81 14 15 80 31 32 16 56 47 27 7 51 52 70 38

1 0 0 3 2 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 4 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 1

no yes 0 yes no no no no no no no yes no yes no no no no n no no no no no no no no yes no no no no no no

34 0 0 0 38 15 27 24 6 24 64 65 6 2 44 9 19 3 53 10 116 22 17 17 31 37 64 17 28 10 11 1 46 40

39 0 0 4 52 16 28 31 11 36 109 73 6 2 72 11 24 5 71 13 145 31 25 19 31 47 73 22 33 11 22 5 51 47

291 0 0 16 323 135 226 224 52 227 650 386 41 15 435 79 178 48 489 80 830 170 138 121 233 280 425 240 228 90 130 20 324 276

yes 0 0 no yes yes yes yes no yes no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yes no yes yes

  yes yes                                                              

7.5 6.8 5.1 2.3 26.6 9 17.1 7.3 7.9 14.9 20.9 21 4 2.1 31.6 2.5 23.2 3.7 31 7.6 28 15 9.3 22 14.8 10.5 22.3 24.3 32 6.1 10.4 6.5 28 21.3

38.8     6.9 12.1 15 13.2 30.6 6.8 15.2 31.1 18.3 10.2 7.1 13.7 31.6 7.6 12.9 15.7 10.5 29.6 11.3 14.8 5.5 15.7 26.6 19 9.8 7.1 14.7 12.5 3 11.5 12.9

1  Ecological Niches Attractive to Nomads

Table 3.3: Modern Settlements in the Eastern Plain of Qal’eh No, Qal’eh Seyyed and Qal’eh Khan. Between 1980 and 1990, most of these villages were deserted. It is important to determine whether the prime reason for the desertion was flooding along the Karun River, or changes in economic or landownership policies.

the east of the Gargar River, the villages of Dar Khazineh and Ab Gonji form the border between the Persian and Arab communities. Arab villages differ in shape to the walled Qal’eh villages and to sprawling modern villages. Arab villages, with a few exceptions, are mostly founded as a result of new development projects, such as the expansion of roads or water supply facilities. However, such development projects have affected the shape and style of remote villages to a much lesser extent. There are still some isolated villages, such as Shebat Touleh, Samirat and Shorayf – (the three closest villages to Tall-e Abu Chizan) that remain minimally affected by these modern developments.

The main body of the population in this area is comprised of groups from the Bakhtiyari region in the north and northeast of Khuzestan province, and of Arab refugees from war-torn areas near the Iran-Iraq border. There are demarcations in existence between Persian and Arab settlements on the Eastern plain. Among the Persian population, in addition to the Bakhtiyari tribe, a number of Shushtaries are present, especially in the north. This dominance has limited the number of Arab settlements in the northern areas of the plain. The village of Arab Hasan, located at the centre of the Mianab Plain, marks the border between areas occupied by Persian populations, and those occupied by Arab groups. Newly built villages and towns are also present in the immediate vicinity of the modern town of Shushtar, including Gavmishabad and Shahrak-e Alam Alhoda in the south, and Modarres in the north. These towns are representative of population redistributions occurring as a result of the Iran-Iraq war. To

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, there has been a sharp increase in population, coupled with a dramatic rise in the overall production of certain food crops and products. Pipe-irrigation-based farming has been initiated in the area between the Karun and the Gargar east banks. Commonly irrigated crops include wheat, barley, rice, oil seeds and vegetables. The Bakhtiyari tribe, whose livelihood depends on fish farming and sheep and goat herding, occupy the majority of the new satellite suburbs

37

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 3.4: Modern Showing the Distribution of Modern Settlements across the Eastern Plain. See Table 3.3 for detail information of the modern settlements. of Shushtar. They not only supply the nearby cities with their products, but also export their fish products to other cities in different parts of the country. Thus, fish farming pools line the shores of the Gargar River. Furthermore, the Bakhtiyaris supply the main labor force for the town, and lease part of their land and irrigation facilities to non-local people (homestead farmers or khushneshins from other provinces such as Isfahan, Shiraz, and Ardabil) for market gardening.

are secure in terms of water supply, which is derived from its rivers and deep wells. The salination rate is, however, relatively high at the centre of the Mianab plain, with much of the land becoming a wasteland in recent times. Crop yields, as well as fluctuating conditions within the cultivated areas to the east (dynamic erosions) have created severe problems for Arab farmers. This has caused them to shift temporarily to other sources of income such as cattle breeding and intensive herding.

Arab rural communities, who practice tractor-based dry farming agriculture and herding, occupy the rest of the plain. They lease pastures to the Bakhtiyari nomads. In contrast to the Bakhtiyari tribe around Shushtar, the Arabs are in close contact with populations in Ahwaz, Ram Hormoz and the new township of Molla Sani. In recent years, leasing land to homestead farmers has become a major source of income for the Arabs, with access to high power pipe-irrigation facilities from the Khuzestan Water and Power Authority Corporation (KWPAC) proving a lucrative asset. The agricultural trends in the eastern areas of the plain fluctuate widely in accordance with prevailing climatic trends. The lands located within the Mianab plain

Fifty-six settlements are recorded in the Mianab plain, of which ten are close to the Karun River, eighteen are located beside the old Darioun irrigation canal system in the north, twenty-one are located near the Gargar River, and seven are found along the Shushtar-Ahwaz main road. The figure in the east of the Gargar River is slightly different. Of the fifty-three recorded settlements, eighteen have developed beside the Gargar River, nineteen are almost entirely dependent on existing roads and sixteen are situated on higher ground for safety, as well as to provide access to extensive gully systems that provide land for patchy farming and sheep, goat and cattle herding.

38

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain Settlement Type Hamlet Small Village Village Extended Village Small Town

Eleven “small villages” have been identified on the Mianab plain, six of which are located in the north within a short distance of the Darioun canals. One of the villages is deserted due to the periodic fluctuations in the Karun (Table 3.3: no. 19). These small villages occupy an area of c. 32.5 hectares, with a total of 994 residents (Table 3.5). Five small villages have been identified in the south of the Mianab plain; three of these are along the Gargar River, with two others being close to the Karun. In the south the population is lower than that of the north, with approximately 561 residents in these five villages, occupying an area of 31 hectares (Table 3.5). The majority of the population has settled along the Gargar River (425 out of 561, occupying 19.6 out of 31 hectares). Twenty-five small villages have been recorded to the east of the Gargar: nine small villages are located along the main roads, six are along the Gargar, and ten are situated in the areas with other advantages, including accessibility to arable lands and pastures. Two of them - Ab Gonji (Table 3.3: no. 15) and Chma Faraj (Table 3.3: no. 56) - are “ecological niches attractive to nomads”. The entire population amounts to approximately 2191 in an area of 180.1 hectares. The population of small villages and other areas of occupation in the Eastern Plain lower than those of the Mianab Plain. The banks of the Gargar River are less populated (about 643 residents in an area of about 44.4 hectares). Small villages located along the major road have 973 residents, covering an area of 65.7 hectares. The rest of the small villages have a total population of 995, covering nearly 70 hectares in area (Table 3.5).

Area in hectare 1-3 3-10 10-20 20-40 Over 40

Table 3.4: Eastern Plain Settlement Types Settlement Type Hamlet Small Village Village Extended Village Small Town

Total Total Total PopulaPopulation Population tion for East for North for South of the Gargar Mianab Mianab River 0 195 226 994

561

995

2171

2941

3224

5232

1900

3034

0

2784

0

Table 3.5: Total Population for Different Sectors of the Eastern Plain Eastern Plain Road Types Type 1 (asphalt) Type 2 (asphalt) Type 3 (gravel) Type 4 (gravel)

Definition

Sixteen “village” type settlements are located in the Mianab plain. In the north, seven villages have been identified, four of which are located close to the Gargar River (with 1459 residents), with three near the Dariun canal (with 712 residents). The total population of villages in the north is 2171, occupying an area of c. 98.3 hectares. In the south the population figure is higher at 2941, with a total area of about 141.5 hectares. Villages along the Karun have 2373 residents and cover 94.4 hectares. The Gargar dependent settlements have 1615 residents occupying 80.2 hectares (Table 3.5). Twelve village settlements have been identified east of the Gargar River; five are situated along the Gargar River; four along the major roads; two at other locations (discussed above). A number of settlement populations and areas have been observed: Gargar dependant villages contain 1615 residents and encompass an area over 80.2 hectares; road-side villages contain 1271 persons, occupying an area of 82.7 hectares; other areas are populated by 378 persons in an area of 27.1 hectares. Two ecological niches attractive to nomads are located near the village of Nur Ali along the Gargar (Table 3.3: no. 112), and near the village of Pirgoory along the major road (Table 3.3: no. 116).

Country highway Suburban residential roads Rural secondary road Rural track and path ways

Table 3.6: Road Types in the Eastern Plain Terminology used in this study to classify settlements in the Eastern plain based on their area in hectare is shown in Table 3.4. There are “hamlet” type settlements in the northern part of the Mianab plain with a total area of ca. 4.1 ha. They are all located close to the Karun River, with periodic shifts in its course leading to the abandonment of some settlements. Three hamlets in the south, with a total area of about 6.3 hectares, depend upon the Gargar River, and are occupied by local farmers and herders. The total population of these hamlets amounts to 195 (Table 3.5). Six hamlets, occupying a total area of 8.4 hectares, have been identified to the east of the Gargar, three along the River, two along the major road, and one in the area close to the Zagros foothills where arable land and good pastures are available (Table 3.3: no. 49). Their total population is 96. Two of the hamlets (Table 3.3: no. 35, 46) are designated “ecological niches attractive to nomads” in this study due to their affinity with the nomadic people.

There are twenty-three “extended village” type settlements in the Eastern plain. In the northern part of the Mianab plain, seven extended villages have been identified, four of which are close to the Dariun canals, two to the Gargar River, and one along the major road. Total population 39

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin of the extended villages in the north is 5222, occupying an area of 224.2 hectares (Table 3.5). This population is concentrated primarily along the Dariun canal (a population of 3761 spread over 132.2 hectares.), along the Gargar (a population of 544 over an area of 57.8 hectares), and along major roads (a population of 927 over an area of 34.2 hectares). The village of Seh Boneh (Table 3.3: no. 98), located along the Dariun canal, exists as an ecological niche attractive to nomads. In the southern part of the Mianab plain, the population is 1900 (Table 3.5) within eight villages, encompassing an area of 222.3 hectares. Six of these extended villages, with 1449 residents and a total area of 169.1 hectares, are situated along the Gargar River. A single extended village is located along the Karun, with 175 residents and an area of 31.9 hectares, with another being situated along the major road, with 276 residents and an area of 21.3 hectares. One of the extended villages along the Gargar River, known as Vali Abad (Table 3.3: no. 93), is also an ecological niches attractive to nomads. Eight extended villages have also been recorded to the east of the Gargar River, with a total population of 3034 and an area of 246.7 hectares. Dar Khazineh (Table 3.3: no. 89), one of the extended villages situated along both the Gargar River and the major road, provides another example of an ecological niche attractive to nomads . Three villages, with a maximum population of 1241 and an area of 97.96 hectares, are situated along the Gargar River. Three extended villages, with 1402 residents and an area of 102.46 hectares, are located along the major road. A further two villages are located in other favorable areas where arable lands and pastures are readily available, with 391 residents spread over 46.4 hectares

In addition to the aforementioned settlement types, Shushtar, the administrative center of the Shushtar Township, along with its four major new satellite settlements on the Mianab Plain, plays a considerable role in terms of organizing the administrative, commercial, and educational and health services. It is also an important tourist attraction and a religious center with several shrines (a combination of Mandaean, Jewish and Islamic). The role of the town of Shushtar in providing services to nearby smaller towns, such as Gotvand and Masjed Soleyman, is also considerable. The latter settlement was developed in 1909 in response to the establishment of the first AngloIranian oil company, which drew the majority of its labor force and food supply from Shushtar. The great Bazaar at Shushtar provides a market place for traders and artisans, offering an extensive range of services to the Khuzestani population. Reed cutters from Huwayzah and Susangird, shepherds from the rural Arab tribes, weavers of the settled Bakhtiyari tribe, s of the Zagros mountains, highly specialized Shushtari craftsman and traders, as well as developers and contractors from all around the country trade in the Shushtar Bazaar. Clerics constitute an important sect in Shushtar which has many private mosques, libraries and highly valuable cultural heritage sites (see Steve 2001: 6). They have hundreds of followers from all over the country. Patterns of subsistence in the Mianab plain differ to those observed on the plain to the east of the Gargar River. Settlements of all types in the Mianab plain have reasonable access to water from both the Karun and Gargar Rivers, with deep wells present in the north where irrigation and extensive agriculture is practiced. In the east, however, with the exception of areas lying close to the Gargar River, dry farming is the main mode of crop production. The separation between irrigated and dry farming zones in the Eastern plain (encompassing both the Mianab plain and the plain to the east of the Gargar River) has resulted in contrasting modes of land use, as shown in Table 3.7.

Two settlements are categorized as “small towns”, both of which are located in the southern Mianab. These settlements include Arab Hasan (Table 3.3: no. 114), with 1893 residents and 63 hectares situated along the major road, and Deylam (Table 3.3: no. 112), with 945 residents and 77.8 hectares, located along the Karun River.

Irrigated Zone of Eastern Plain (The Mianab Plain and the area along the Gargar) Crops Other Products Industry Paddy Rice, wheat,1 beans, sweet corn, melons, watermelon, tomatoes, cucumber, cabbage, carrot, onions, garlic, dates, lettuces, greens, oil seeds

Sheep, goat, fish, water buffalo, cattle, diary, meat

Dry Farming Zone of the Eastern Plain Crops

Other Products Reed cutting, Sheep, brick factory Wheat goat, and rarely cattle, barley diary, meat

Industry

brick factory, stone mining

 The wheat production figure in the irrigated zone is 1300-1600 kg per ha and it varies from 350 to 450 km per ha in the dry zone.

1

Table 3.7: Contrast in the Variety of the Local Products between the Irrigated and Dry Farming Zones of the Eastern Plain 40

Geographical Observations in the Eastern Plain

Fig. 3.8: Location of the Ecological Niches Attractive to Nomads

Ecological Niches Attractive to Nomads (ENAN) in the Region

the Eastern plain during winter (Figure 3.8). These two areas provide them with increased security, better pastures, fresh water and more favorable conditions for the mobility of animals to exploit a variety of resources. The proximity of such camps to nearby towns is also important in terms of the exchange of goods. During the rainy winter season, these nomads collect their water from the deeply incised gullies. This strategy is highly practical in the north near the Zagros Mountains because of the stony landscape at the Zagros foothills.

Among the 116 settlements recorded during our surveys since 2001 (Table 3.3), three, nine and one ecological niche attractive to nomads are identified in the northern part of the Mianab plain, to the east of the Gargar River, and in the south of the Mianab plain respectively. These attraction niches are close to the residential areas which include both existing and deserted villages. Nomads, who come to these areas during their winter migration, often have settled relatives in the villages, or are related to former settlers of the deserted villages. These nomad families have much fewer herds than those who settle in the Zagros foothills, and commute between their summer and winter quarters by motor transport, rather than by traditional forms of nomadic migration.

The movement of Nomads, in their various forms, about the Eastern Plain is restricted by settlers. As we observed, some nomad families only cross the plain to the east of the Gargar (from north to south) to reach the areas south of the Kupal anticline. Even in this case, their range is severely limited by the local Arab residents, who use this area for dry farming and sheep, goat and cattle herding. As a result, the nomads do not utilize the central regions of the plain, with the exception of a few cases where agreements have been formed with the Arab settlers.

Other nomads in the region, who practice a more traditional nomadic way of life i.e. “Nomadic Pastoralizm” (Abdi 2003: 398), set up their camps near the Zagros Mountains and the low sandy hills (Kupal Anticline) to the south of 41

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Summary Overall, this chapter provides a range of diverse geographic observations from the Eastern Plain, acting as a background for the next two chapters, devoted to archaeological surveys and excavations. Hypotheses which result from our observations, discussed above, require a more complete evaluation through both field and laboratory research. One point, however, is clear: extensive taphonomic processes are impacting upon the geography of this plain in the lowlands of southwestern Iran. Whatever the causes, some of which have been highlighted as being more probable, it is clear that they have affected the ancient settlements on and around the Eastern Plain to a high degree. Whether they are obscured by floods, dissected by channel shift activities, or destroyed by regional base level changes, it still remains that human interference played a significant role in this process. Some observations have been made in relation to modern land use and life in this particular region. It is fruitful to observe the results of studies conducted in other parts of Iran (Sumner 1989) and the Near East, especially Turkey, in the later decades of the twentieth century (Wilkinson 1990; Algaze 1990). While our attempt is not wholly comparable to these previous studies, by employing similar approaches in the field, we have been able to observe diverse land use, a useful tool in understanding the prehistoric economy of the region. The most important factor in determining the distribution and hierarchy of modern village settlements is water availability, closely followed by the availability of road systems. While the nature of the terrain has hampered in-depth studies in rural areas, our interest is to focus on aspects of the local landscape during the Later Village period. It is, however, apparent that lack of fresh water and irregular rainfall patterns have caused the rural population to pursue diverse activities, ranging from dry farming, to herding, mining and leasing land to non-local people. The present picture of the land use in the Eastern Plain shows sharp contrast in different areas - those in the Mianab plain, which are mostly dependent upon the Karun and the Gargar Rivers for irrigation agriculture, and those in the eastern area of the Gargar River which have less access to water and are more reliant on herding and diversified activities. This contrast contributes to the balance between lifestyles in the heartland and hinterland.

42

CHAPTER 4 The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain

Introduction

In this chapter, methodological considerations from the project will be discussed in the survey section. This will then be followed by a short review highlighting distinct differences between the Mianab Plain, an irrigated landscape zone, and the plain immediately to the east of the Gargar River, a zone dependant upon rainfall. The notion of “irrigation” is not the only concern, however, as the main focus is the consideration of constraints associated with a dependence upon, and the benefits attached to independence from, water sources. Other factors, including proximity to roads and the availability of a favorable topography and other natural resources, are considered in order to demonstrate differences and possible similarities.

The primary objective of this chapter is to evaluate the development of the prehistoric settlements of the Eastern Plain. As described in the introductory chapter, in contrast to other unirrigated areas in Greater Susiana frequented by “archaeologists instead of mad dogs in hot midday” (cf. Johnson 1973: 19), the Eastern Plain, especially the land to the east of the Gargar River was, until recently, largely disregarded. A number of surveys (Lees and Falcon 1952; Wright 1969; Moghaddam and Miri 2003; Alizadeh et al. 2004; Moghaddam 2005 (ed.); Moghaddam 2007a; Moghaddam and Miri 2007) have allowed for the development of a database concerning history of human settlement on the Eastern Plain. Thus, it is now possible to contextualize all the evidence, and to draw a general picture of human settlement patterns in this particular area.

In the previous chapter, modern settlement patterns were briefly discussed. It has been shown that the modern settlements have been structured in relation to multiple landscape elements such as roads, canals, water sources, fields and pastures. These features, as Wilkinson (Wilkinson 2003: 44) emphasized, can be recognized over the majority of the modern landscape. However, as described before, in the Eastern Plain many historical or prehistoric landscape elements could have vanished as a result of taphonomic processes. This is especially true of prehistoric landscape elements that, as a result of specific land-use practices, and of subsequent taphonomic processes, are unlikely to have left significant evidence of their existence.

Before evaluating evidence from archaeological settlements on the Eastern Plain belonging to the Later Village period, a brief sketch of the archaeological landscape of the region, based on the general theme of this chapter, assessing the settlements within an extended catchment of the Karun River, will be provided. This will outline two hypothetical phases of human landscape in the Eastern Plain, referred to as both “primary” and “secondary”, within which two distinct settlement patterns developed through time (Moghaddam 2005a: 416-450). The landscape of the settlements, along with evidence of land use, will be discussed in order to provide a foundation for a further assessment of the settlements from the Later Village Period in the second part of this chapter. This approach highlights diverse aspects of the human settlement landscape in the same manner as that implemented in the previous chapter in relation to the modern human landscape, i.e. patterns of settlement distribution in the region and their causes.

In essence, the survey results since 2001 will be used in order to trace the archaeological evidence and to show how changes in the landscape over time resulted in both “primary” and “secondary” phases of settlement (cf. Moghaddam and Miri 2003: 105; Moghaddam 2005a: 416-450; Moghaddam and Miri 2007: 50-52). Other factors, including the alignment of sites along the Karun River, the dependency of settlements upon watercourses, the flood-prone area, as well as the remarkable example of Middle Elamite expanded sites close to the “road”, will also be addressed.

Apart from some inadequacies in data from the Eastern Plain, the history of the settlement landscape provides a promising context within which changes not only in the physical landscape (which has been discussed in the chapter 3) but also in man’s adaptation to it can be understood. One may say the Eastern Plain is a plain of causes and effects, where social domains and environmental interactions have furnished archaeologists with a magnificent array of contexts. Needless to say, the taphonomic processes are at work in the Eastern Plain are to be adduced as a major obstacle to the collection of data from this particular plain. Nevertheless, there are some aspects of the natural environment, discussed below, that have augmented the dataset.

In the last part of the chapter, the Later Village Period settlement of landscape of the Eastern Plain will be described in detail. Techniques and Methodological Considerations Since the last century, particularly since pioneering archeological work conducted during the 1960’s and 1970’s in southwestern Iran, several attempts have been made to elucidate the cultural history of the region. In the northwest, the small Deh Luran Plain was subjected to

43

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.1: Natural Resources and the Investigated Areas in the Eastern Plain.

an intensive survey (Neely and Wright 1994). Further to the southeast, the central Susiana plain became the major focus of the research and studies of many scholars such as Adams (Adams 1962), Hole (Hole 1969), Wright, (Wright 1969), Johnson (Johnson 1973) Schacht (Schacht 1976) and Wenke (Wenke 1975-6). Roughly 100 kilometers to the southeast, the Ram Hormoz plain was also surveyed (Wright and Carter, 2003) and, lastly, the southernmost plains of Behbahan and Zohreh were the subject of an extensive survey, the results of which have been published by Dittman (Dittmann 1984, 1986). After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and a subsequent long-term hiatus in research, Iranian archaeologists conducted extensive surveys in two of the relatively unknown plains present in the region, namely the Mehran Plain in the northwest (Khaliliyan and Nokandeh, n.d.), and the Mianab plain located to the east

of the Karun River, south of Shushtar, along the Zagros foothills to the Ram Hormoz plain (Moghaddam and Miri 2003, Moghaddam 2005, Moghaddam and Miri 2007). Prior to the recent study, only general geological and geographical studies were conducted. Lees and Falcon (1952) provided the only data published for the region east of the Karun River. Geoarchaeological studies undertaken by Wilkinson and Kouchoukos in 2002 contributed to the meager data set, shedding light on several fundamental issues relating to landscape changes in the Holocene period on a micro-regional scale (Alizadeh et al. 2004). Following this, our investigation focused on other key issues, such as patterns of land use and the location of natural resource niches, in addition to recording archaeological features present on the plain.

44

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain For those parts of the study area (the Mianab Plain) subjected to an initial survey during the salvage project in 2001, the strategy was to locate all possible archaeological sites. Later on, all materials from the surveyed areas on the Mianab plain were reassessed for possible dating errors. For instance, some very small painted sherds and equivocal sherds found in Ishan Al Dowweh (KS 1616) were initially thought to have been from the Late Susiana phase. These were later found to belong to Susa III, when further surveys revealed larger sherds with distinctive Susa III designs. Several other attempts were made to identify any incorrect dates attributed to sherds collected from the surface. In addition to this strategy, some limited sounding projects were employed to clarify the prehistoric sequence of the plain, namely in KS 1508, a settlement severely disrupted by agricultural activities and in KS 1617, a small Late Susiana and Uruk settlement (Moghaddam 2005a: 415-416; Miri and Zeydi 2005d: 525-540).

any archaeological features and secondly, to document the various strategies used by modern inhabitants in order to exploit the available natural resources (cf. Chapter 3). As a result, we discovered that the Bakhtiyari nomads exploited two major zones during their winter cycle. Nomad camps were located in the southern Zagros folds and on the southern slopes of the Kupal Anticline (Map 4.1). Factors such as security, the availability of pastureland, proximity to fresh water and ease of access to towns for the exchange of goods are thought to have influenced the distribution of such settlements. In contrast to the Deh Luran plain, where there is an abundance of springs, such as the Abi Garm and Ain Qir in the northwest and north, Ain e Girzan in the south, and the Dwairij and Mehmeh Rivers on both sides of the plain (Kirkby 1977; Neely and Wright 1994), there are no natural sources of fresh water in the Eastern Plain. However, during the rainy winter months, nomads would use the deeply incised gullies to gather their water. This strategy is highly practical in the north near the Zagros Mountains as a result of the rocky terrain of the Zagros foothills. Admittedly, there is no evidence available as yet to suggest that such a strategy was practiced in prehistoric times. Aside from the aforementioned resources, we found oil seeps in several locations in the Zagros foothills (Figure). This area, and especially the Naft e Sefid Zone, is one of the most oil-rich areas of Khuzestan.

The concept of spatial hierarchy and the uneven distribution of resources in the case of intensive agriculture i.e. the “central, marginal and interstitial” areas of a region (Hole 1987; Wright 1987) has warranted the description of land east of the Gargar River as “marginal land”. To some degree, we agree that human settlement in this region could not be compared to that present in neighboring plains during the Later Village Period. Some have gone further in emphasizing that “ human settlement in this region [the Eastern Plain] was dispersed, intermittent and shifting, due in part to a subsistence economy based on opportunistic floodwater farming and small-scale sheep and goat herding” (Alizadeh et al. 2004: 69). Nevertheless, this kind of speculation necessitated, and to some degree dictated, a wider range of field strategies to obtain satisfactory answers. The first priority was to turn to other forms of landscape use, rather than the two most emphasized sectors of human subsistence regimes: agricultural and the pastoral economy.

The final survey season took place in May, 2005. The aim of this season was to conduct further complementary work in the region. Most of our time was devoted to an intensive survey around the major prehistoric sites of Chogha Chanbar (KS 1638) and Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663). Previously, in 2002, we had conducted an intensive survey in the area along the left bank of the Gargar River (see Alizadeh et al. 2004: Fig. 8). However, the aim of our survey in 2005 at KS1638 was to systematically collect scattered material from the surface of the site and adjacent gullies. Although there were concerns as to the validity of intensive sampling, in regards to the geomorphology of the region, we looked whenever possible for exposed features such as kilns, pits, etc. around the site, and not only for scattered pottery. One advantage of the erosion that has taken place in the Eastern Plain is that, on occasions, the exposed land surfaces offer us a valuable window to the past. This phenomenon is not restricted to the gully and river cuts (i.e. Dar Khazineh section) and can be observed on the surface of the plain, where features such as kilns, previously buried, may re-appear as a result of erosion (for relevant discussion see Banning 1996: 33).

Thus, we had two tasks: first, to identify and investigate the natural resources of the Eastern Plain and second, to record all archaeological features present within the survey area. Three modes of survey were employed. The first was to conduct a general reconnaissance across the plain from the east of the Gargar River basin to the west bank of the Kondak stream, towards the western-most extent of the Ram Hormoz plain (Map 4.1). In this phase, we tried to identify exploitable natural resources such as arable land, fresh water, available pastures, and minerals. In the second phase, we conducted two systematic intensive and extensive surveys. We identified features using CORONA satellite images and then, using a GPS, we traced and recorded those features on the ground. This approach was particularly fruitful in the flat, less dissected eastern section of the Naft Sefid Zone, where we were able to record several features including an ancient Qanat system. We also conducted extensive surveys in the wider tracts between the Zagros foothills in the north and the Kupal anticline in the south focusing on two objectives: firstly, to examine

Finally, the myriad of gullies and badland areas in the region presented many difficulties in limiting access to different parts of the plain. To cross the plain from the Zagros foothills to the Kupal anticlines, a half day was required to find a suitable route. Without the help of a GPS, we would never have succeeded. In terms of the visibility of artifacts, both depositional processes seasonal changes in vegetation were limiting factors. For instance, in the Naft Sefid Zone, densely scattered Tamarix, Alhagi

45

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin maurorum and cultivated areas severely hampered artifact and site visibility in the field, obscuring small sites and isolated sherds.

digital topographic, physiographic, and geological data (Table 4.1). Since then, all digital databases have been upgraded using new maps and images and information from additional intensive surveys (Karimi 2005: 545).

Definitions

All archaeological sites and off-site features were recorded in the field using a handset GPS (Garmin Model 12XL). Subsequently, all archaeological maps were produced using ArcGIS 9.1 (licensed under the University of Sydney Archaeological Computing Lab). In settlement maps, all coordination readings were taken from the center of the settlements and, with the exception of KS 1693, KS 1617 and KS 1663, all topographic maps of the settlements have been drawn using information generated by GPS.

Settlement: In our study, we applied the term “settlement” to those sites that have a continuum of artifacts present on their surface. The settlements vary, with both single mounded sites and clusters of some small-integrated mounds being observed. They also vary in height, especially in the Mianab Plain, where 50.5% of the settlements are less than 2 meters in height, 39.8% about 3-5 m, and 9.7% more than 5m. While this provides a convenient surface for dray farmers to plough up, it is difficult for archaeologists to distinguish materials from different mounds in the case of settlements with mound clusters. Karvansara (KS 1654) situated in the east of Mianab provides one of the best examples. On the Mianab plain, this phenomenon is problematic among clustered settlements (see Moghaddam 2005a: 436-439).

Part one: A history of the settlement landscape after the fourth millennium B.C Primary and Secondary Settlement Phases It has already been adumbrated that the landscape of the Eastern Plain witnessed a transformation following the Parthian period (Moghaddam and Miri 2003: 103-105; Moghaddam 2005a: 426-427). There is no direct evidence to account for the largely extended irrigation landscape prior to this era. Therefore, the population apogee during the Parthian period in the Mianab plain can be seen as a preparatory phase preceding subsequent changes to the landscape experienced in the Sasanian period. Nevertheless, there are a number of historical accounts and archaeological evidence in existence in relation to the role of the Sasanians in the extensive transformation of the landscape (see below). Thus, in our discussion here, in contrast to previous interpretations (Moghaddam and Miri 2003: 105; Moghaddam 2005a: 426-427), the era before the Sasanian period will be considered as the “primary” settlement phase, and the following era, “secondary”.

Site: features that indicate human activities in the landscape, such as workshops, fields, mines etc., not simply the location of human habitations. Karun flood basin –old - new: this term is highly suggestive and used to explain shifts in the course of the Karun channel over time and their consequences. Digital Data Integration Database (DDID) Prior to the start of fieldwork in 2001, as a result of the nature of the first survey (the salvage survey), we only had some of the available aerial photography and 1/25000 topographic maps of the region. Later, satellite images, predominantly CORONA images, were available to assist in our interpretation and understanding of the region. After the collaborative project in 2002, and with the initial help of Dr. Nicholas Kouchoukos of the University of Chicago, we developed our digital database using a wide range of

The distinctions of the primary phase landscape are illustrated in the maps (below). It will be demonstrated how our archaeological reconnaissance has made it possible to

Name Topographic Maps Geological Maps Satellite image ETMO+ Satellite image IRS Satellite Image SPOT Satellite Image TM Satellite Image CORONA

Scale 1/25000 1/100000 Bands:2-30-60m Band 5/6 m Band 10m Band 30m Band 2m

Year 1992 1981 2000 2000 1992 1992 1968/9

Organization

Village maps of Iran Regional Road Maps Aerial Photography

1/250000 1/250000 1/20000-1/40000

2001 2001 1964/1997

Remarks Base map

Geological/Oil Company Iranian Remote Sensing Center (IRSC) IRSC University of Chicago (Nick Kouchoukos) IRSC University of Chicago (N. Kouchoukos)USGS Iranian Internal Ministry Iranian Road and Logistic Ministry

Table 4.1. List of the employed cartographic material used for DDID (modified from Karimi 2005: 545)

46

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain trace chronologically the geographic patterns caused by the, somewhat anomalous, Karun River. In chapter 3, the wadi system that flows from the Zagros foothills to the southwest, where the “Old Karun River” is described as having been located, is discussed. This feature has played an integral role in determining patterns of settlement distribution during early periods, and its development is closely related to that of the Gargar “channel”.

(Le Brun 1978: 189-90; Canal 1978b: 173; Carter 1980). In Susa, the early occupation of this period is attested to only on the Acropole (cf. Le Breton 1957: 115-117 and Amiet 1992: 81). Four settlements dating to this period have been recorded along the “Old Karun” River (Map 4.2). The alignment of the sites to the river is remarkable, and further research is required in order to determine the exact course along which the river flowed. The total area of settlements in this region of the plain is c. 20.71 ha. With the exception of KS 1580, which shows some indication of prior occupation (Late Susiana 1 sherds), all other settlements appear to have been established during at this time. Nevertheless, surface remains from this period are relatively scant. This can be attributed to later periods of occupation, attested to in three of the four settlements. The site KS 1558 is a cluster-mounded site, with sherds from Susa III/IV being scattered around one small mound. This prompted us to conduct a stratigaphic sounding here in 2001 (Miri and Zeydi 2005c).

The “secondary” phase landscape began with the appearance of the Gargar “channel”, and its subsequent transformation into the Gargar River. These complex features are illustrated in different settlement period maps. Periods from the late fourth millennium BC onwards in the Eastern plain will be described, followed by an assessment of the prehistoric settlement landscape in the second part of the chapter. Susa III Settlements (3100-2600 B.C.) Stratigraphically secure ceramic sequences from KS 1558 (Miri and Zeydi 2005c) made it possible to date pottery of this period from surface collections from the Eastern Plain. Assemblages from the entire late fourth and early third millennia are closely comparable in shape, style of decoration and repertoire of motifs to contemporaneous ceramics uncovered at Godin III/6, and those found in Acropolis levels 16-14b, and at Ville Royale level IV-B

Evidence of settlements from the late fourth and early third millennium BC is not very clear in the eastern part of the plain. In the Ab Gonji and Dar Khazineh zones, only scattered sherds dated to the period have been identified (KS 1681 and KS 1682), with extensive occupation during this period being identified at a site in the Naft-e Sefid zone (KS 1665). The latter is about 5.4 hectares in area, and is

Map 4.2: Susa III Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

47

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin located about 2 km north of Tall-e Abu Chizan, within a few hundred meters of the Zagros foothills. The number of exposed large stone slabs observed at the site suggests that it was probably used as a cemetery. Unfortunately, highly active watercourses have eroded the site. In addition to the aforementioned stones, some scattered sherds from this period have been found at Tall-e Samirat (KS 1643).

Iranian plateau, transported to Mesopotamia through a network of natural corridors in Khuzestan, in exchange for Mesopotamian agro-pastoral products. The Ram Hormuz plain was connected to Central Khuzestan and Mesopotamia by two main routes, one of which stretched from the Ram Hormuz plain to Ahwaz across what Carter has described as “badlands”, the other following the “western edge of the inner chain to Band-e Qir or Shushtar” (Carter, 1971: 253). Ram Hormoz was itself connected to Fars, the Persian Gulf coast and to the Central Plateau by a network of routes.

Overall, the settlements in this period were most likely dependant upon watercourses, especially along the Karun flood plain, and on other elements including topography and grazing pastures. Approximately five out of the nine settlements are close to the Karun flood plain, with three being located within close proximity to what may have been watercourses and pastures, with another situated at the Zagros foothills. It appears that four new settlements were established along the Karun flood plain, and that tentative settlements such as KS 1681, KS 1682 and KS 1643 may provide evidence of a communication route through the plain. The location of our survey area in relation to other known Old and Middle Elamite occupied sites (discussed below) suggests that this region may have served as a connecting route linking Mesopotamia with northwestern and central Khuzestan, the Ram Hormoz area, eastern Fars, and possibly the shores of the Persian Gulf in this Phase as well.

The discovery and translation of an inscribed stone from Tall-e Bormi (RH 11), about 4 km southeast of Ram Hormoz, dating to the late 3rd millennium BC, has led to the identification of this site with Elamite Hunar/Huhnur, adding weight to the suggestion that such a road existed. The inscription concerns the building of a temple for the Elamite god Ruhurater at Huhnuri by the Ur III (= Old Elamite II) ruler Amar-Suen (Potts n.d.; Mofidi Nasrabadi 2005). Fourteen settlements of this period have been identified in the Eastern Plain, twelve in the west (Mianab plain), close to the “Old Karun” levee, and two in the east, likely t have been beside the flood-prone area. It is likely that a lack of evidence from areas in the east may be due to a paucity of surface finds and diagnostic sherds from this phase.

Elamite Period (2600-539 B.C.) Old Elamite Phase

In the eastern part of the Naft-e Sefid zone, near the small village of Salemiyeh, there is a cluster-mounded settlement comprised of seven small mounds covering a total area of ca. 15 hectares (KS 1670) dating to the late third millennium (Map 4.3). In addition to such clusteroccupations in the Naft-e Sefid zone, another late third/ early second millennium site was identified to the south of Rogheiveh village in the Naft-e Sefid zone (KS 1651). The location of all of the third millennium occupation sites in the Naft-e Sefid zone reflects their dependence upon the availability of water resources.

A relative lack of late third millennium settlements (Shimashki phase), and a slight growth in the number of early second millennium sites (Sukkalmah phase), has been observed on the plains of central Khuzestan. The latter may have occurred as a result of the intensification of agricultural activities in that period (Carter 1971: 178, 182-4). It is believed that, as early as the late third millennium, “Elamite influence” extended from the central Zagros area into eastern Fars, and that during the Old Elamite period (Shimashki and Sukkalmah phases) the Susiana lowlands were united with the highlands of Fars, particularly with Anshan; ties that might have developed further during the Middle Elamite period (Potts 1999: 1567,178). Furthermore, based on evidence of commercial links between Fars and Susa with Oman, Bahrain and eastern Arabia (ancient Dilmun), it is believed that the Sukkalmahs’ control extended as far as the coast of the Persian Gulf (reference required). Considering the location of the Elamite town of Liyan near modern Bushehr, these links may have been facilitated by the existence of routes through western Fars, and perhaps eastern Khuzestan as well (Potts 1999: 178-181; Petrie et al. 2005: 67-76).

In the west (Mianab plain), it is likely that shifts had occurred in the course of the Karun River. As Map 4.2 illustrates, almost all Susa III settlements in the western reaches of the plain were located in the western bank (flood plains) of the “Old Karun” River. However, during the Old Elamite period, at least two newly established settlements (KS 1543 and KS 1609), appear to have developed in the area between the Old and the modern Karun River. This can be seen as representative of periodic shifts in the course of the Karun (discussed in Chapter 3). As illustrated in Map 4.3 eight newly established (type c) settlements from this period were recorded along the Old Karun levee (see also Fig. 3.3 for Old Karun levee, marked by arrows). This pattern is, to some degree, comparable to other populated areas along major flood plains like Ahudasht and Shoeybieh, which are located along the rivers Karkheh, Shaur, and the western banks of the Karun (Carter 1971: 65).

During the earlier part of the Old Elamite phase, the settlements in central Khuzestan were established along the major natural trade routes (Carter 1971: 179). Mesopotamian texts refer to exchange between Mesopotamia and Elam. Elamite exports were mainly goods from the mountainous Zagros areas, or from the 48

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain

Map 4.3: Old Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

Middle Elamite Phase

Nur Ali (KS 1640) is a major Middle Elamite site exhibiting a linear arrangement, discernable in aerial photographs of the region. Most of the western and southwestern sections of the site have been washed away by periodic shifts in the Gargar Channel, while lateral movements of the Nur Ali wadi have further eroded the northern section of the site. Further north, there is a barely accessible Elamite temple site known as Tall-e Bard Karegar (KS 1625). The vast area of scattered, broken bricks present on the surface, both plain and inscribed, have attracted looters, with illegal excavations taking place at the site in recent years. The inscribed bricks relate to the building of a temple for the Elamite goddess Pinigir by the Middle Elamite king Shutruk-Nahunte, and its subsequent restoration under Shilhak-Inshushinak, “King of Susa and Anshan”(Kozuh 2003: 6-7). Another group of inscriptions refers to the restoration of a temple of Kamul by Shutruk Nakhunte (Kozuh 2003: 6-7).

Evidence for the concentration of populations into larger settlements during this phase in central Khuzestan (Carter 1971: 190) is complemented by the appearance of larger settlements in the Eastern plain as well. There is a general increase in the number of settlements in Khuzestan at this time. Wright and Carter (Wright and Carter 2003: 67) have suggested that, as a result of population increases in the central Susiana plain, settlements probably expanded to the Ram Hormoz plain after from about 1700 B.C. and that “during the later second millennium, Middle Elamite settlement expanded to unprecedented levels.” During this period, ancient connections between the lowlands and the highlands – Susa in Khuzestan and Anshan in Fars – were strengthened, as is indicated by Elamite titularies, i.e. “King of Susa and Anshan” or “King of Anshan and Susa.” In the late second millennium, the eastern part of the plain witnessed the emergence of numerous, densely populated settlements arranged in a linear pattern. These appear to have been predominantly nucleated towns, extending in a line parallel to the Zagros foothills in the north and the low sandy hills (Kupal anticline) in the south, exhibiting a greater concentration in the southern section of the region (Map 4.4). The rest of the settlements on the western side of the plain still appear to have been strongly dependent upon the Old Karun Levee, or the Karun flood plain, as in the previous phase.

In the Ab Gonji Zone, a vast area, (about 30 hectares) densely covered with Middle Elamite sherds, was recorded (KS 1646). The pattern of pottery distribution suggested that this was, in fact, a cluster of sites. The distribution of Middle Elamite sites in the Naft-e Sefid Zone exhibits a strong, linear distribution pattern along a corridor extending from Ram Hormoz to Shushtar (cf. the Old Elamite period above). Moving from west to east, the first of these is Tall-e Samirat (KS 1643), near 49

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.4: Middle Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

Map 4.5: Neo Elamite Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

50

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain plain, is still evident. However, Khuzestan must have possessed an “ample” population, as evident from the long list of Elamite toponyms in Assyrian records from this period (Potts 1999: 28).1 The overall number of settlements on the Eastern Plain during this phase of occupation was reduced to twelve.

the modern village of Samirat along Darreh Naft. Exposed baked-brick walls, burials, wells, thousands of pits with innumerable chaff-tempered sherds and vast black, burnt areas extended over an area of about 26.07 hectares in area, to a height of 8 meters. The southern slope of the site has been heavily eroded by the seasonal flooding of the Darreh Naft, forming a new terrace.

A decline in the number of the settlements on the Eastern Plain parallels that evident in central Khuzestan. This is in contrast to evidence that suggests that a degree of prosperity had existed in the eastern plains, such as Ram Hormuz and Behbahan, during this period. Evidence from Neo Elamite phases suggests that a decline in the level of prosperity and the number of settlements in eastern Khuzestan and central Khuzestan occurred at this time. Wright and Carter (Wright and Carter 2003:69-72) have proposed that, “pressured on the west by the Assyrians, on the north by Medes and on the east by the Persians, the Elamites may well have sought refuge in the Ram Hormoz and Behbahan valleys”. As a result of these pressures, the Elamite kingdom was no longer “a unified state linking the highlands of Fars and the lowlands of Khuzestan” at this time, and it has been suggested that during this period the kingdom of Anshan is likely to have become independent (Potts 1999: 259, 273; Carter and Stolper 1984: 189).

The next Elamite site in this zone is Tall-e Hosniyeh (KS 1661). With a height of 10 meters and a total area of c. 31.3 hectares, the site is located on the northern bank of the Darreh Haddam, a few hundred meters south of Darreh Naft and a few kilometers northwest of the modern village of Kargeh. Like KS 1643, the site was covered with thousands of sherds and baked bricks. It is interesting to note that on the eastern slope of the site, as at Samirat, roughly rounded pits with signs of burning covered the whole area. On the northern slope of the site, close to the center, several glazed frit sherds beside a massive baked bricked wall were also clearly noticeable. In the south, the down-cutting of Darreh Haddam has exposed a section containing several thousand sherds, chaff-tempered footed goblets and baked bricks. At both Samirat and Hosniyeh, there is evidence of a vast catchment area with low mounds, artifacts scattered sporadically around the northern part of the site. This pattern is likely to represent secondary occupation.

In the Naft-e Sefid Zone, KS 1653 revealed some direct evidence of 1st millennium BC occupation, with Tall-e Hosniyeh presenting further, limited evidence of this period. Separation between the lowland and highland territories of the Elamite kingdom in this period may account for changes in Neo Elamite settlement patterns in the survey area in particular, and in other parts of eastern Khuzestan in general.

A third Elamite site is located a few kilometers to the north of the modern village of Shajirat (KS 1662), to the west of the Darreh Haddam, which has eroded most of the northern area of occupation. The site covered c. 1.7 hectares with its highest point being 5 m above the newly formed terrace of the Darreh Haddam in the north of the site. Towards the south and southwest, the site sloped smoothly. The modern Arab inhabitants of the region have been using the higher ground of the site as a graveyard.

Achaemenid Period (521-325 B.C.) Stratigraphically controlled ceramic sequences from KS 1558 (Attai 2005: 477-495) made it possible to date the surface collection of this period from the Eastern Plain. During the Achaemenid period, there was some continued occupation at previously occupied, often Elamite, settlements. In the east, only Tall-e Hosniyeh (KS 1661) presents some limited evidence from this period. However, in the west, eleven new settlements were established, including five along the Karun Flood Plain, six along the Old Karun Levee, and one likely to have been located along the eastern watercourses (Map 4.6).

The next Elamite site on the plain is situated at the eastern end of the Naft-e Sefid zone, north of the village of Roqayveh. The site incorporated two mounds (KS 1652, KS 1653), covering a total area of 4.77 hectares. The village cemetery is located on the lower mound (KS 1652). The role of this plain as a transport route, discussed above, is strongly supported by the settlement pattern of this period (Map 4.4). The new Middle Elamite settlements in the Eastern Plain tend to be located along major natural routes between Ram Hormoz and the central plains of Khuzestan.

As in the Neo Elamite phase, based on the present evidence, during the Achaemenid period the distribution of settlements does not attest to the existence of a connecting road between Susa and Ram Hormuz. Instead, settlement

Neo Elamite Phase In comparison to the previous Middle Elamite phase, characterized by newly emerging settlements along a distinct geographical corridor, evidence from the NeoElamite period is limited, with settlement patterns in the eastern part of the plain experiencing drastic change (Map 4.5). In the western part of the plain, the dependence of settlements upon the Old Karun Levee, or the Karun flood

  The area between Ram Hormoz and Behbahan, Tepe Patak and a place located along the Karkheh River have been identified respectively with the Neo-Elamite centers of Madaktu, Hidalu and Avva (de Miroschedji 1986: 215, 217; Zadok 1977: 120-1; Potts 1999: 272, 302). There are also references to Dur Untash, which might be Chogha Zanbil (Middle Elamite Al Untash Napirisha) (Potts 1999: 284). 1

51

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.6: Achaemenid Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

Map 4.7: Parthian Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

52

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain numbers along the Karun flood plain sharply increased. Based on the evidence from the neighboring area of Ram Hormuz, Tall-e Bormi (RH 11), ancient Hunar, is mentioned in Neo-Assyrian sources and in the Persepolis fortification texts as a station situated along the PersepolisSusa road (PF 10:2 f., PF 11:4, PF 255, 406, 479 f., 734, 924, 970, 1790, 2019, 2026, 2082, 4765; Hallock, 1969, Potts, n.d.). While there may have been settlements in the area, the survey did not uncover any evidence in support of this. Nevertheless, two potentially significant Achaemenid settlements, KS 1593 (in the west), and KS 1661 (in the east), were uncovered. A more comprehensive analysis of the survey ceramics and excavation material may provide further information as to their importance. Overall, judging by the distribution of Elamite and Achaemenid settlements, it seems probable that there was a major, westerly shift in the Karun flood plain during the Achaemenid period in contrast to a more easterly orientation observed in previous phases.

(Wright and Carter 2003: 72). The continuous occupation of the Ram Hormoz area from Elamite to Islamic times, and its location along the Achaemenid Royal Road and later Islamic trade routes, leaves no doubt that it was an important area during the Parthian and Sasanian periods. This seems to be true of the Eastern Plain as well, although the number of sites is not large. The locations of KS 1664 and KS 1683, in a line between Ram Hormoz and Shushtar, in conjunction with evidence from later periods, presented below, supports the existence of such a path and its continued use over time. Sasanian Period (250-640 A.D.) During the Sasanian period, changes in the number of settlements, and their distribution, occurred. In the Mianab Plain, the number of settlements dropped from 61 to 54. The number of settlements along the Karun flood plain was also reduced, although new settlements were found along the Gargar Channel. Previous settlements in the northwestern corner of the plain were deserted, a likely consequence of flood activities associated with the Karun, or the growth of new towns such as Shushtar. In the south, settlements were mainly found along the Gargar Channel and the Karun flood plain seems to have been less hospitable than in previous periods. Some extended townships (KS 1564, KS 1569 and KS 1619) continued to exist in the south although, in the north, the previously extended town of Dastwa became less important in this period.

Parthian Period (324 B.C-250 A.D.) A distinctive change appears in the size and number of settlements in the northern sector of the Mianab plain during this period. In contrast to the three settlements identified from the Achaemenid period, 31 Parthian settlements have been located in the northern sector of the plain. There are more densely concentrated around the Karun flood plain and the Dariun canals. Another development in the north was the appearance of the first extended town, known as Dastwa, with its eight distinctive clustered mounds. The Karun flood plain remained the most attractive area for settlements from north to south (Map 4.7). In the south, two extended towns (?) (KS 1567, KS 1566) emerged in the region of the Karun flood plains.

Interestingly, evidence from the Sasanian period is limited to the west of the Gargar River. There is, of course, some evidence that is indicative of occupation, including a number of potentially Sasanian sherds near Nur Ali and Samirat (KS 1640 and KS 1643), and a few small sites near other large Middle Elamite settlements (KS 1652, KS 1653). However, there is a degree of uncertainty as to whether they were in fact Sasanian settlements at this stage, due mainly to the fundamental problem of differentiating Sasanian from Early Islamic pottery. The Sasanian material to the northeast of KS 1643, and to the east of KS 1629, provides the only direct evidence for occupation in this period (Map 4.8) Sasanian urban, agricultural and industrial developments were concentrated primarily in the western parts of Khuzestan where major watercourses provided the basis for agricultural intensification around Susa (Irān Khurrah Shāhbuhr, renamed by Shapur II, 309-379 A.D.), Shushtar, Ivan-e Karkhe (Irān Shahr Shāhbuhr, founded by Shapur II, 309-379 A.D.), Ahwaz (Hormozad Ardashir, founded by Ardashir I, 224-240 A.D.) and Jundishapur (Weh az Andiōg Shāhbuhr, founded by Shapur I, 240-270 A.D.) as well as in western Fars, at Bishapur (founded by Shapur I) and Arrajan (Weh az Amid Qobad, founded by Qobad I, 488-496/498-531 A.D.). This may serve to explain the scarcity of large Sasanian occupations in the region east of the Gargar River, where no major watercourses were present to enable development (Moghaddam 2008 in press).

To the east of the Gargar River, there is one new settlement in the Naft-e Sefid zone (Ishan Al Aswad KS 1664), a Seleucid-Parthian/Elymaean settlement with a cemetery consisting of large stone structures in the east, and an extended black burnt area (pottery kilns?) in the west. This highly dissected settlement is located on the right bank (north) of the Darreh Naft, covering an area of over 6 hectares. Another low mound settlement (KS 1683) in the Dar Khazineh Zone, to the northeast of Dar Khazineh (KS 1626), contains Seleucid-Parthian/Elymaean period sherds (Map 4.7). The low height and relative isolation of these sites is characteristic of this period throughout the Susiana plain (Wenke 1981: 313-4). In the south, near the Gargar River, some sporadic Parthian sherds have also been recorded, although the highly dissected nature of the terrain prevented any accurate observations of the area and the features of the settlement. Significant Seleucid-Parthian settlement sites are known in neighboring areas, including Masjed Soleyman and environs (Ghirshman 1976; Bivar and Shaked 1964), Shushtar (Rahbar, n.d.), Izeh and Malamir (Vanden Berghe and Schipmann 1985: pl. 2). The Ram Hormoz survey also identified some Parthian or possibly early Sasanian sites 53

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.8: Sasanian Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

Map 4.9: Early Islamic Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain.

54

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain The Eastern Plain is located to the north of the main road between the Sasanian capitals in Mesopotamia and Fars, passing through Ahwaz and Ram Hormoz. Another road may have connected the Sasanian towns of Shushtar and Ram Hormoz. Shushtar was developed under Shapur I (240-270 A.D.) who settled the captives of his Roman wars in the town, expanded the textile industry and established new infrastructure and hydraulic projects including the Shadorvan weir (Tabari, vol. 5: 29-30), Band-e Mizan, and Band-e Mahibazan. The foundation of Ram Hormoz on the other hand is attributed to Hormozd I (270-271 A.D.) (Tabari 1999, vol. 5: 43). It is probable that areas to the east of the Gargar River were used in support of Shushtar’s textile industry. Early Islamic geographers document the importance of Ram Hormoz as a centre along the major Iraq-Khuzestan-Fars trade road. Most of these roads passed through Ram Hormoz, although Ibn Hawqal records a road connecting Ram Hormoz and Shushtar via Askar Mukram as having been part of the major road from Arrajan to Susa (Ibn Hawqal, 1938-39: 258). Considering the fact that Askar Mukram was only founded in the Islamic era, and thus not in existence during the Sasanian period, the main road may well have passed through the northern part of the plain, just as it did in earlier periods (see below). Although there is no record of this road in the early Islamic geographical texts, the distribution of Sasanian and early Islamic settlements strongly suggests that such a route existed. Furthermore, no major Islamic settlements have been found in the Ab Gonji or Dar Khazineh zones (see below), while some Sasanian settlements have been identified near KS 1629.

qanat system running from the north (near the foothills) to the south near the massive site of KS 1654 (Figure 4.1) is indicative of a new agricultural strategy replacing the Sasanian method of large-scale channel-based irrigation. Similarities between surface finds, baked bricks, splashed metallic glazed ware, black on blue glaze, sgraffiato, and relief-impressed wares, among the new emerged towns in the east and south (KS 1622, KS 1654 and KS 1666) provide compelling evidence in support of this extensive qanat-based irrigation system, likely to have occurred in response to socio-political changes occurring in the region after the Islamic invasion. The Islamic settlements in the southeast distributed primarily along a route towards Askar Mukram, this being confirmed by early Islamic geographical texts. During this period, a route connected Ram Hormoz, Askar Mukram, Shushtar and Shush (Ibn Hawqal 1938-39: 258), crossing the southern-most end of this area. The name of the aforementioned township (KS 1654)-Karvansara (caravanserai) - is also indicative of its role as a station along such a road. The dissected nature of the western zones of Ab Gonji and Dar Khazineh precluded us from tracing the path of the long distance road system from this area to major centers like Shushtar. However, the distribution of settlement mounds along the strip leading to Askar Mukram in the southwest suggests that a caravan road existed in this part of the plain. The location of a series of early to middle Islamic settlements along the western bank of the Gargar River, from Askar Mukram in the south to Shushtar in the north, also suggests that a route may have existed between these two major settlements (Maps 4.9 and 4.10).

Islamic Period (Early and Middle Islamic era ca. 6401100 A.D)

It needs to be stressed again that several major changes occurred in the Eastern Plain following the Susa III period. All settlement phases have shown a strong dependency on watercourses such as those situated along natural streams like the Karun, seasonal streams originating from the Zagros and later, the Gargar River and those are closely aligned to man made irrigation systems (the Dariun and Gargar canals and the Qanat system). Some direct evidence, mostly from the Elamite and Islamic periods, is also supportive of the existence of such connection corridors, ancient contact routes in the Eastern Plain. Nevertheless, this tentative hypothesis needs to be precisely investigated by intensive surveys and excavations. Other factors such as topography and the availability of pasture and mineral extraction niches are yet to be evaluated. Nevertheless, the available evidence is promising to a degree. Settlement pattern also provide evidence of changes in the course of the Karun River over time. This is shown in different maps (Maps 4.2-10) from the so called “primary phase”. Another change occurred when the Gargar Channel was established in Sasanian period (Map 4.8), with further shifts in its course being demonstrated by the alignment of settlements along the new Gargar River in the Middle Islamic period (Map 4.10). The actions and reactions, causes and effects integral in shaping the region are still

New processes of colonization and changes in settlement configuration occurred during this period. In contrast to the Sasanian period, characterized by the growth of towns, settlements of the early Islamic period show a pattern of rural growth (Map 4.9). A major expansion took place across the southern sections of the plain to the east of the Gargar. Islamic settlements are more concentrated further south in the Naft-e Sefid Zone, and towards Askar Mukram. The foundation of Askar Mukram as a base camp for the capture of Izeh and Ram Hormoz (Baladhuri 1866: 383) may explain why the early and middle Islamic occupations are concentrated in this part of the plain. It is probable that other smaller Arab communities also formed after the invasion of the Arab Muslims and the establishment of Askar Mukram. In addition to military expansion, other factors contributed to the rapid growth of settlements in the east and mostly in the Naft-e Sefid Zone. Between the modern villages of Rogheiveh and Shajirat, and south of the modern village of Karevansara, there exists a cluster of small mounds belonging to an early to middle Islamic town (KS 1654). The ruins of a building known as Karevansara (Caravanserai) are visible at the northern end of Karevansara village. A

55

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig. 4.1: Nucleated Early Islamic site of Karevansara (KS 1654) and its linked Qanat System.

56

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain

Map 4.10: Middle Islamic Settlement Patterns in the Eastern Plain.

evident (as discussed in Chapter 3), and tracing these changes in a historical context is less difficult than those that occurred in the prehistoric era.

of our ongoing surveys and excavations in the region. It was after the first plotting of the archaeological sites on the map that the importance of the Eastern Plain during the ‘Later Village Period’ emerged. In other words, the most questionable period in our survey material was the prehistoric; with sharp contrasts in terms of settlement numbers in comparison to those recorded in the nearby plain to the east of the Karun River (see also settlement maps of the Susiana plain see Kouchoukos 1998: 110114). The unraveling of this thorny problem was to a large degree made difficult by the process of erosion and/or the superimposition of later occupations.

As explained above, the primary phase of settlement ended sometime in the Sasanian era, which corresponds to fundamental changes in the regional landscape. Many details pertaining to the settlement history of the region are available in a monograph published by the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (Moghaddam 2005). The following phases are those that are most relevant to the subject of this study, and are treated here in greater detail. Part Two: Later Village Period settlement Landscape of the Eastern Plain

The frequent burial of early settlements beneath a considerable amount of sediment was observed during our short reconnaissance in the summer of 2001, with the recording of a controversial section at Dar Khazineh. This observation was strengthened when we learned that, half a century ago, Lees and Falcon reported a significantly buried archaeological context in a dissected section (Less and Falcon 1952: 31-32). This section was, for a long time, used as a reference point for describing patterns of deposition over the southwestern alluvium (Johnson 1973: 19; Veenenbos 1958; Kirkby 1977). Further surveys in the region clarified the fact that the rarity of early settlements in the Eastern Plain was not connected to processes of sedimentation, or to the development of later settlements upon their prehistoric antecedents (see below; for a similar interpretation see Wright et al. 1999: 69). As will be

Introduction In this section, a detailed account of Later Village Period settlements in the Eastern Plain will be given, based on the available database, which has been supplemented following our first surveys in the region in the summer of 2001. As outlined elsewhere in previous chapters, the Eastern Plain had been visited earlier by Wright (Wright 1969), although the survey was brief and of a mostly incomplete nature. Our salvage reconnaissance in 2001 allowed for the development of new interpretations, forming the aims

57

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin discussed, Dar Khazineh provides just one example of an obscured settlement, with three other settlements (KS 1580, KS 1593 and KS 1617) being somewhat overburdened by later occupations. The paucity of settlements also led scholars such as Alizadeh (Alizadeh 1992: 57; 2003: 5; 2006: 21-22) to suggest that nomads were present in the region during this period, a region that can be viewed in terms of the presence of nomad attraction niches. This simplistic speculation, based entirely upon similarities with ceramics from the Zagros, does not take into account key evidence, namely that attached to the history of settlement in the region. While there is still no direct evidence to explain “why” and “how,” it is clear that there would be multiple reasons to account for the paucity of early settlements in the Eastern Plain. However, as our long-term investigations in the eastern Khuzestan plains are still in their infancy, these important questions will form the basis of our research.

Map 4.11: Map of KS 1508 Phases: Beveled Rim Bowls (BRB) accounted for the majority of sherds at the site. Evidence from Late Susiana was scant and highly fragmented. A moderate quantity of Parthian ceramics was found around the settlement as well. A stone bowl fragment and some flints were among the surface finds (Miri and Zeydi 2005a: 110- 120). Based on the available surface evidence, KS 1508 may have been occupied during the first phase of the Late Susiana (Susiana d/ Late Susiana 1) and Uruk period.

Settlement Description2 Number: KS248/1508 Coordination: UTM

Name:Tape-ePomp Benzin Dimensions:

Zone 39N2- 2969053541821 Length:178m (EW) Width: 92m (NS) Area (ha): 1.35

Modern Environmental Context: the settlement is located in the area between the alluvial slopes of the Dar Khazineh Zone in the east, and the Karun flood basin in the west. The present course of the Gargar River cuts the alluvial slope, with the site being located approximately half kilometer to its east (Map 4.11). Based on the aforementioned settlement phase (primary pattern) hypothesis, some trace exists of seasonal streams in the east, those that were flowing prior to the establishment of the Gargar Channel. Down cutting caused by the new Gargar River has created a steep slope, approximately 7 meters in height, to the east (close to the site), and a relatively steep slope to the west. This feature prevent further surface assessment in terms of evaluating the eastern stream flow near the site. In addition, recent agricultural activities have made it difficult to detect any sign of stream flow.

Comment: The area occupied by this largely destroyed settlement is based on sherd dispersal. To be sure of the remaining stratified layers we conducted a limited sounding at the center of the site. The results were disappointing as all traces of settlement evidence had been completely destroyed down to virgin soil. Local residents reported the existence of a site a few hundred meters to the northeast in 2006. Except for some doubtful reports on the discovery of a large amount of Late Susiana and Uruk sherds (Dr. H. Rezaii pers. comm.), no official report has been released. Number: KS1580 Coordination: UTM Zone39N:299863 – 3336645

General Description: Tape Pomp-e Benzin was a relatively large mound in the northern section of the Mianab plain when visited by Henry Wright in 1969. This site (KS 248) was described as having an unknown “L” shape, 103m (EW) long, 100m (NS) wide and 10m high. At the time, he was visiting the site local developers were leveling parts of it for road construction. He established an initial sequence of the site, ranging from the Late Susiana to the Susa D, Parthian and Sasanian periods. Following Wright’s short visit, continued destruction severely eroded the site. In 2001, only sporadic scatters of sherds were discernible around the bulldozed surface, mainly at the southwestern corner of the site.

Name: Tall-e Hasan Dimensions: Length:183m(NW-SE) Width: 98m (NE-SW) Area (ha): 1.51

Modern Environmental Context: It is located in the Old Karun flood basin, approximately two kilometers to the west of the present Gargar River, and six kilometers east of the modern Karun Channel. General Description: Tall-e Hasan is a relatively large mound rising six meters above the surrounding plain. It is roughly oval in plan, with four separated summits, labeled in the Map 4.12 by capital letters A to D. A shallow canal (ca. 1.7 m deep and 2.2 m wide) cuts the eastern sector of the settlement. Two other earthen canals ran along the eastern and western margins of the settlement, possible remnants of the Dariun irrigation system.

 All coordinates’ numbers in the Eastern Plain are in accordance with WGS 1984 UTM zone 39N. 2

58

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain

Map 4.12: Map of KS 1580

Map 4.13: Map of KS 1593.

A small number of Late Susiana sherds (six sherds, one painted) have been discovered on mound B. Evidently, later occupations have obscured all evidence of prehistoric occupation in this settlement. No distinctive features were visible on the surface as the area, cut by the canal, was covered by surface soil and sporadic Alhagi.

1. From lowest layers, layers 9 to 5, remains from the Achaemenid period were found 2. Layer 5 is a transitional phase between the Achaemenid and Seleucid periods 3. From layer 4 to the surface a mixture of Seleucid and Parthian material was identified.

Phases: The earliest phase identified at Tall-e Hasan, Late Susiana (?), is evidenced by the discovery of five unpainted buff sherds with a dense fabric, and one greenish-brown on buff sherd with a solid curved element. Sasanian, Early and Middle Islamic sherds were abundant on the surface.

Just one Late Susiana sherd has been recovered, from layer 7 (at a depth between 7.93 to 7.43m). Another Late Susiana sherd had been recovered from the surface. Comment: The appearance of just two Late Susiana sherds in Darouqeh is questionable. The sherd recovered from the layer 7 may have been an inclusion contained within mudbricks. Further excavation is required for a full assessment.

Comment: Further assessment is necessary to clarify Late Susiana occupation in this settlement, especially in terms of the occupation area. Present indications are inadequate to delineate the area precisely. The arbitrarily assigned area would be (ca.75 x 30m), approximately 0.2 hectares. Number: KS1593 Coordination: UTM

Zone 39N: 299758-3528615

Number: KS1617 Coordination: UTM

Name: Tape Darouqeh Dimensions:

Zone 39N- 302821-3518156

Length: 202 m (N-S) Width: 175 m (E-W) Area (ha): 2.83

Name:Tape Meshwal III Dimensions: Length: 155m (E-W) Width: 110m (N-S) Area (ha): 1.24

Modern Environmental Context: It was previously thought that KS 1617 was located along a, now dry, watercourse leading from the east to the Karun River (Moghaddam 2005a: 416). Further assessment drew attention to the existence of a low-lying plain to the northeast of the site with highly saline soil. This would suggest that this area was once filled with rainwater/surface water as a floodprone area. Tamarix and Alhagi trees grow densely, with no cultivation of any kind being possible in this part of the Mianab Plain. Indeed, we must bear in mind that this part of the Mianab plain, especially areas immediately adjacent to KS 1617, was entirely criss-crossed by ancient canal systems (Moghaddam 2008 in press), and that its salinity may have been caused by later irrigation activities. A primary characteristic of the location is that it is situated on low-lying ground close to the Karun flood basin.

Modern Environmental Context: The site is located on the Karun River flood basin, directly adjacent to the present course of the river. General Description: Tape Darouqeh is one of the most impressive Achaemenid settlements in the Eastern Plain. It is oval in shape and stands 8 meters above the current plain in the Karun flood basin. During our chronological soundings, a deep trial trench was dug in the southern central portion of the settlement. The sounding reached virgin soil at 9.8m (from the datum point positioned in the highest locus of the site (Ataii: 2005: 478) Phase: Three distinct phases have been identified from the sounding

59

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.14: Map of KS 1617

Map 4.15: Map of KS 1626

General Description: this settlement consists of a single mound with moderately steep sides. It is oval and rises 2 meters above the current plain. A relatively small number of ceramics, as well as flaked stone artifacts, were observed scattered about the mound. These have been dated to the Late Susiana, Uruk and Parthian periods.

(discussed in chapter 3), KS 1626 is located in the Dar Khazineh Zone alluvial fan system between the Zagros foothills, approximately one kilometer northeast of the Gargar River (Map 4.24). The distinctive nature of the archaeological context at Darkhazineh has been discussed previously. It is important to note that this settlement has been heavily dissected by gullies.

Phase: No Uruk sherds have been seen on the surface. In contrast, a considerable number of Late Susiana sherds were present. Sporadic Parthian and Sasanian ceramics were scattered around the site, very likely due to its proximity to the extended historical settlement (KS 1615) from which some sherds may have been transported. A very limited sounding was conducted in this settlement (about 2 x 2 meters) in 2001 (Miri and Zeydi 2005d: 525540). Partho-Sasanian materials were uncovered in the uppermost levels, followed by Uruk material in the middle and Late Susiana at lower levels. There was a mixture of Uruk and Susiana material in some areas, although we have not been able ascertain the extent of occupation in these periods. Uruk phase ceramics included conical spouts; string cut bases, straight round rimed jars, neckless ledge rim jars, and straight expanded jars. Characteristics of the Late Susiana phase ceramics include dot motifs mixed with birds and vertical bands in small and shallow bowls, and flaring rim jars with bands on both rim and shoulder.

General Description: this settlement consists of several dissected ridges extending between 1 and 6 meters from the extended terrace of the Dar Khazineh wadi system. The highest point of the site is almost level with the existing plain. This is an important factor in terms of visibility. Thus the highly dissected area of Dar Khazineh cannot be considered a classic mound site. Phase: The site was revisited nearly half a century after Lees and Falcon’s first visit, with several new locations being discovered. Apart from highly fragmented sherds, in-context pebble stones, and stone artifacts in the front southwestern face of the well-known exposed section at the site, there were moderate quantities of sherds and flaked stone artifacts covering the dissected areas and incised slopes of the site. In 2002, Abbas Alizadeh conducted excavations at four locations around the settlement over a period of about a month (Alizadeh 2003; Alizadeh et al. 2004). A full report the excavation has not been published but available evidence suggests that the site was occupied during the Late Susiana phase only, especially in the Late Susiana phase 1.

Comment: No beveled rim bowl (BRB) fragments have been seen in the Uruk assemblage. The Susiana sherds are representative of the first stage of the Late Susiana phase (Susiana d/ Late Susiana 1). No further excavation has been undertaken at this site. Number: KS1626 Coordination: UTM Zone 39N: 309788-3532460

Comment: The site of Dar Khazineh is likely to have been a large site with a complex developmental history. Dar Khazineh provides a classic example of the obscuration of archaeological deposits as a result of the actions of alluvium. However, it warrants consideration as a large extended settlement that developed through time in different locations, with the Late Susiana settlement being in the north east, the Sasanian and Parthian in the northwest and southwest corners, and the Susa III in the south.

Name: Darkhazineh Dimensions Area (ha): 1

Modern Environmental Context: In accordance with our description of the major alluvial fans of the Eastern Plain

60

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain Number: KS1630 Coordination: UTM Zone 3521117

39N:

316704-

Name: Cham Faraj East (E) Dimensions: ?

Modern Environmental Context: Located within the Ab Gonji alluvial fan zone, approximately one kilometer to the east of the present course of the Gargar River. General Description: Local construction activities have leveled the settlement to a large extent. Based on the sherds scattered around the leveled area, the settlement may have extended over an area of approximately one hectare. One of the direct effects of the development of pipe irrigation and fish farming pools along the Gargar River was the extensive leveling of archaeological sites. Recently, such destructive activities have accelerated, especially in the Ab Gonji zone with its proximity to the Gargar and easily accessible motor pump facilities. Thus, far from the scrutiny of the local archaeological service, archaeological sites have been destroyed extensively.

Map 4.16: Map of KS 1638 only discernible from the south and west. From the north and east, whilst the sun was at a low angle, the site was visible. Chogha Chanbar is one of the most remarkable settlements of the Eastern Plain. In terms of natural forces, it was one of the best-preserved sites in the region, although in 2005 minor damage had been caused by fish farmers on the eastern slopes of the settlement. Our team had been in the region at the time, and attempts were made to stop further damage. However, since then, an increase in the number of such fish farming pools along the Gargar River may have wiped sites with such a low elevation.

Phase: The artifacts scattered across the leveled areas consisted of ceramic sherds and stone flakes (include large flaked stone hoes). A few diagnostic sherds in the collection include bodies with dot motif, as well as multiple horizontal lines, and a rim with a bold horizontal band representative of Late Susiana 1/Susiana d phases at the settlement.

Phase: In 2005, the site was surveyed intensively. The aim was to compare the surface material of the two extended Later Village period settlements present in the Eastern Plain (KS 1638 and KS 1663). Surface surveys at Tall-e Abu Chizan provide detailed information about the surface collection, with its high rate of exposure and site topography characteristics being treated in chapter 5. In Chogha Chanbar, an intensive survey elucidated four distinct phases. The earliest ceramics collected from the surface can be ascribed to the Late Middle Susiana phase. No earlier ceramic sherds have yet been identified from this settlement. Tentatively, the ceramics from this phase were concentrated mostly in the center of the site in an area of approximately 2 hectares. The occupation at Chogha Chanbar continued through Late Susiana (1 and 2) (Maps 4.25-25), the site is likely to have been abandoned for a period of several centuries. Again, the site was resettled in the Early Uruk phase (Map 4.26), and finally abandoned after this period.

Comment: This settlement was surveyed intensively at the end of the 2001 season and again in the 2002 collaborative season. Later attempts to visit the site have not been successful as a result of further leveling and irrigation projects in that part of the plain. Number: KS1638 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 306000-3537572

Name: Chogha Chanbar Dimensions: Length: 215m (N-S) Width: 195m (E-W) Area (ha): 4.1

Modern Environmental Context: Located on the southwestern edge of the Dar Khazineh alluvial fan zone, beside the deep Pir Gori wadi system, approximately one kilometer north of the present Gargar River channel. The surrounding grounds were stabilized by a series of low, parallel ridges, oriented east- west. General Description: KS 1638 consists of a single mound, generally oval in plan. Activities within the Pir Gori wadi have eroded away the western margins of the site, forming steep, irregular sides. To the east and northeast, the slopes gently blend into the alluvial plain. This feature made the settlement difficult to be seen from the north and from the east. Alizadeh and his excavation team failed to recognize the site during their 2002 excavation campaign at Tall-e Bard-e Karegar (KS 1625), which is located less than half a kilometer to the north. The highest point of the site was about 3 meters above the present plain, although this was

Comment: it is obvious that the exact size of the settlement in each phase cannot be assessed by the surface collection. Nevertheless, as stated above, Late Middle Susiana ceramics were found scattered in the center of the settlement (in an area of approximately 2 ha). Late Susiana ceramics were found sporadically in the eastern section of the settlement. Material evidence of later occupation (Early Uruk) was found in the southwestern section of the site. Both Late Susiana and Uruk phases might have occupied an area about 2.1 hectares. 61

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Number: KS1642 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 318119-3525469

Name:? Dimension: Area (ha): 0.6

Modern Environmental Context: Located in the Ab Gonji Zone, close to the foothills of the Zagros. General Description: KS 1642 is not a mounded site. It is composed of several parallel strip ridges beside the present wadi system. Sporadic unpainted sherds were present. Irregular scatterings of sherds in some areas were associated with stone slabs, raising the possibility that the site was used as a graveyard. Phase: No painted sherds have been uncovered from this site. All sherds appear to be Susiana buff ware, and are predominantly basins with a dense fabric and no visible inclusions. It is very likely that this settlement had been used during Late Susiana phase, although the available evidence cannot provide definitive support. No accumulations of flaked stone tools or ground stone tools were observed.

Map 4.17: Map of KS 1648

sherds dating to the Elamite and historical periods were densely scattered towards the western sector of the site (between KS 1648 and KS 1622). It is very likely that KS 1648 was in use for only a short period of time.

Comment: it is difficult to assign the site area, although the sherds were scattered over an area of approximately 0.6 ha. Number: KS1648 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 327430-3495690

Number: KS 1649

Name: Abu Sakhar Dimensions:

Coordination:

UTM Zone39N: 314513-3524563

Length: 113 m (E-W) Width: 76 m (N-S) Area (ha): 0.8

Name: Cham Faraj South (S) Dimensions: Length: 58 m (N-S) Width: 40 m (E-W) Area (ha): 0.2

Modern Environmental Context: Located on the alluvial fan system of the Ab Gonji Zone, approximately one kilometer to the east of the present Gargar Channel.

Modern Environmental Context: Located within the Naft Sefid Alluvial fan system, approximately half a kilometer from the present channel of the Darreh Haddam.

General Description: KS 1649 is another leveled settlement in the Eastern Plain completely flattened for irrigation agriculture by local residents. Nevertheless, an area of about 0.2 ha with darker soil was traceable. The previous location of the leveled site was pointed out by a local youth. Even though the site was under wheat cultivation, some diagnostic Late Susiana 1 sherds were collected. According to the locals, the site was about 3 meters above the present level of the plain.

General Description: This small settlement is located approximately 250 meters to the east of KS 1662 (Tape Shajirat). It consists of a single, moderately flat terrace with four low mounds (c. 1 meter in height), difficult to distinguish, even from a short distance. The settlement is roughly elliptical in plan, with an east/west axis of orientation. A very small number of sherds were found scattered over the surface. No flaked stone artifacts were recorded.

Phase: Late Susiana 1

Phase: The very scant and highly fragmented Late Susiana 1 ceramics found at the site display solid bands, horizontal wavy lines and ladder motifs, with one sherd possessing a dot motif.

Comment: Although the site has been completely leveled, the soil color and sporadic sherd scatters suggest that it may have been at least 0.2 ha in area.

Comment: The areas surrounding the site were intensively surveyed in four transects in order to evaluate the sherd scatters. The transects covered the following areas: north to the new terrace and channel of the Darreh Haddam, east approximately one and half kilometers, south to the modern village of Shajirat and its cultivated fields, and west to the deserted terraces of the Darreh Haddam. No evidence of prehistoric occupation has been recorded. However,

Number: KS1650 Coordination:

UTM zone 39N: 333182-3492107

Name: Tape Roqayveh A Dimensions: Length: 242 m (NE-SW) Width: 93 m (NW-SE) Area (ha): 2.2

Modern Environmental Context: Located on the eastern edge of the Naft Sefid Zone and along the northern margins

62

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain The construction of a new village and the development of roads in the area have obscured and possibly destroyed areas of the settlement. In 2005, the villagers in Roqayveh dug into a Late Susiana burial about 58 meters southwest of the site beside a house. For unknown reasons, they immediately destroyed the burial gifts (Late Susiana 2 bowls). We managed to collect some sherds of those bowls and confirmed that they were distinctive Late Susiana 2 pottery. We identified another burial during our last survey at the site, although no further assessment was attempted due to time constraints. Number: KS1655 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 337065-3490606

Map 4.18: Map of KS 1650

Name: Tape Salemiyyeh Dimensions: Length: 47 m (N-S) Width: 21 m (E-W) Area (ha): 0.09

Modern Environmental Context: Located in the easternmost region of the Naft Sefid alluvial fan system, in the middle of the modern village of Salemiyyeh.

of the flood-prone area of Roqayveh. Tamarix, as well as thousands of Alhagi trees covered both the northern and southern margins of the settlement.

General Description: For a long time the soil of the settlement have been used as fertilizer by the villagers. Now, the settlement area functions as a local rubbish dump. The actual area and height of the settlement might have been larger and higher than it is now.

General Description: The construction of a new road divided the site into two sections, north and south, exposing its stratigraphy. In the northern area, a relatively thin cultural layer (about 30 cm thick) was visible. The rest of the deposit consisted of soft and sandy loam. In the southern area, in contrast, evidence of cultural deposits was more substantial, with densely scattered sherds, kilns, and burials. Leveling activities have demolished parts of the settlement in the east.

Phase: Only 3 sherds uncovered from within the scattered assemblage can be attributed to the Late Susiana 1/Susiana d phase. Comment: The northern part of the site was covered by modern garbage; hence the present dating is based on surface finds from a limited area.

Phase: A relatively dense scatter of sherds and flaked stone tools existed in the southern sector of the settlement. A relatively small number of diagnostic Susiana d/Late Susiana 1 sherds indicate a brief period of occupation during this period. Late Susiana 2 / Susa A ceramics are abundant, with the majority being orange in color, with a dense texture and no visible inclusions. Some plain ware sherds have white inclusions. A few sherds representative of a later Susiana phase (Terminal Susa) or Uruk phase have also been collected from the surface. However, one sherd, provisionally dated to Terminal Susa (the basin with thumb- impressed), cannot be ascribed to this period with any certainty, in contrast to the description published by Johnson (1973:59-60). Some over-fired sherds with a blackened, burned surface from the Late Susiana 2 phase were found together with dense remains of slag and kiln shafts towards the southern end of the settlement. This indicates that pottery firing may have taken place at the settlement in the later stages of the Late Susiana phase. Comment: An open spout basin with a thumb- impressed motif, a soft fabric and a chopped straw and mineral temper, found among the surface collection is the only indication of later occupation at KS 1650. Very likely, the full site encompassed an area much larger than that visible now.

Map 4.19: Map of KS 1655

63

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Number: KS1656 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 337255-3491262

Name: Ishan Mohammad Dimensions:

Number: KS1657 Coordination:

Length: 101 m (E-W) Width: 78 m (N-S) Area (ha): 0.7

UTM zone 39N: 328891-3493698

Name: Ishan Ebadat Dimensions: Length: 224 m (NE-SW) Width: 167 m (NW-SE) Area (ha): 3.7

Modern Environmental Context: Located on the eastern-most region of the Naft Sefid alluvial fan system, approximately 300 meters from the Zagros foothills.

Modern Environmental Context: Located on the Naft Sefid alluvial fan system, a few hundred meters to the south of the Darreh Haddam channel.

General Description: Surrounded by dry farm fields, the size and the precise parameters of the settlement have become progressively more obscured after each season of cultivation. Thus, as a source of fertilizer, KS 1656, a unique Late Susiana 1/Susiana d settlement, is being destroyed by local farmers before any in-depth studies have taken place. A few hundred meters to the southwest, there was a saline area with dense Tamarix and Alhagi trees. Our intensive surveys around the site indicated that the nearby settlements KS 1650, KS 1655 and KS 1656 could have been located around a vast lagoon that forms at the Zagros foothill after every rainy season. The location of the settlements is also worthy of consideration, with all 3of them being located above the level of the plain. Future excavations at these sites may help to clarify their nature.

General Description: KS 1657 is another extensive site, interpreted as a pair of nucleated settlements. Sporadic Tamarix and dense stands of Alhagi tress were found to the east and north of the site. To some extent, this settlement can be described as “Tape Sabz” (green mound), as its eastern half is carpeted with dense grass, extending to the east and north where the Alhagies are present. The grass covering present at the site is likely to assist in its preservation. The western and southern areas of the site were under cultivation. In a general sense, the site KS 1657 can be considered, along with the aforementioned units (KS 1650, KS 1655 and KS 1656), as having been part of a larger, nucleated settlement system within the Naft Sefid Zone during the Later Village Period. Phase: Very densely scattered sherds, baked bricks, some blue-green stone (likely to have been copper), and flaked stone tools were visible on the areas of the site not covered by grass. While the number of the Late Susiana 1/ Susiana d and Late Susiana 2/Susa A sherds in KS 1657 were moderate, Terminal Susa and Uruk sherds dominated the surface collection.

Phase: A relatively dense scatter of sherds covered the summit and slopes of the settlement. In addition, some larger sherds, flaked stone tools and one stone hoe have been found from the cultivated fields immediately adjacent to the site. It is very likely that the scatter in this sector has been affected by ploughing activities. A considerable number of sherds were small bowl fragments exhibiting a dot motif. Other ceramic finds included bowls with heavy branch motifs, multiple narrow bands, and quadrant pattern synopsis etc.

Comment: Darreh Haddam and its tributaries to the northwest are threatening KS 1657. In response to drainage activities in the area, the slopes in the northern areas of the site were getting steeper. Many more artifacts were thus exposed in that region of the site.

Comment: This site is one of the most promising among the Late Susiana 1/Susiana d phase settlements of the Eastern Plain. As with every site identified within our survey area, KS 1656 has been registered on the national heritage list.

Map 4.20: Map of KS 1656

Map 4.21: Map of KS 1657

64

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain Number: KS1658 Coordination:

UTM Zone 39N: 332360-3496733

Summary and Conclusion

Name: Tape Al Auneh Current Dimensions:

From the above evidence it is possible to discern seven distinct patterns in the distribution of settlements from early phases up until the Middle Islamic Period in the Eastern Plain:

Length: 96 m (E-W) Width: 94 m (N-S) Area (ha): 0.9

Modern Environmental Context: On the Naft Sefid alluvial fans system and close to the Zagros foothills.

Settlements at the alluvial fan at the base of Zagros foothills and their possible natural resources; Settlements along the major watercourses; Settlements in the Karun flood basin and its old channel levee; Settlements located in flood-prone areas; Settlements established along the possible road systems; Settlements in association with the irrigation systems (Dariun, Gargar and Qanat); Settlements along the newly formed levee of the Gargar River channel.

General Description: KS 1658 consists of one moderately low mound, likely to have been circular in plan. A deeply incised tributary of the Haddam rivulet removed the southern sector of the settlement completely, resulting in a 3.6 m section wall. In addition to this, the remainder of the site was used by villagers as farmland, an ideal environment for dry farming. During our survey, the site was under cultivation with no surface scatters being visible. Nevertheless, dissected areas to the south provided a window to assess the history of settlement at the site. Phase: Only two diagnostic sherds can be dated to the Late Susiana 1 phase, with the surfaces of the remaining sherds being completely destroyed and therefore difficult to distinguish. Flaked stone tools were rare at this site, with some Islamic pottery sherds being present, suggesting that the site was occupied during the Islamic period.

It has been shown that settlements from different phases and periods were dependent on the above factors in this particular plain. Those belonging to the “primary” phase of occupation, with a close dependency upon to the Karun flood basin, watercourses and a need for a mild topography, and those of the “secondary” phase of occupation that show a clear reliance upon irrigation systems such as at Dariun, the Gargar canals and later on through the use of Qanat wells. It is reasonable to hypothesize that settlements in this plain have always been dependent on communication routes. The corridor-like nature of the plain facilitated such contact routes between at least two major zones – the highlands of the Zagros and the lowlands of Susiana(Moghaddam and Miri 2007). Whilst none of the evidence is completely conclusive at present, as a whole it is highly suggestive.

Comment: Our understanding of the surface material from KS1658 needs to be evaluated by further intensive surveys when the land is cleared.

Nevertheless, for the sake of this study those elements of the settlement landscape that relate directly to the Later Village Period need to be stressed once again. Late Middle Susiana (5000- 4600 B.C) As described above, the earliest evidence for settlement in the Eastern Plain dates to the Late Middle Susiana phase (Susiana c). The apparent paucity of human settlement before this time could be attributed to several factors. For example, earlier sites may have been obscured by an active aggradation process. An intensive geo-archaeological survey in the Dar Khazineh zone in 2002 showed that, around the time of the Late Susiana phase (Susiana d and Susa A/ Susiana e), the base level of wadi systems to the east of the Gargar River was significantly higher than at present (Alizadeh et al. 2004: 72). Moreover, further studies of the sediments have documented a regular, and in some cases, continuous process of aggradation after the Middle Susiana phase (Alizadeh et al. 2004: 72). Viewed from this perspective, the archaeological contexts at Dar Khazineh, buried beneath 2 meters of overburden overbank

Map 4.22: Map of KS 1658

65

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.23: Late Middle Susiana phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain deposits, are understandable. However, other factors seem to be at work as well. Geoarchaeological studies carried out in the Dar Khazineh area have also confirmed that, “due to considerable variation in wadi catchments and basin morphologies, significant flooding and aggradation probably occurred only under specific conditions” (Alizadeh et al. 2004: 73). Thus dissection by streams enabled occupation horizons to be discerned at sites that would have otherwise been buried. Dar Khazineh provides a prime example. The site was deeply buried; however, we could see clear evidence of archaeological deposits in its extensively dissected and exposed sectors. However, of all the sites and different drainage zones recorded from the left bank of the Karun River, to the western edge of the Ram Hormoz plain, Dar Khazineh is an exception. Except for one site (KS 1593), where some late Susiana sherds were found in a sounding, all of the prehistoric cultural deposits were visible at the surface. This applies to sites KS 1508, KS 1580, KS 1617, KS 1630, KS 1638, KS 1642, KS 1650, KS 1655, KS 1656, KS 1657, KS 1658, KS 1648, KS 1663, and KS 1649. Furthermore, the soundings in the prehistoric mounds of KS 1508, KS 1593, and KS 1617 in the Mianab Plain (Moghaddam 2005) and Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) ( Moghaddam et al. 2007) in

the Eastern Corridor showed that they were established on virgin soil on the eastern bank of the Karun River from the Late Middle Susiana phase onwards. No sites similar to Dar Khazineh - buried by flood deposits - have been found as yet in this region. Previous literature also emphasized that the cultural sequences in the easternmost regions of the southwestern lowlands seem to have begun primarily in the Late Village Period (Hole 1989: 33). There is, apparently, some surface material from earlier settlements in the Ram Hormoz, Behbahan, and Zohreh plains. Some “sporadic and somewhat uncertain” exceptions such as “just one sherd” at Tol es-Suwada in Ram Hormoz (RH-3), dated to the Early Susiana phase (Wright and Carter 2003: 65), have been uncovered. In addition, although Nissen’s descriptions (Nissen 1976:276) suggest that no sites existed before the Middle Susiana phase on plains of Behbahan and Zohre, in Dittman’s tabulation; five early prehistoric sites are listed including BZ.35 (Archaic Susiana) and BZ.59 (Early Susiana) in Behbahan, and BZ.93, BZ.71 and BZ.97 (Early Susiana) on the Zohreh Plain (Dittmann 1984: 67). However, it is difficult to assess these finds due to the lack of excavations undertaken in the area. 66

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain Landscape ID

Modern Name

Settlement Variation

Area(ha)

Settlement Type1

Prob. Dependency

KS 1638

Chogha Chanbar

Single

2

c

Topography/watercourses

KS 1663

Tall-e Abu Chizan

Single

5.9

c

Topography/watercourses/other

a) Preceding occupation b) preceding and succeeding occupation c)succeeding occupation d) neither preceding neither succeeding occupation (adapted to Dewar 1991; Neely and Wright 1994; Pollock 1999: 63, box6). 1 

Table 4.2: Late Middle Susiana phase Settlements During this phase, two settlements were established in the Eastern Plain, both relatively large in extent. Their location is likely to have been heavily influenced by the above patterns. The evidence from Chogha Chanbar is not clear, however Tall-e Abu Chizan shows remarkable evidence regarding multivariate patterns of dependency upon environmental factors. These factors include the presence of an alluvial fan system, possible natural resources (oil seeps, flint sources, pasture, arable lands and so on, see Chapter 5), major watercourses and possible contact routes with the neighboring plains. The latter proposition is reasonable when we consider cultural development in fifth millennium B.C. in a wider context, especially in the later Middle Village Period (cf. Wright and Johnson 1975; Pollock 1983; Wright 1984; Wright 1987; Johnson 1987 Hole 1987), when several settlements show evidence of expansion, with symbiotic relationships between different geographical units emerging as a result of socio-economic factors. In a wider context the distance between the larger LMS sites, from Chogha Mish in the west to Tol-e Geser (Tall-i Ghazir) in the east, is about 40-45 km (e.g. Chogha Mish > Chogha Chanbar > Tall-e Abu Chizan >Tol-e Geser). Evidence from the area between Ram Hormoz and Behbahan is not yet available. However, Tol-e Suze (Tepe Sohz), on the Behbahan Plain, and Chogha Sofla, Landscape ID

Modern Name

Settlement Variation

on the narrow Zohreh Plain, can also be included in the list of larger LMS sites (cf. Nissen 1976; Dittman 1984). Further south in the Persian Gulf region, Bushehr and its environs may also provide evidence of a similar pattern (Oates 1978b; Carter et al. 2006). Late Susiana 1 / Susiana d, phase (4600-4200 B.C) During this phase, the Eastern Plain became increasingly settled. This growth occurred as a result of the expansion of small settlements throughout the plain. Twelve new settlements, combined with two existing from the previous period, resulted in the highest number of settlements on the Eastern Plain in the “primary” phase of occupation. The organization of settlements changed in comparison to the previous phase, although in the western sector of the plain settlements display a similar alignment along the “Old Karun” flood basin. In the east, small settlements appeared along major watercourses through the aforementioned three Zones. Two LMS settlements in the eastern and western parts of the plain (KS 1638, KS 1663) continued to be inhabited, however sector surveys of both settlements show that the contexts within which LS1 material was recovered differ at each site. At Chogha Chanbar, for example, LS1 indications were found in

Area (ha)

Settlement Type

Prob. Dependency

KS 1508

Tape pomp Benzin

Single

1.35

d

Karun flood basin/watercourses

KS 1580

Tall-e Hasan

Single

1.51

d

Karun flood basin/watercourses

KS 1593

Tape Darouqeh

Single

2.83

d

Karun flood basin/watercourses

KS 1617

Tape Meshwal III

Single

1.24

d

Karun flood basin/flood-prone area ?

KS 1638

Chogha Chanbar

Single

0.4

b

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1626

Dar Khazineh

Single

1

c

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1630

Cham Faraj

?

?

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1642

Unknown

Single

0.6

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1648

Ishan Abu Sakhar

Single

0.8

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1649

Cham Faraj S

Single

0.2

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1650

Roqayveh A

Single

2.2

c

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1655

Tape Salemiyeh

Single

0.09

d

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1656

Ishan Mohammad

single

0.7

d

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1657

Ishan Ebadat

Single

3.7

c

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1658

Tape Al Auneh

Single

0.9

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1663

Tall-e Abu Chizan

Single

5.9

b

Topography/watercourses/other

Table 4.3: Late Susiana 1 Phase Settlements

67

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.24: Late Susiana 1 Phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain scattered areas around the site, mostly in the eastern sector. In contrast, at Abu Chizan, LS1 material was spread more evenly across the site.

Apparently, the settlements in the Dar Khazineh and Ab Gonji Zones were intermittent and dispersed in comparison to those in the Naft-e Sefid Zone, in which settlements appear to be clustered around the modern villages of Roqayveh and Salemiyeh, forming more integrated units. We must bear in mind that the western zones are located on the least stable land where active drainage systems are present. This is in contrast with the Naft-e Sefid Zone, located at the area of highest elevation throughout the plain, where little in the way of degradation has taken place. Another piece of evidence relevant to this clustering

Apart from the two larger settlements of Tall-e Abu Chizan and Chogha Chanbar, fourteen new settlements, covering roughly 17.93 hectares, are known from the LS1 period. Significantly, eleven settlements were established and subsequently abandoned within this phase. The remaining three new settlements continued to grow in the next period, the Late Susiana 2 phase (Table 4.4).

Landscape ID

Modern Name

Settlement Variation

Area(ha)

Settlement Type

Prob. Dependency

KS 1638

Chogha Chanbar

Single

1.2

a

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1626

Dar Khazineh

Single

1?

a

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1638

Tall-e Abu Chizan

Single

5.9

b

Topography/ watercourses/other

KS 1650

Roqayveh A

Single

2.2

b

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1657

Ishan Ebadat

Single

3.7

b

Topography/flood-prone area

Table 4.4: Late Susiana 2 Phase Settlements. 68

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain phenomenon is the densely saline area around the eastern extent of the Naft-e Sefid Zone, particularly in the northwestern part of Salemiyyeh and south of Roqayveh, where a higher rate of water accumulation occurs in relation to the entire plain. The name “Roqayveh” relates to an area that is prone to the collection of rainwater, inundated for a short time of the year in winter, and saline in other seasons. The small prehistoric site of KS 1617 in the southwestern sector of the plain exhibits similar characteristics. It is located on the most saline part of the plain. The distribution of settlements in alignment with the Karun flood basin in the west suggests that areas with more accessible water resources were preferable during the LS1 phase. The green areas around the southwestern edge of KS 1663 (discussed in chapter 5), the northeastern edge of KS 1657, the northern sector of KS 1650 and south of KS 1656, with dense tracts of Tamarix and Alhagi, infer that a link exists between soil moisture and occupation density.

1 settlements is towards small, generally single-period settlements dependent primarily upon available water sources. Late Susiana 2/ Susa A Except for KS 1626, where surface finds are poorly represented, Late Susiana 2 phase (LS2), ceramics were found on five sites (Map 4.25). Based on surface collections, no new settlements were established during this phase and, by the end of the Late Susiana period, settlement numbers diminished throughout the plain. Surface materials from the Terminal Susa A phase may have been uncovered at Tape Roqayveh, Ebadat and Tall-e Abu Chizan, indicative of ongoing occupation at these sites. However, the general trend is similar to that seen in central Susiana and on the Deh Luran Plain (Kouchoukos 1998; Kouchoukos and Hole 2003). Settlements along the Karun flood basin were largely abandoned, whereas in the east there seem to have been some continuation through this phase.

The Susiana d/LS1 phase is marked by a remarkable growth in the number of settlements on the plain (similar to observations in Susiana plain Weiss 1977; Pollock 1983). Based on present evidence, the overall trend of LS

Map 4.25: Late Susiana 2 phase Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain

69

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Map 4.26: Uruk Period Settlement Pattern in the Eastern Plain

Uruk phase

and traces of kilns, core fragments, flakes, and blades were found, mostly in the eastern and northern or northeastern sectors of the site, where an intense accumulation of Uruk pottery was located. The situation is somewhat different at KS 1657 (about 3.2 hectares) which dates mainly to this period.

A little growth and change occurred in settlements occupied in the fourth millennium BC in the Eastern Plain. The Karun flood basin seemed to be favored again by Uruk settlers. Sherds characteristic of this period were recorded at six sites (Map 4.26), however, the most familiar Uruk ceramic “Beveled Rim Bowl” (BRB) does not seem to have been used in every settlement. There were no BRB sherds at the small settlement of KS 1617, or even in the relatively large site KS 1650. The Uruk material at both Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) and Chogha Chanbar (KS 1638) was primarily found scattered along the slopes of the sites. This distribution is likely to be representative of the formation of enclaves within these large local settlements. In fact, the material was associated with the presence of pottery and lithic workshops along watercourses that run beside these settlements. At Chogha Chanbar, there were a number of over-fired Uruk sherds and slag scattered on the southwest slopes. While at Abu Chizan, in addition to slags, wasters

It needs to be noted that the aforementioned settlement development is not necessarily a definitive interpretation; it needs to be supported by new evidence and, most importantly, to be evaluated through different approaches and techniques. Nevertheless, the evidence presented in this chapter forms a general foundation for the understanding of settlement development across this particular plain during the “primary” and “secondary” phases. The next chapter will further consolidate this foundation by focusing on Tall-e Abu Chizan and the evidence that it has provided in relation to Later Village Period settlement in the Eastern Plain.

70

The Archaeology of Settlement Development in the Eastern Plain Landscape ID

Modern Name

Settlement Variation

Area (ha)

Settlement Type

Prob. Dependency

KS 1508

Tape pomp Benzin

Single

1.35

d

Karun flood basin/watercourses

KS 1617

Tape Meshwal III

Single

1.24

d

Karun flood basin/flood-prone area

KS 1638

Chogha Chanbar

Single

0.5

d

Topography/ watercourses

KS 1650

Roqayveh A

Single

0.7

a

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1657

Ishan Ebadat

Single

3.7

a

Topography/flood-prone area

KS 1663

Tall-e Abu Chizan

Single

2

a

Topography/watercourses/other

Table 4.5: Uruk Period Settlements

71

CHAPTER 5 Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations … in future archaeological research in Iran (as elsewhere in the Near East),we must strive to obtain the fullest contextual information for each site during each period. In particular we need to pay much more attention to the circumstances of the finds: where they are located in sites; their relationships to one another; the nature of the deposits; how the material came to be deposited; where it was found; the processes that may have degraded the archaeological picture, etc. (Hole 1987a: 26) Introduction

materials such as clay for pottery making and stone for tool making, as well as gypsum, bitumen, copper and obsidian for other purposes which are not completely clear.

While Chapter 4 was intended to provide a general overview of the history and geography of the later Village Period settlements in the Eastern Plain, the aim of this chapter is to investigate Tall-e Abu Chizan and its environment as a case study to evaluate the certain settlement in the Eastern Plain during the period in question. The initial study of the archaeological material from Tall-e Abu Chizan suggested that the founders of this site had used a variety of raw

Tall-e Abu Chizan (UTM 326312, 3504819) is located about 50 kms southeast of Shushtar along the southern ridges of the Zagros Mountains (Figure 5.1). The plain that surrounds Tall-e Abu Chizan is the result of several alluvial fan depositions that originated from the southernmost canyons of the Zagros (Map 5.1). This plain is known as

Map.5.1: Map Showing Geological features around Tall-e Abu Chizan (Modified from Iranian Oil Operating Companies,1966). 72

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

Fig. 5.1: Location of Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) on the Landsat Image of the Study Region the Naft Sefid Zone (cf. Chapter 3 and Map 3.1). The site is situated in the mid-western part of this fan system and displays a long history of settlement from Susiana c/Late Middle Susiana to the Middle Uruk period. It is a relatively large mound of about 8 hectares, over 6 m high and there is little doubt that Tall-e Abu Chizan is the largest settlement in the Eastern Plain (Moghaddam and Miri 2007: 30-31).

economic and cultural changes occurred in southwestern Iran (cf. Chapter 2). Tall-e Abu Chizan was selected over single-period sites in the Eastern Plain since its occupation covers more of the important archaeological phases of the later Village Period. Its endangered situation, threatened by destructive, natural forces, also influenced its selection. As emphasized in Chapter 4, during the Late Susiana phases (Susiana d and Susa A phases), the Eastern Plain is likely to have witnessed a three-level settlement hierarchy including small hamlets (under 1 ha), medium-sized (1-4 ha) and large sites (over 5 ha). This observation is, however, based on surface survey and may not be entirely correct. It needs to be checked by intensive survey and selective excavations.

The first inhabitants of the site definitely benefited from its location. The proximity to the alluvial fan would have brought multiple rewards for their agriculture, grazing as well as pottery and lithic production. Other factors such as a location on an accessible natural route and proximity to bitumen sources made Tall-e Abu Chizan an ideal place for settlement. However, the location has had an adverse affect on the site’s perservation. Tall-e Abu Chizan lies in a very dynamic and unstable environment and as a result drastic effects on its cultural deposits have been and still are progressing actively.

This chapter is divided into three parts: part one will concentrate on the site’s natural context and accessible natural resources, the highly dynamic nature of the site’s geomorphology and the natural processes in and around the site which have affected it; part two will focus on the controlled sampling survey (CSS) of the site; while part three is dedicated to the excavation results.

Nevertheless, the site was chosen as a case for intensive study in order to achieve a better understanding of the nature of a large site in the Eastern Plain and its development during a period in which several major socio-

73

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Part One: Tall-e Abu Chizan and its Environs

major region for habitation from the Late Middle Susiana period onward. This alluvial environment later became one of the most dynamic regions in southwestern Iran, in which thousands of seasonal stream channels migrate spatially and temporarily, and long-deserted channels are inundated by flash floods causing both aggradation and degradation i.e. active alluviation that progressively deposits sediments and channel shifts which remove older land surfaces (van Abdel and Runnels 1995: 484).

The site’s External Context: The Naft Sefid Zone and its characteristics One of the most attractive areas for human habitation is the alluvial plain/fan. Such regions provide settlers with fertile soil, accessible water resources and various raw materials that would have been favored not only by ancient but also by modern societies. The dependency of the inhabitants of arid and semi-arid regions on ground water is obvious and in this case the alluvial-fan deposits comprise part of the groundwater reservoir of the alluvium (Sherratt 1980: 322; Roberts 1991: 5; van Abdek and Runnels 1995: 149). Hence, it is not surprising that the Eastern Plain became a

Results of the geomorphic and natural landscape study in the Naft Sefid Zone will be presented in this section, the aim of which is to present a context for evaluating the natural potential of prehistoric settlement at Tall-e Abu Chizan. The site is located on a terrace-shaped fan

Fig.5.2: Location of Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663) on a Terrace-shaped Fan adjacent to the Southern Slopes of the Zagros Mountains

74

s

Fig. 5.3: Landscape around Tall-e Abu Chizan, View from Zagros Foothill

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations adjacent to the southern slopes of the Zagros Mountains (Fig. 5.2). To the south, this terrace is intersected by the Darreh Naft and then Darreh Haddam, two major drainage systems in the Eastern Plain. Further south, the slightly flattened fan toe has been lifted as the Kupal anticline (Fig 5.3). Our survey followed the profile orientation of the site from north to south. The main landforms, the alluvial fan systems, will first be reviewed. This will be and followed by a more detailed examination of drainage characteristics, vegetation, natural resource potential and agents of erosion.

4 also provided some evidence in terms of settlement patterns in relation to these landforms. It is upon the sediments and water reservoirs of these alluvial features that numerous archaeological sites - from the Late Middle Susiana period onward - are located, mostly in the form of mounds or tells (cf. Chapter 4). Since Tall-e Abu Chizan is located almost in the middle of the Naft Sefid Zone (Map 3.1), a brief look at the geomorphology, development and changes of this fan system will facilitate our understanding of the natural conditions of the site. The Naft Sefid Zone has a total length of about 14 kms and a maximum width of ca. 5 kms with a moderate slope of 1-3º in its upper region and 1º in its lower region (the general

Some of the general characteristics of the colluvial slopes and alluvial fans were described in Chapter 3. Chapter

Fig 5.4: Photo Showing the Chah-e Naft Sefid Canyon

75

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin slope values of the fan would be steep, gentle and flat). It is not a classic example of an alluvial fan as described by Rachocki (Rachocki 1981) or Bull (Bull 1977); however, it is typical of the fans previously described in Chapter 3. Two contrary processes might have affected this fan system: 1- the building up of the ground level by the fan supply and its extension; 2- incision, channeling and human intervention that gradually changed the nature of the fan. Several major canyons have incised trenches of different depths at the fan head. With a maximum depth of 15-20 m, the deepest canyon in the fan head is the Chah-e Naft Sefid (Fig. 5.4). This canyon has become one of the major streams in the Eastern Plain (the Darreh Naft) and is now a major drainage system discharging most of the Eastern Plain surface water to the Gargar River.

gullies with heavy gravel sediments in the lower levels; 2) the mid-fan zone with sub-parallel ridges and stepped terraces composed of bedded sand, silt and sandy loam as a matrix of sheet flood deposits and coarse particles in the stream deposits; and finally 3) the fan toe zone with silty diamicron and silt modified by debris flow (Fig. 5.5). The overall trend in plan shape is convex arcuate. This zone has been disturbed by later dissections that have mostly affected the margins of the major streams of Darreh Omm Saleh, Darre Hasan Shahi and Darreh Naft. The softness of the sediments, especially in the midfan zone, and the force of the winter storms seem to be influential in making the channel system in this particular fan a stream-dominated fan. Numerous stacked channel fills indicate repeated re-occupation of the same site by avulsing channels. Our observations suggest the presence of two general types of avulsion here: incisional avulsion, which is characterized by infilling migrated bar forms, and

The Naft Sefid Zone consists of three distinct topographical zones. The are 1) the fan head zone, which is mostly a mixture of sandy silt and irregular debris and includes deep

Fig.5.5: Three Distinct Topographical Zones of the Naft Sefid Fan 76

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations aggradational avulsion, which begins with aggradation followed in time by stream integration into a single, down-cutting channel. The type of avulsion that occurs is strongly influenced by the weather.

Naft Sefid Zone. Compared to its western portion, the rest of the fan to the east remained flat and less dissected and is mostly used today as patchy farm land. Ephemeral stream channels with different bank heights varying from 50 cm to 3 m and maximum width of 8 m - are present along the length of the fan. The greatest amount of channel activity is currently taking place in the areas along the major ephemeral stream courses of Darreh Omm Saleh, Darre Hasan Shahi and Darreh Naft (Fig. 5.6). Currently, stream flow is limited to the winter months and discharge is subject to great fluctuation in rainy years (see Chapter 3). The dominant features in the channels, however, are gently undulating, transverse ridges and swales, with different heights, which extend across the width of the channels.

Our study also suggests that the Naft Sefid Zone once had a typical radius extending from the apex to the fan base in an east-west direction. The eastern extent was ca. 6 km, while westerly expansion seems to have been nearly 8 km. When the Gargar changes occurred as detailed in Chapter 3, the Naft Sefid trunk (Chah-e Naft/Darreh Naft) shifted towards the west and its incision caused several alterations in the shallow distributor channels. By gradually shifting towards the west, the Naft Sefid trunk left a slightly raised levee near the Zagros front to the north of Ajamiyeh village. Due to incision and the gradual shift of the Darreh Naft, the eastern sector of the fan became isolated from the Gargar basin. The emergence of a new division point near the left bank of the Darreh Naft, by a massive levee shield, made it difficult to understand the new situation because it seems this division occurred before the later changes in

Exposed Sections around the Site A number of seasonal rivers flow from the site catchment in the Zagros Mountains to the south (mostly southwest).

Fig.5.6: Current Channel Activity in the Areas along the Major Ephemeral Stream Courses of Darreh Omm Saleh, Darre Hasan Shahi and Darreh Naft. 77

Fig.5.7: Exposed Section to the Northeast of the Site

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

78

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations These have deposited alluvial sediments across the plain leading to the formation of large alluvial landforms. In Chapter 3, the agents of sedimentation and erosion and the effects of the man-made irrigation system in the western sector of the plain were discussed in detail. As mentioned, apart from a number of long, ephemeral streams that could carry water to the Karun River before the establishment of the Gargar, the Eastern Plain in general and the Naft Sefid Zone in particular were hydrologically closed (cf. Alizadeh et al. 2004: 80-81; Moghaddam 2008: in press). Thus, there has been no major loss of deposited material from the Naft Sefid Zone alluvial fan during the earlier Holocene period in contrast to the modern landscape, where accumulated sediments are eroded by new, baselevel activities (see Chapter 3).

Of several sections that were examined near the site, except for one section that presented a Qanat shaft (discussed below), none contained any cultural deposit. The results of the examination in three of the sections are given below The northeastern section (Fig. 5.7): This was the largest exposed section, which faced north. It measured over 11m in depth, was about 172 m long, and was situated 71-83 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l.) The sedimentary sequence in this section, from top to bottom, consisted of sandy loam, undifferentiated loam, gleying, bedded sandy clay and clay loam. No cultural deposit was visible in this section. The sequence implies a relatively stable environment. Desiccation cracks were visible down to the base of the section and in some parts have caused the section to collapse.

The appearance of several canyons in the Naft Sefid Zone head provides an ideal tectonic setting for the rapid accumulation of alluvium at the Zagros Mountain front. The apex of the alluvial fan at the canyons’ mouths (Darreh Omm Saleh, Darre Hasan Shahi and Darreh Naft) is steep and consists of water-deposited gravel. It has a dissected morphology and enjoys rapid accumulation of coarse particles. A few hundred meters further south, and light gray clay with a gentle, flat slope at the top. The heavily incised areas provide remarkable windows on the sediment accumulation process. To study the rate of sedimentation in the Naft Sefid Zone and especially around Tall–e Abu Chizan catchment, we conducted a survey along the exposed sections of the ephemeral channels (discussed below).

The northwestern section (Fig. 5.8): This section faced northeast and was 7.30-2.80 m deep, more than 94 m long and was situated 73.72-81.02 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l). Two important features were discerned in this section: a high point known as a “Picked Island” in the western end of the section and a steep slope at its southeast section, which implies a hilly environment around the site before the extended erosional phase. This phenomenon was also documented in many other places in a 4-5 kilometers radius around the site. The high points (Picked Islands) around the site stand between70 and 113m. The mean height is 90.9m and the standard division is about 11.29 m (Fig. 5.9).

As Figure 5.2 illustrates, Tall-e Abu Chizan is located on a terrace-shaped fan adjacent to the southern slopes of the Zagros Mountains. To the south, Darreh Naft and Darreh Haddam, two major drainage systems in the Eastern Plain, intersect the terrace. Further south, the slightly flattened fan toe engages with the lumpy Kupal anticline. The aggradational nature of the colluvial slopes and alluvial fans has resulted in the formation of deep sedimentary sequences in the Eastern Plain, while further erosional activities (as discussed in Chapter 3) have caused a changing environment for most regions of the plain.

The second feature was a channel cut, which is clearly visible in the left hand side of the “Picked Island” (Fig. 5.8). It can be interpreted in two ways 1) an old, manmade channel dug in ancient times or 2) a naturally created feature. As mentioned before, almost all exposed sections show abundant desiccation cracks. Nearly all of the cracks extended to the root zones of the sections and interestingly the majority of them had a curved shape due to the texture of the bedded sediments. It is also noteworthy that the channel cross-section here had a sharp angle instead of the typical concave shape of earthen irrigation canals. The whole section in general consisted of bedded sediments that included, from top to bottom, sandy loam-undifferentiated loam, structured clay, compact silt and indurated loam. The “old” channel was sharply cut through this sequence (Fig. 5.8) and the fill in it was quite different from the rest of the section, consisting of low-energy sands, silts and clay and roughly gray-hued blocky. Interestingly, no cultural deposit was seen in the channel fill. The most visible inclusions included chunks of white particles (probably gypsum).

It is important to consider the geomorphological conditions of Tall-e Abu Chizan prior to, during and after its occupation and to understand how alluviation affects data from archaeological sites and off-site features in such an environment. In order to address these questions, coring was planned initially, but had to be abandoned due to factors beyond our control. However, the aforementioned exposed sections with reasonable depth were abundant around the site, and their study demonstrated that the area was heavily affected by water erosion. It is obvious that the soil in this forceful erosional situation loses much of its productive potential due to the removal of nutrients, organic materials, and soil organisms as well as a reduction in water storage capacity and hence root-zone depth. Currently, erosion not only threatens Tall-e Abu Chizan, it affects the livelihood of the local herders.

The second interpretation would be to consider this feature as a completely natural feature. The five numbers in Figure 5.8 respectively show five channel shifts in this 79

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.8: Exposed Section to the Southwest of the Site. Photo shows a channel cut, clearly visible in “Picked Island” in the exposed section to the northwest of the site and five channel shifts through time.

the left hand side of the

three distinct types of shafts were recorded: 1) those built with chaff-tempered, baked bricks with finger marks on one side. This variant was found in the northeast of the site and in the Deep Gully Zone (Map 5.2); 2) those made from gravel stones. Just one example of this variant was found beside the site to the east of the East Gully (Fig. 5. 10: C, No. 1). It is not clear whether Qanat Shaft no. 2 (Fig 5.10: C, No. 2) is another example of this variant or not; 3) those made from large cylindrical lumps of condensed clay (observed in the exposed section). Unfortunately we were not able to recognize its internal structure during the 2006 season, but at this stage we consider this shaft type to be a third variant. Most likely, the Qanat system in this area is related to the extended Late Sasanian (?) and Early Islamic site of KS 1666 that is located about 1.08 kms southeast of Tall-e Abu Chizan (see Chapter 4, Maps 4.8-9).

Figure 5.9: The high points (Picked Islands) around Tall-e Abu Chizan

According to the local people in the nearby village of Shebat Tuleh (about 4km west of the site), the water table is about 8-13 m below the modern surface of the plain. The highest and lowest points in this village are 76 and 72 meter above sea level, respectively, and it is located about 3.5 kms from the Zagros foothills. Tall-e Abu Chizan the highest and lowest points of which are 89 and 74 m.a.s.l is located 2.5 kms from the Zagros foothills. The Qanat shafts around the site however, do not necessarily indicate the previous depth of the water table because the distance from the foothills to these shafts is about 2.5 km (a well was also discovered near the foothills. See Fig. 5.11) and they are most likely those that continued to the Qanat system in the

environment through time. If taken as a natural feature, the so-called “old channel” would be the third phase. If our second interpretation were correct, then this section would be illustrating well the changing environment around the site. This reconstruction, however, needs to be evaluated by further geomorphological studies. The southern section (Fig. 5.10): This section stands between the Uruk Zone and the Stripped Ridges Zone (discussed below, Map 5.2) and is highly exposed due to the action of the East Gully. The focal point of this section is an exposed Qanat shaft (Fig. 5.10). A number of Qanat shafts have been dug out both on and off the site. Generally, 80

Fig. 5.10: Exposed Section to the South of the Site. Distinct Types of Qanat Shafts in the Southern Section are visible.

s

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavation

81

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin north of KS 1666. Nevertheless, this section also can help us to interpret previous landscapes around the site. Figure 5.10 shows that the Qanat shaft was dug between two hills of about 82.4 and 80 m height (respectively in the left and right hand side of Fig. 5.10: B). The present height of the Qanat shaft is about 81.2 (m.a.s.l.). Two interpretations are possible: 1) after abandonment of the Qanat system due to the deflation of water in the channel, a collapse about 1.2m occurred, which leads to sink holes and further collapse in the surface 2) The second interpretation suggests a hilly landform for this area. Because there is no indication of any collapse in the section and the shaft is laid on the heavy and condensed bedded clay, the present surface may well be an ancient land surface.

niches. Clearly, changes in the landscape could have masked any possible off-site features related to agricultural practices around the site although the floral remains recovered through excavation indicate the diversity of both wild and cultivated spices (Appendix 3). Cattle-breeding was probably practiced around the site. Faunal remains indicate that the settlers of Tall-e Abu Chizan discarded cattle bones and probably consumed meat at the site. It is not possible to locate the ancient farmlands associated with the site. After clay, bitumen seems to have been the second most important raw material used by the settles of Abu Chizan. The diversity of raw materials used in production of the chipped stone is also noteworthy, pointing to the fact that the environment of Tall-e Abu Chizan provided scope for a diverse range of resource exploitation. To understand the resource niches in the site catchments and to record any archaeological features (on-site or off-site and of all periods), a systematic reconnaissance was carried out in a 5 x 7 km area around Tall-e Abu Chizan. The whole area was divided into 13 transects, each surveyed by 2 to 8 persons

Site Catchments and Resource Niches Material from the intensive survey and small-scale excavation (floral and fauna remains, pottery, chipped stone and bitumen) reflect the materials and resources being exploited during the occupational phases at Tall-e Abu Chizan. Particular attention was paid to exploitation

Fig. 5.11: Image Showing the Location of a Well Discovered near the Zagros Foothills as well as 13 Transects Site, Surveyed during 4 Different Seasons and the Location of the “Bedded Gravel Path”, Recorded near the Northeast Sector of the Site

around the

82

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations at 50 m intervals (distance between two surveyors) during 4 different seasons (Fig. 5.11). The overall result of this survey is presented below.

that pottery kilns of different phases are densely distributed across the site. Both residual and alluvial clays are quite common in the Naft Sefid Zone. Residual clays were found eroding out of deposits in the foothills on either side of the valley. Some fluvial fan deposits were interspersed with alluvial deposits in the upper sector of the major streams (Omm Sale, Hasan Shahi and Naft). Alluvial clays were noted to have accumulated in the form of fine-grained, brownishgray strata. The Naft Sefid wadi system often leaves behind ephemeral lagoons during the rainy months. Finegrained alluvial clays from these ephemeral lagoons are deposited slowly over time. Every year, local residents make some temporary, rounded and domed storage structures from the clays that are available in the Darreh Naft catchments lagoons to store their harvested wheat. The local brick factory also extracts clay from the northern margin of the Darreh Naft. The expanded escarpment of this brick factory is one of the modern landmarks in the Eastern Plain.

Vegetation Stream channels cause degradation of sediments beneath the thalwegs.1 Upon abandonment of the channel, this thalwegs area would be moist and sheltered, and form a suitable environment for plant growth. As most of the stream flow is induced by seasonal rains, the bottoms of the thawed channels are exposed at the beginning of the growing season. Once the vegetation is established, the probability of mass movement is reduced and thus the abandoned channels quickly become colonized by ribbons of vegetation. In the head and mid-fan areas, vegetation growth is closely linked to the ephemeral stream channels. The active drainage system does not support vegetation growth although shrub species grow in the flat wings of major channels. The vegetation in the Naft Sefid Zone is dominated by Nubo-Sindian units such as Ziziphus nummularia and Lycium shawii that are found around the gullies. Numerous annual plants that colonize the unstable alluvial soils after the winter rain form the main local floral. They complete their life cycle during a very brief period before the onset of spring heat. Then a dense coverage of plants of various families (Poacaeae, Fabaceae, Plantaginaceae, Malvaceae, Apiaceae, Asteraceae, Primulaceae…) occupies any flat area left between the down-cutting wadis. Vast stretches covered by Malva parviflora (locally called Tula) particularly attract grazing animals.

Water No fresh water source has been recorded around the site. In fact, any attempt to reach the fresh water by digging wells was useless due to oil contamination. The Naft Sefid oil fields are one of the richest in southwestern Iran. The Naft Sefid Zone in general is veneered with lenses of gravel indicating the existence of ephemeral stream channels. In the area covered during the intensive reconnaissance, many gravel marks were recorded but gravel density was low except for a dense scattering near the northeast sector of the site, marked as “bedded gravel path” on Figure 5.11, where pebble sizes ranged from 2 cm to more than 30 cm in diameter. These gravels were rounded, indicating that they were transported here. An attempt was made to clarify the relationship between this “bedded gravel path” and the Naft Sefid canyon by expanding the survey towards the upper part of the fan system (fan head). Although new changes in the environment (channel shifts) prevented us from pursuing this, the depth of the Naft Sefid canyon and its wide discharge mouth can be considered a potential cause for the presence of the “bedded gravel path” near the site (about 3 km away). This feature could well suggest the existence of a narrow stream near the site in the past.

The plain around Tall-e Abu Chizan is virtually treeless except for a few shrub species growing in crevices and wadis created by ephemeral streams. The spiny mesquite (Prosopis farcta) thrives on the unstable, loamy soils where it draws water from the subsoil through long taproots. Tamarisk (Tamarix tetragyna) grows along larger wadis and seems to be the main species exploited for fuel (Further detail is presented in Appendix 3) Clay The high density of pottery sherds, slag and wasters at Tall-e Abu Chizan clearly indicates that intensive production of ceramic vessels close to the clay source. However, due to the nature of the highly dissected landscape it is not possible to identify potential clay pits or an irregular escarpment, both of which are key signatures of clay extraction. Nevertheless, away from the site, where the density of later settlements is relatively low, such a landscape signature is more likely to be recognized than close to it. The intensive survey around the site showed

Today, it is not feasible to emulate the earlier technique of exploiting the Qanat systems to access the water in the region due to the present chemical structure of the groundwater and the socio-political conditions. The drop in the groundwater level is another factor that prevents accession. Nevertheless, as mentioned above, several Qanat shafts recorded near Tall-e Abu Chizan indicate previous attempts to exploit underground water.

  Line connecting lowest points: a line connecting the lowest points of successive cross sections through a river channel or valley. 1

83

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.12: Salty Pathways Created by Animal Footprints at Tall-e Abu Chizan Chipped Stone Source

area; however, the analysis of the material collected from excavation indicates the existence of a nearby source of bitumen (Further detail is presented in Appendix 2).

The location of the “bedded gravel path” near the site and the richness of the chipped stone recovered through the CSS and the excavation encouraged us to search for the sources of the raw material used. Gray and light gray cores, blades and flakes recovered from site were likely to have originated in the “bedded gravel path”. Further to the north and towards the Zagros foothills, the “bedded gravel path” is concealed by later fan sediments. Nonetheless, the foothills of the Zagros could also have provided some of the raw material used. Further discussion of Tall-e Abu Chizan chipped stone industry is presented in Appendix 5. This study suggests the existence of tool-making workshops at the site, which is reasonable given the closeness of the site to the source niches. Further investigation is required to clarity the specific geological sources of raw material.

Internal Spatial Organization Topographic Characteristics and Site Taphonomy It is well known that natural conditions have an important influence on the development of the archaeological site (Kirkby and Kirkby 1976; Davidson 1976; Butzer 1982). Tall-e Abu Chizan is comprised of occupational strata which show signs of periodic, massive flooding and collapse. The site has an irregular and non-linear surface and geo-archaeologically it is extremely complex. It has a high and steep slope at its southwestern end and a low, gentle slope towards the northeast. Its upper part has been flattened through time and the vicinities shows fine sediments mixed with cultural material, which is most likely indicative of the destructive progression of erosion.

Bitumen One of the most important materials recovered during the excavation was bituminous matrix and asphalt (bitumen). Besides the intensive reconnaissance survey (Fig 5.11), other attempts also made to trace the possible sources of these materials in the Zagros foothills at the major oil well cluster sites of the Naft Sefid oil fields. Only one oil seep site was recorded about 5.5 kms to the east of Tall-e Abu Chizan. This site consists of multiple oil seeps were visible on the ground. No bitumen pit has yet been recorded in this

On a local scale, the main agent in the process of the site’s taphonomy is rainfall causing mechanical erosion. On a regional scale, the massive movement and dissection of the site is the result of changes caused by the Gargar River, which simply engulfed certain topographic features (discussed in Chapter 3). Apart from seasonal rainfall, daily humidity also has a severe effect on site taphonomy in the Near East (Miller Rosen 1986: 25). At Tall-e Abu Chizan,

84

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations humidity, absorption and evaporation of moisture - even during the rainless seasons - are particularly important in factors causing the surface soil of the site to fracture. During the evaporation of moisture capillary action transports soluble salts to the surface (Miller Rosen 1986: 10). This is followed in winter by intense rainfall and surface damage done by sheep and goat herds. During the project, a Bakhtiyari nomad family spent its winter near the site. For the last 40 years Mr. Kiani, the head of the family, has had an agreement with a local Arab Sheikh that the nomad family could use the Sheikh’s bare land during the winter for grazing. Over this time, annual grazing has caused severe problems for Tall-e Abu Chizan in different ways as the site is located in the middle of these bare lands. Each year the nomad family pitches its tents by the site. Every day more than 400 sheep and goat pass over the site, leaving thousands of animal footprints on the weak soils of the site. Rainfall collects in the hollow footprints, dissolving soluble salt and allowing it to accumulate in the hollows. When the weather becomes drier, thousands of white, salty pathways appear all over the site, leading to the disintegration of the surface and its upper occupational levels (Fig 5.12). These processes affect mud brick architecture of prehistoric sites such as Tall-e Abu Chizan. The disintegration of the surface materials at Tall-e Abu Chizan seems to have affected the Susiana d / Late Susiana 1 levels. Similarly, at Ali Kosh at the Deh Luran plain, where untempered clay or silt slabs were used for construction, Hole has observed, “It may be for this Map.5.2: Six Major Topographic Zones at Tall-e Abu Chizan very reason that virtually no traces of architecture were detected by the are a major characteristic of this zone. Low vegetation French in their excavations at Tepes Jaffarabad, Jowi, cover, intense seasonal rain and drainage activities of the Bandbal and Buhalan in central Khuzestan” (Hole et al. Eastern Gully have made the soil to slide from the upper 1969: 24). portion of the site to the lower parts of this area, forming parallel strips (Fig. 5.13). Sporadic distribution of cultural Erosion affected the different sides of Tall-e Abu Chizan material at the lower end of these strips indicates the recent to varying degrees. Six major topographic zones were emergence of these ridges. If this were not the case, we importantly to provide a zonal boundary for the controlled would expect to find more material transferred from the sampling survey (discussed below) (Map 5.2). These are top to the bottom of the ridges. Particular erosion features as follows: such as down-cutting of the ridge’s base and sinking of Stripped Ridge Zone: this zone is located in the southern areas between slope ridges are also visible in this zone. sector of the site. It is 75-84 (m.a.s.l.) and covers a 170 Dewclaw Zone: Tell-e Abu Chizan derived its name from x 112 m area. Several stripped ridges that radiate from this area. In the local Arabic dialect, the term “Chizan” the main body of the site toward the south and southeast 85

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.13: Parallel Strips of Soil at the Stripped Ridge Zone means a ridge that is similar to a goat’s dewclaws (a dysfunctional shorter digit or claw on the paw of a dog or other mammal). This zone, which is the steepest slope of the site, is located in the western part of the site. Parts of this zone that face the western humid winds are covered in low grass. It is about 129 m long and 30 m wide and 7587 (m.a.s.l.). A gully cuts right through the middle of this zone. The grass canopy has prevented this eroded section

from further incisions. A massive amount of the site has collapsed in the northern end of this zone probably because of the Old Gully activities (see below). Viewed from the west, a concave curve is visible in the site’s profile, which was probably created after this collapse (Fig. 5.14). This massive collapse has also had other physical consequences, such as the emergence of a huge crack in Area A (see entry under Area A below).

Fig.5.14: Heavy Collapsed Load in the Dewclaw Zone.

86

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

Fig. 5.15: The Old Gully to the West of Tall-e Abu Chizan Low Stripped Ridge Zone: The northern and northwestern sectors of the site are characterized by several low ridges, 178 m long, 101 m wide and 76-81 (m.a.s.l.). The distinctive feature of the Low Stripped Ridge is the existing traces of an old gully, referred to here as the Old Gully (Fig 5.15). This was probably active until the occurrence of the changes in the northern part of the site (discussed above). Most likely, the Old Gully has affected this part of the site in the same way the east gully is affecting the Stripped Ridge Zone in the southern part of the site. Like Zone 1, this zone also has little vegetation cover but erosion here is not as active as the Zone 1.

sections in this zone include some Qanat shafts, but since 2002 these and many other parts of this zone have been wiped out by erosion. Two types of erosion are in progress: 1) sinking, which is more common in the lower areas and 2) tunneling, which is attested only to in this zone. As for the cultural deposits, several basket loads of sherds, pebbles, hoes, bones, lithics and so on were recorded in this zone. In addition to the previously mentioned erosion factors, the existence of the several Qanat shafts may be another potential factor which is accelerating erosion in this zone. When the Qanat system was abandoned the empty Qanat channels collapsed and caused the surface here to sink. Similarly, as the groundwater reservoir in the clay sediments here diminishes through pumping, the surface of the land sinks.

Moderate Slope Zone: This zone is located between the central and the northeastern parts of the site. It is about 222 m long and 30 m wide with an elevation of 79-89.11 (m.a.s.l.). In its lower portion, the surface is covered by low mounds. Apart from the southern sector which is covered by patchy grass, the rest of the area is bare. This Zone is threatened from the east by the action of the eastern Deep Gully that is rapidly progressing towards this Zone. The surface is almost smooth and several features such as kilns are visible at its surface.

The Uruk Zone: this area is separated from the site by the eastern stream (east gully). It measures about 160 x142 m and is 75-85 (m.a.s.l.). The slope in this zone is east-west. The western sector of this zone is now affected by the East Gully activities. Like Zone 1, this Zone is relatively bare and consists of stripped ridges. Part Two - Controlled Sampling Survey (CSS)

Deep Gully Zone: this zone is relatively dynamic in terms of gully activities and many of the features are rapidly being removed here. It is about 186 m long and 128 m wide with an elevation of 75-82 (m.a.s.l.). The exposed

The principal aim of the first excavation campaign was to obtain information from stratigraphic excavations (Area A) and intensive surface survey. The survey was intended

87

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin to provide a comprehensive picture of surface material, exposed structures and the distribution of archaeological features. In addition, it was hoped that this would allow us to understand the extent of gully erosions in different parts of the site in order to better assess the site’s natural condition prior to commencing excavation. This survey, referred to as the Controlled Sampling Survey in this study, is discussed below.

as it resulted in the exposure of the topographically higher areas of the site and naturally scraped surfaces. On the other hand, in the southern and southwestern parts of the site, significant amounts of cultural material were found which had probably been eroded from higher points on the site. Consequently, these artifact scatters bear no contextual relationship to the cultural deposits beneath them. However, the process of gully formation has created some segmented stripped ridges that present a radial shape emanating from the center of the site. Fortunately this preserved some archaeological features in the lower elevations, such as the area in which Uruk period kilns were found (Uruk Zone; Map 5.2).

Introduction As mentioned in Chapter 1, in most earlier archeological studies at prehistoric sites in Susiana, attempts to derive detailed archaeological information from surface finds were often limited due to a lack of spatial control on a given site rather than the absence of chronologically sensitive data. Obviously, the lack of a stratigraphic sequence makes for the incomplete understanding of a site’s chronology; hence, the establishment of a reliable stratigraphic sequence has been one of the main concerns of successive French missions in Susiana since the 1950s (cf. Le Breton 1957). Early researchers rarely considered surface collections to be a valuable indicator of a site’s occupational history (for a possible exception see Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Figs. 39-44; these were based on the excavation trenches, however, not on surface sampling).

Aims The aims of CSS were as follows: 1-determining which periods had the most surface indicators 2-assessing the distribution of surface materials from different periods and their relationship to the spatial organization of the site with respect to the location of pottery or lithic workshops. 3- Discovering surface material dated to periods other than identified in the soundings.

Experimental studies have clearly demonstrated that diverse natural and cultural agents constantly modify the surface distribution of artifacts at a given location over 71). At Tall-e Abu Chizan, the effects of erosion and deposition on the site’s surface are quite obvious. Many sherds, for example, have been transported hundreds of meters away from the immediate slopes of the site through water action. While this may bring obscure material to attention, it severely impairs interpretation of the surface finds and site taphonomy by influencing artifact size, form and location, destroying archaeologically relevant spatial information (cf. Hole and Heizer 1973; Dunnell and Dancey 1983: 269). Nevertheless, the abundance of burnt areas and dense concentrations of sherds with slag and wasters convinced us to conduct what we call here a Controlled Sampling Survey (hereafter CSS), a full-coverage survey with a top-down approach that follows the natural boundaries of the site. Unlike a conventional sample survey, which gives a generalized picture of a site’s sub-areas (cf. Wilkinson 2000: 227), the intention of the CSS was to elucidate structural patterning in archaeological surface material and the natural characteristics of whole area at Tall-e Abu Chizan (for similar studies in the Deh Luran Plain, see Hole 1977: 43).

4- Assessing the rate of erosion and dissection in different parts of the site, in order to prioritize which areas were most in need of further excavations before further damage was done. It is apparent that substantial changes in the surface of the site have occurred since 2002with some areas more eroded than others (see below). Methodology On first inspection, Tall-e Abu Chizan appeared to be composed of two principal topographic sectors: the higher part in the south and the lower part in the north. However, it is clear from our 2005 survey that the site in fact consists of three topographic distinctions: a large southern sector, which rises 15 m above the modern surface of the surrounding plain and whose western part is the steepest part of the site, usually covered by a carpet of grass; a wide northern sector, rising 4 m above the plain with a moderate slope; and a wide, low eastern sector (the Uruk sector, Map 5.2) that stands 5 m above the surrounding plain. Although the Uruk sector gives the impression of being isolated from the rest of the mound, the CSS suggested that these three raised areas formed part of a single whole and the presence of Uruk remains in the Deep Gully Area indicates that the Uruk sector was separated from the southern sector by the formation of the Eastern Gully.

A GPS was employed to locate the spots at which material was collected. Later, a total station was used in sampling defined squares more accurately. This proved to be a great help in selecting suitable areas for intensive examination.

Using a total station, the northern and southern sectors of the site were established as covering nearly 8 ha and a detailed contour map was produced. Mapping was carried out on a 1:200 scale with contours drawn at 1m levels, thus providing a fine resolution of surface features, some

The CSS also prevented us from making unsubstantiated assumptions about the site’s extension and chronology. To some degree, the high rate of erosion was beneficial 88

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Square ID No.: D10 (17) GEC: 75-87 m CEC: 82m Natural Setting: part of the Dewclaw Zone (Zone 2) which had remarkably irregular topography. The eastern and southern parts of the square were highly exposed and erosion was very active. However, the western part was quite stable due to a heavy carpet of low grass. Sampling: All materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square in the center of the area at in the elevation 82 m. Surface Features: Two kilns were clearly visible in the southern and central part of the square. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 5 chaff tempered brick fragments, 3 small fragments of orange to pale yellow trays with an average size of about 5-12 cm (in diameter), 2 spindle whorls, 1 animal figurine and 2 slag fragments. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and some Late Susiana 1.

of which may relate to buildings or major wall alignments immediately underlying the surface of the mound (Map 5.2). Collection of surface artifacts was carried out across the site inside 20 x 20 m squares where features were visible on the surface and associated artifacts seemed to be in a primary, rather than a disturbed secondary context. Where a feature was visible, only those materials that were distributed around the features were recorded. In some cases, depending on the context of the dispersed material on the surface, the materials were collected from a smaller square (2 x 2 m, 4 x 4 m, etc.) within each larger square and these were collected more intensively. A uniformly dense coverage of vegetation as well as the steep slope in the southwestern sector of the site rendered surface collection there unreliable and survey difficult, hence no collections from this sector of the site were recorded. Overall, 66 squares - each measuring 20 x 20 m - were surveyed (Map. 5.2). Artifacts recovered from each square were recorded in specific forms for each category of material including ceramics, bones, stone tools, shells, obsidians, flints, bitumen and other recovered materials. All technical characteristics of the ceramic sherds such as color, texture, form, decoration, firing, temper, etc. were also carefully recorded. The natural characteristics of every square such as estimated erosion rate, gullying deposition and erosion rate, etc. were precisely considered. In sum, the CSS method allowed us to illustrate the surface features of site in detail.

Square ID No.: D15 (4) GEC: 77-80 m CEC: 79 Natural Setting: as in square C15, in the upper part of the stripped ridge. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square in the northwest sector of the area. Surface Features: A large burnt gray-green area (kiln or oven?) was visible. The material was dense in this feature. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 15 pieces of chaff tempered broken bricks that are orange (outer surface) with a light brown to gray core, 34 pieces of slag, 8 almost rounded pebbles (2-11 cms in diameter). Remarks: Artifact density was high. The quantity of painted sherds was low; a number of body sherds had diagnostic forms. It seems that all the surface materials were transported from the feature mentioned above (probably a kiln). Provisional date: Susiana d (LS1) and Uruk.

A catalogue of the 66 squares is presented below. Table 5.1 presents the description of the pottery and chipped stone collection of each square. The square ID numbers are the same as the grid ID numbers - composed of a digit and an alphabet – shown on the topographic map of the site (Map 5.2). Controlled Sampling Survey Catalogue2

Square ID No.: D16 (2) GEC: 75-79 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: western side was close to the Eastern Gully, hence erosion was active here. The surface soil was silty. Some small shrubs were visible in the gully cut. Very patchy, scattered areas of low vegetation. Sharp topographic differentiation with some areas between 7576 m nearly flat. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 pieces of highly-fired, chaff- tempered brick with green interior and yellow exteriors

Square ID No.: C15 (3) GEC:3 75-77 m CEC:4 77 m Natural Setting: located at the last stripped ridge of the southern dissected area. Vegetation density generally low. The silty soil was exposed in the upper sector of the ridge without any vegetation while in the lower elevations ephemeral vegetation was denser. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Remarks: Overall, the density of material was high; the material was less dense scattered in its southern part which was lower than the northern part. Provisional date: Susiana d (LS1) and Uruk.

Remarks: Although the density of material in this square was low, compared to Square ID No: D 17, the number of painted sherds and diagnostic forms was high. The density of material in the southern part of the square was lower than the north.

  For finds description of CSS see Table 5.1.   GEC: General Elevation Contour. 4   CEC: Collection Elevation Contour. 2 3

89

D15

- Quantity: 22 -almost dense -gritty -creamy slip - average size: 4-9cm

D10

- Quantity: 85 -dense - visible mica flakes some are gritty with small grits and white dots visible on the surface - black core slip - average size about 5-18 cm

- Quantity: 6 - mostly dense - air voids - no visible inclusion except for some mica flakes and white inclusions - average size: 2-4 cm

Red Ware

C15

Square ID. No.

Fabric - Quantity: 307 - Mostly dense with no visible inclusion - wash slipped -air voids - 68 pieces are painted in olive brown and olive

Pale Yellow Ware

- Quantity: 206 -Dense with no visible inclusion - somehow gritty with very small grits visible -some pieces have a red slip on their interior with a medium fabric -air voids - few are straw tempered -some sherds are slipped -average size: 2-7cm - Quantity: 2872 - Dense with no visible inclusion -gritty - visible very small grits - Quantity: 908 - air voids - dense - slipped - slipped with creamy - cracks and eroded or pale yellow slip surface - very small grits - average diameter visible between 3 - 9 cm. - average size is -Some of pieces with a between 7-14 cm greenish yellow fabric are highly fired and somewhat deformed - Some yellow wares are Straw tempered and highly fired (prob. BRB sherds)

- Quantity: 39 -dense with no visible inclusion -very small grits, some granulate on the surface -creamy slipped -air voids -average size: 3-5cm

- Quantity: 73 - Dense with no visible inclusion except for some mica flakes - eroded surface - air voids - decoration in brownish black -Uruk sherds are straw-tempered - average size: 3-7cm

Orange Ware

Pottery

90 Fine and medium size dots, bands, nose logs, concentric rectangles, stylized vegetal motifs and curvy paralleled bands

Solid circles surrounded by medium size dots, stylized goat horns, narrow-lined circles, fine dots, vertical and horizontal hatches, multiple bands with a curvy band in the middle, wavy bands in separated frames

Multiple vertical and horizontal bands, bands around base and rim, wavy bands restricted by narrow bands, solid bands, fine dots, circles, zigzags, cross hatches, bold crosses and concentric rectangles

Represented Motifs

Quantity 13

Narrow mouth goblet or solid footed goblet (of Uruk period), shallow bowl, ring 19 base, flaring rim jar, close mouth jar, narrow base jar, deep bowl and ledge rim jar

Deep bowl, carinated bowl, 9 small tray, high necked jar, ring base beaker and hole mouth jar

Medium size bowl, small bowl, slightly carinated bowl, flat base, ring base and beveled rim bowl

Represented Forms

Light gray, brown, light brown, black

Dark red, gray, light gray, brown, light brown

Gray, light brown

Color

flint

flint

flint

Material

Chipped Stone

1-3

1.5-4

Length Size (cm) 0.5-4

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

91

E13

E11

D17

D16

- Quantity: 131 - very fine ware - gritty ware with very small grits visible - some dense with no visible inclusion - slipped -some eroded body - large bodies >7 cm size - Quantity: 571 - gritty with very small grits visible -air voids - some slipped pieces - some dense with no visible inclusion - painted - average size: 4

- Quantity: 44 - dense and no visible inclusion - some are gritty - some slipped - large bodies> 7 cm size

- Quantity: 176 - mostly dense with visible inclusion - eroded surface - very small grits - 3 beveled rim bowls -average size 6 cm

- Quantity: 28 - black core - red slip on interior and exterior.

- Quantity: 11 -most pieces have black core - dense with no visible inclusion - large bodies > 9cm size

- Quantity: 53 - dense - some gritty - black core - average size: 4 cm

- Quantity: 677 - Some cracks on both sides body -decoration in greenish brown - One straw tempered piece (Uruk) -eggshell - The average size is between 3 -12 cm - High percentage of the sherds have eroded surface

- Quantity: 958 - Incised and painted decoration in olive brown. The pale yellow ware relatively presents large bodies

- Quantity: 69 - Small grits visible - 1 straw tempered - some pieces have wash slip on both sides -some very small sand granulates and white inclusions visible

- Quantity: 134 - Dense - both grit and straw - Quantity: 46 tempered example are - both grit and straw present tempered example are -some very small present sand granulates - both thin and thick visible slip - creamy slip - air voids. -white inclusion - some very small visible in the temper reddish brown sand and surface granulated on the -air voids surface even in the - There are some section of some sherds. coarse ware, probably - size of the red bodies mud or Baked brick is between 2 to 8cm -3 BRB pieces - average size is about 3 cm long

Wavy bands, narrow bands and fine dots, narrow parallel lines, medium size dots, vertical lines on the jar shoulders, crosshatches and large zigzags filled by sets of crosshatches

Scalloped circles, vertical lines in the interior side of bowls, small butterflies, parallel wavy bands, solid bands, solid suspended elements in the interior side of rim, vertical solid bands on the exterior side of bowls, band rims, solid diamonds and zigzags

Bands, fine dots and sigma

Fine dots, bands and incised cross hatches (on Uruk potsherds)

Large open bowl, close form jar, ring base jar or beaker, shallow bowl, carinated bowl and beveled rim bowl

High neck jar with a solid painted surface on the neck and shallow bowl

bowl (both open and close forms) and jar

3

3

55

Ring base beaker, carinated bowl, slightly carinated bodies, open bowl, close 15 form jar, necked rim jar and flat base

Light gray

Brown, red

Dull yellow orange, light gray

Light gray

flint

flint

flint

flint

2

1-4.5

0.5-3

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

92

F9

E15

E14

- Quantity: 302 - Dense - very small grits visible - some mica flakes visible - some have creamy slip - average size: 5cm

- Quantity: 148 - mostly dense some gritty with white inclusions - black core and eroded surface - some strawtempered (BRB) - wash slipped - air voids - some highly fired - some sand or very small grits tempered average size: 3-9cm.

- Quantity: 24 - very small grits -some creamy slipped - some are dense with no visible inclusion, - air voids - average size: 1-5cm

- Quantity: 57 - dense with no visible inclusion - mostly with very small grits visible - some small grits granulate on the surface some slipped - air voids - average size:3cm

- Quantity: 28 - dense with very small grits visible - eroded surface - air voids -slipped and/or wash slipped - highly fired - some have lighter spots on their bodies probably because of firing process - black core - creamy slip - average size 2-7 cm.

- Quantity: 8 - gritty - gray core - air voids - average size: 2-5cm

Fine dots, medium dots and bands

Nose lug, bands, fine dots, medium size dots on the shoulder of the jar, multiple bands, vertical hatches, wavy bands, crossed lines and zigzags

- Quantity: 115 - Gritty, very small grits. - Some are dense with no visible inclusion Festoons, solid vertical triangles, - wash slipped bands, circles and birds - eroded surface - air voids - average size:2- 6cm

- Quantity: 352 - mostly dense with no visible inclusion, some gritty - wash slipped - air voids - 15 painted ware - 32 straw tempered (BRB) - average size 2-11 cm.

- Quantity: 861 mostly dense with very small grits visible and creamy slip - some gritty with some small grits visible on the surface - air voids - some irregular lines visible on some surface - eroded bodies - some have a yellowish wash - highly fired bodies - average size: 5cm Over 58 painted body including 15 rim, 9 highly fired and deformed fragments, 12 bases, 5 necks and 1 handle

Open-mouthed bowl, carinated bowl, jar, slightly carinated bowl, flat base bowl, turtle vessel’s spout and beveled rim bowl

5

Flat and ring base jar, ledge rim jar, large open jar, close 20 mouth jar and rim band jar

Large bowl with carination, ring base jar or beaker, flaring neck jar, flat base 11 jar, open bowl, high rim jar and beveled rim bowl flint

Light gray, gray, brown, light flint brown

Light gray, gray, light brown, flint white

Light gray

1-3.5

1.5-3.5

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

93

F14

F12

F11

F10

- Quantity: 26 - mostly dense and no visible inclusion - eroded surfaces -white inclusion in temper - average size: 3-7 cm

- Quantity: 217 - mostly dense and no visible inclusion - some are slipped or wash slipped - air voids - highly fired and black core - eroded surface - some are straw tempered (Uruk ware) - average size7cm,

- Quantity: 47 - Quantity: 21 - dense with no - some are highly dense visible inclusion - some small grit (sand) - some with very granulates on the small grits surface - some with visible - average size:2-4 cm mica flakes - average size:4cm

Flaring rim jar, heavy rounded rim jar, shallow bowl, flat base jar, high 26 neck jar, short neck jar, carinated bowl, open form bowl and beveled rim bowls

Deep bowl, flat base jar, bowl, beaker, heavy round lip jar, high necked jar, 5 flaring necked jar, carinated bowl and close form jar

Ring base jar, flat base bowl, small bowl, hole mouth jar, carinated bowl, 9 deep small bowl, flaring jar, hemispherical bowl, small tray and low rim jar

Wavy bands, goats with stylized horns, ladders, large festoons, fine dots, multiple bands, cross hatches, circles, scalloped circles, large zigzags filled by sets of crosshatched triangles, birds in row on the upper exterior part of the beakers

Horizontal wavy bands, circles and grids, stylized animals, multiple bands, curvy solid bands, zigzag ladders, solid paint on rim, suspended elements, bold zigzag bands, goats with stylized horns and medium size dots

Deep large bowl (craterform vessels), shallow bowl, small bowl, ring base 5 jar, carinated bowl and hemispherical bowl

Scalloped circles, bold reversed triangles, fine dots, ladders, solid bands, bold zigzags, vertical narrow bands, multiple horizontal lines and suspended rectangle

- Quantity: 789 - dense and no invisible inclusion – some with very small grits visible Wavy paralleled bands, small - some small grits birds in row, bands, fine dots and granulated on the surface concentric rectangles -some slipped -air voids - 1deformed body - average size: 1- 6 cm.

- Quantity: 188 - Mostly dense and no visible inclusion - some with very small grits - some sherds are slipped in yellowish olive with smooth surfaces - average size: 1-4 cm

- Quantity: 52 - Dense - Quantity: 46 - very small grits visible - Quantity: 11 - dense with no - some gritty - dense with no visible visible inclusion - slipped inclusion - very small grits - wash slip - wet hand slip - some straw - highly fired - wash slipped tempered - some with yellowish - very small grit visible - eroded surface slip - average size: 4cm - average size: 6cm - air voids - incision decoration - large bodies >9cm dominated - Quantity: 1982 - Quantity: 109 - Quantity: 1067 - dense with no visible -dense with no visible -dense with no visible inclusion inclusion inclusion - straw tempered - air voids/ - some with very - some very small sand -some straw tempered small grits visible granulates on the surface - black core - eroded surface -eroded surface - eroded surface/ - very fine bodies - slipped/ average size: 3-5cm - slipped - eggshells - average size: 3-5cm - average size: 1-8cm

Flint

flint

Light gray, gray, Flint brown

Light gray, red

Brown, red

Light gray, gray, light brown, flint brown

0.7-4

0.5-6

1-4

1-3

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

94

G12

G11

G10

G7

G5

F17

- Quantity: 9 - Dense - gritty - very small black grits granulated on the surface - slipped - One Islamic blue glazed ware - average size:1-4cm

- Quantity: 831 - some have a yellowish slip with smooth surface -no visible inclusion - dense -air voids -some are highly dense with creamy slip -highly fired, - some are straw tempered -eroded surface - average size: 1-10cm

6

7 (including one Obsidian)

1

0

13

Shallow bowl with ledge rim, flat base jar, deep large 4 bowl, small bowl, short rim jar and high rim jar

Bell shape bowl, hole mouth jar, flat base cup, rounded base vessel, shallow wide mouth bowl and small bowl

Small jar and high neck jar

-

Solid circles surrounded by medium size dots, multiple bands, hatches, Ring base, high neck jar, solid bands with meanders, grids, hole mouth jar rim, deep concentric rectangle, horizontal bowl and small beaker lines, fine dots, animals and solid diamonds

Cross hatches, meanders, carnivorous animals, solid circles surrounded by medium size dots, zigzag bands, close vertical lines, solid bands, fine dots and ladders

Concentric rectangles, short wavy lines, bands, semi circles, large circles with T shape cross in the middle, solid circles surrounded by a row fine dots and a solid circle band, fine dots, cross hatches, diamonds and reversed triangles, flying bird, small circles and reversed triangles filled by hatches

- Quantity: 212 - gritty - some are eroded Concentric rectangles - some are dense with no visible inclusion - average size: 2-9cm

- Quantity: 7 - dense - gritty - very small grits granulated on the surface - eroded surface - slipped - average size:1-4cm

- Quantity: 6

- Quantity: 209 - some gritty - some dense and no visible inclusion - some very fine pieces - air voids - eroded surface - slipped - average size: 3-5cm - Quantity: 510 -dense and no visible - Quantity: 119 inclusion -dense and no visible - slipped inclusion -very small grits -slipped - some pieces of eggshell -air voids ware -eroded surface - gritty - average size: 3-7cm - some are highly fired - average size 2-5cm

- Quantity: 138 - mostly gritty - some slipped - average size: 2.56cm

- Quantity: 187 - Dense but some - Quantity: 72 very small grits - dense with some very visible small grits - some are washed - black core slipped on both sides - some straw tempered - some very small - someone have eroded sand granulate and surfaces white inclusions. - wash slip - creamy slipped - the average size: 1- 6 - eroded surface cm - air voids - average size: 2-8 cm

- Quantity: 37 -some dense - black and gray core -wash slipped -air voids -average size: 2-8 cm

- Quantity: 41 - Dense - air voids -slipped - Black core - chaff/straw temper - average size: 4cm

- Quantity: 48 - very small grits - Quantity: 23 – some straw tempered - very small grits/ - slipped in pale yellow - average size:3-8cm - black core - average size: 1-6cm

- Quantity: 1 -Dense - vegetal and grit tempered -highly eroded surface - black core -average size: 4cm

- Quantity: 2

Light gray, brown, brown, red, white

Light brown, brown, light gray

Brown, light brown, light gray

Light brown, light gray, red

Gray

Flint

Flint

Flint

Flint and Obsidian

Flint

1-6

1-2.5

1-3

1-5

3.5

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

95

H4

H2

G16

G14

G13

- Quantity: 82 - Dense but very small grits visible/ - slipped -average size: 3-13 cm

- Quantity: 86 - dense - eroded surface - air voids - mostly fine ware - creamy slip

- Quantity: 14 - very small grits - some are slipped

- Quantity: 22 Somehow dense and no visible inclusion/ slipped by buff color, someone has very small grit as temper/ highly fired bodies/ average size: 1-4cm

- Quantity: 12 - Mostly dense and no visible inclusion -some with air voids and white inclusions - some mica flakes visible

- Quantity: 28 - Dense - some are slipped - straw air voids - white inclusions visible on the surface. The collection is somehow different to others -red and light red ware are dominant

- Quantity: 12 - dense with no visible inclusion - air voids -gray core - eroded surface - average size:2-4cm

Parallel vertical band

Scalloped circles, horizontal lines and bands

- Quantity: 87 Dense, no visible inclusion, some body gritty, very small sand granulated on the surface. slipped, high fired, void/ average size: 1-4cm

Single bands, solid bands, zigzag ladders, multiple bands, medium size dots, narrow bands, curvy bands and fine hatches

Fine dots and bands

Shallow bowl and rounded base

Flat base and high neck jar

Shallow bowl and open bowl

Shallow bowl and deep ledge rim bowl

Bands, ladders, bands and suspending element, parallel vertical Hemispherical bowl, hole bands, hatches, zigzag bands, mouth jar rim and flat base fine dots, solid painted zones and jar carnivorous animals

- Quantity: 24 -some with very small grits as temper - some mica flakes visible

- Quantity: 243 - no visible inclusion - very small grits - slipped - eroded surface -air voids

- Quantity: 196 - gritty - dense with no visible inclusion - some straw void - some incision - slip washed - average size, 8cm

- Quantity: 203 - dense and no visible - Quantity: 102 inclusion - dense and no visible - some are slipped inclusion - some highly fired - some are gritty and deformed pieces - average size 4cm (greenish surface and dark olive core) - average size 4cm

- Quantity: 37 - dense and no visible inclusion - some are straw tempered - air voids - average size: 5cm

- Quantity: 41 - dense with some very small grits - some have black core and are straw tempered -some are darker with eroded surface - wash slip - average size 5cm

2

3

13

7

7

Flint

Red, light gray

Gray, light brown

Flint

Flint

Light gray, gray, light brown, Flint brown

Light gray

Gray, light gray, brown, light Flint brown, red

4

4

1-2.3

1-3

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

96

H14

H11

H10

H8

H7

H6

- Quantity: 3 - dense and no visible inclusion - black core - some have eroded surfaces - average size 4cm

- Quantity: 3 - Dense - one sherd has a white thin slip on its exterior. It is straw and grit tempered - average size 2-3cm

- Quantity: 38 - Dense - no visible inclusion - air voids - gray core - average size: 2-5cm

Quantity: 38 -Similar to H7

- Quantity: 17 - dense, - no visible inclusion - eroded surface - average size: 1-3cm

- Quantity: 12 - dense with no visible inclusion - air voids - black core - average size: 3cm

- Quantity: 59 - mostly gritty but very small grits visible - air voids - eroded surface - creamy slip - average size:4cm

- Quantity: 19 - very small grits visible but mostly dense with no visible inclusion - some have eroded surface - average size 6cm

Narrow bands, curvy hatches, wavy horizontal bands, medium size dots and birds

Solid band on the rim, animals in row, multiple solid and narrow bands, horizontal zigzags, stylized animal designs filled by dots

- Quantity: 181 - Dense and no visible inclusion - some gritty, - some have very small grits as temper - air voids - highly fired - average size/1-5cm - Quantity: 42 - dense and no visible inclusion - slipped - air voids/ - one eggshell sherd - average size 3-8 cm

large festoons, solid small circles surrounded by two narrow lines, scalloped circles, solid bands, zigzag ladders, large dots separated by small panels, large reversed hatched triangles, hatched diamonds, solid paint on the rim, narrow grids, concave semi circles on the rim and zigzags

Quantity: 181 -Similar to H7

- Quantity: 28 - dense and no visible inclusion -some very small sand granulated on the surface - slipped - average size/ 4cm

- Quantity: 125 - Somehow dense and no visible inclusion - buff slipped - some have very small grits as temper -average size: 2-5cm

Quantity: 125 -Similar to H7

Large festoons in the interior side, large dots on the high rim jar shoulder, hatched panels, large scalloped circles, hatched diamonds, goats, circles with solid small dots in the middle, circles

Deep bowl and flat base bowl

Deep bowl

0

1

Large deep bowl, ring base jar or bowl, shallow bowl, vestigial flanged vessel, 6 (including hole mouth jar, carinated one bowl, flat base jar, open Obsidian) mouth beaker, high rim jar, wide flaring bowl and small close jar

Flint

Light gray

Flint

Flint and Light gray, light Black red, light brown obsidian

Gray

Small bowl, deep bowl, high neck jar, ring base jar, hole mouth jar, close mouth 1 jar, large deep bowl and small jar

Flint

White, red, light Flint gray

Light gray, brown

6

Ring base bowl, hole mouth jar, open mouth bowl, high neck jar, deep large bowl, 4 small bowl and short neck jar

Solid paint on the rim, small vertical Ledge rim vessel, small lines on the jar shoulder, solid bowl, small jar and high hatched frames and fine dot neck jar

Multiple bands, curvy bands, animals, solid painted frames, zigzag ladders, rectangles, vertical lines and scallops

- Quantity: 124 - Gritty - some with very small grits - some are dense with no visible inclusion - air voids - eroded surface - slipped. - average size: 1-4cm - Quantity: 161 - dense and no visible inclusion - Quantity: 24 - fine ware and eggshell -dense - some are gritty - very small grits - very small grits - average size: 1-4cm - highly fired - some have incised decoration - average size 1-7cm

- Quantity: 26 - dense - some very small grits visible - slipped in pale yellow -air voids - eroded surface - average size:5cm

2

4

1-3.4

2-4

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

97

J6

I12

I11

I10

I7

I6

- Quantity: 45 - dense, no visible inclusion - some gritty - slipped -average size: 3-7cm

- Quantity: 20 - dense and no visible inclusion - creamy slip some with a grayish red interior -average size: 2-5cm

- Quantity: 16 - dense with no visible inclusion - black core, - eroded surface - there are some sherds with lighter color and very dense that seem to be Islamic or Uruk red ware -average size:3-7cm

- Quantity: 5 - dense, - black core - one BRB with chaff temper - average size: 3-6cm

- Quantity: 11 - dense but very small grits visible - average size: 1-4cm

- Quantity: 82 -dense -very small grits -air voids -eroded surface -average size:2-5cm

- Quantity: 37 - dense and no visible inclusion - very small grits - air voids, - creamy slip -average size: 1-6cm

- Quantity: 37 -some are straw tempered average size: 4cm

- Quantity: 14 - dense with no visible inclusion - slipped - BRB with straw and sand temper - average size: 3-5cm

- Quantity: 19 - very small grits - somehow dense, - some small grits granulated on the surface, -slipped - average size: 0.55cm

- Quantity: 24 - dense, no visible inclusion - some very small grits visible - slipped - average size: 4

- Quantity: 13 - dense and no visible inclusion - black core - average size:4

- Quantity: 63 - dense and no visible inclusion - some gritty - very small grits - slipped - air voids - eroded surface - average size:1-6cm

- Quantity: 38 -dense -somewhat gritty -slipped -BRB with straw temper - average size: 2-5cm

- Quantity: 316 - somehow gritty - very small grits - dense and no visible inclusion - some straw tempered - highly fired -slipped -average size:1-7cm -Quantity: 105 - dense, no visible inclusion - eroded surface - very small grits visible - air voids - some visible incisions -average size: 3-7cm - Quantity: 32 - very small grits, - some are dense and no visible inclusion - slipped - air voids, - eroded surface, - some have incised decoration - average size: 2-4cm

- Quantity: 71 dense and no visible inclusion, -slipped -air voids -eroded surface - average size:1-4cm

Solid bands, large festoons, vertical bands and hatched rectangles

Incised combed designs on the jar shoulder

Bands, circles with hatches, large festoons, narrow bands and horizontal zigzags

Vertical and wavy bands

Horizontal bands, narrow bands, solid circles surrounded by medium size dots, nose lugs, fine dots (both interior and exterior) and narrow circles surrounded by a bold circle band

Solid bands

0

Flat base jar, open bowl and 0 close form jar

Beveled rim bowl and close 7 form jar

Hole mouth jar, deep bowl, hemispherical bowl, high neck jar, and band-rim jar (probably of Uruk period)

Hole mouth jar, flat base jar, carinated bowl and shallow 3 bowl

High neck jar, ring base jar, jar with finger indented bands, flat base jar, shallow 9 bowl, deep bowl, short neck jar and carinated bowl

Flat base bowl, small flat 0 base and plain flared rim jar

Flint

Flint

Light gray, gray, red, brown, light Flint brown

Light gray, brown

Light brown, brown, light gray

1.5-4

0.5-3

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

98

J12

J11

J10

J9

J8

J7

- Quantity: 22 - dense and no visible inclusion - air voids - eroded surface - average size:2-4cm

- Quantity: 31 - dense and no visible inclusion - black core, - eroded surface - average size:3cm

- Quantity: 21 -dense and no visible inclusion - black core - grits visible on some - slipped - average size 2-7cm

- Quantity: 17 - dense - black core -average size:25cm

- Quantity: 68 - dense and no visible inclusion - gray core - eroded surface, - creamy slip - average size: 1-4cm

- Quantity: 27 - dense and no visible inclusion - eroded surface average size:1-4cm

- Quantity: 84 - dense - some gritty, -very small grit visible, -slipped -very small sand granulate on the surface -average size 4-8cm - Quantity: 63 - Quantity: 40 - dense and no visible - very small grits inclusion - slipped - very small grits - air voids - slipped and wash - one Uruk sherd - one seems to have a - average size: 2-4cm decomposed paste may be due to firing - average size: 3-6cm - Quantity: 38 - Quantity: 163 - dense, - somehow gritty, - very small grits - eroded surface - air voids - very small sand visible - eroded surface, - air voids - slipped - average size: 1-5cm - average size: 4cm

- Quantity: 32 - dense and no visible inclusion - very small grits visible on the surface - slipped - average size 4-6cm

Hatches, bands and grids

Crosshatched designs

Vertical paralleled lines, goats

- Quantity: 97 - dense and no visible - Quantity: 40 inclusion -some gritty, - some gritty Solid bands, narrow horizontal lines -some dense with no - very small grits, and narrow bands (on the interior visible inclusion - eroded surface surface). - average size: 5cm - slipped - some very small grits granulated on the surface - average size:1-7cm Vertical bands, bold triangles, - Quantity: 221 - Quantity: 312 zigzags, fine dots, cross hatches in -some gritty - mostly gritty and quadrangles, paralleled curvy lines, - some dense high fired large dots on the jars shoulder, bold - gray core - very small grits circles surrounded by medium size - slipped - slipped dots, zigzag ladders, vertical bands, - BRBs -air voids scalloped circles, bold suspended - average size: 3-6cm - average size: 2-7cm elements and solid horizontal bands - Quantity: 29 - Quantity: 62 - dense but some grits - somehow gritty visible - very small grits -some very small grits - some dense with Solid triangles, hatched elements, (in black) granulate no visible inclusion fine dots and band on the surface - slipped - some BRB sherds - some incisions visible - average size: 3-5cm - average size: 2- 7cm

Round base bowl, basal carinated bowl, flat base, flaring neck jar and high neck jar

Small bowl

Large bowl, hole mouth jar and plain high neck jar

High neck jar

High rim jar, large bowl, shallow bowl, carinated bowl, small cylindrical bowl, ring base bowl, beveled rim bowl and hole mouth jar

8

2

7

6

6

High rim jar, deep bowl, flat base jar, ring base bowl, 3 shallow bowl and slightly carinated bowl

Flint

Flint

Gray, light gray

Gray, dull orange

Brown, light gray, gray

Flint

Flint

Flint

Light gray, gray, brown, light flint brown

Red, brown, light gray

Light gray

1-7

2-5.5

1.5-3

1.2-3

1-3

4

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

99

K19

K13

K11

K9

K7

K6

- Quantity: 30 - very small grits - some are gritty - average size:3-8cm

- Quantity: 63 - dense, no visible inclusion, - black core - eroded surface - average size: 3cm

- Quantity: 21 - dense and no visible inclusion - black core and straw tempered - eroded surface - average size: 4-8cm

- Quantity: 18 - very small grits visible - eroded surface, slipped - average size: 2-5cm

- Quantity: 4 - Dense - chaff tempered - average size: 3-6cm

- Quantity: 15 - dense, no visible inclusion - air voids - average size: 3cm

- Quantity: 21 - dense but very small grits visible - air voids - wash slipped - average size: 3-6cm

- Quantity: 11 - dense and no visible inclusion - eroded surface - average size: 2-4cm

- Quantity: 23 - Dense - gritty - chaff tempered - air voids - average size: 2-7cm

- Quantity: 63 - Dense, no visible inclusion - very small grits. - slipped - air voids - average size: 1-4cm

- Quantity: 19 - very small grits as temper, - some mica flakes visible - average size: 1-7cm

- Quantity: 11 - dense - somehow gritty - air voids - mica flakes visible - average size:2-4cm

- Quantity: 12 - Somehow gritty. - Dense and no visible inclusion - chaff tempered/ - average size: 2-6cm

- Quantity: 156 - somehow gritty - very small grits visible - some dense and no visible inclusion - eroded surface - average size: 1-4cm

- Quantity: 156 - somehow gritty - eroded surface - very small sand visible - average size 1-6cm

- Quantity: 49 - dense and no visible inclusion - gritty - very small sands - eroded surface - slipped - average size: 2-6cm - Quantity: 110 -dense, no visible inclusion, -slipped - some have very small grits as temper, - some are gritty - average size: 3-8cm

- Quantity: 56 - dense and no visible inclusion - washed body - average size:2-7cm

Medium size dots, zigzag ladders on the jar shoulders and reverse triangles with cross hatches

Large festoons and solid band around ring bases

Butterflies filled with hatches, hatched diamonds, animals (sheep and goat) and large festoon

Fine dots

Bands, fine dots around a curvy solid band (snake?)

Round rim jar and beveled rim bowl

High rim jar

Short neck jar, carinated bowl, ring base bowl and flat base jar

High neck jar, flat base jar and ring base bowl

Ledge rim jar

Flat base bowl, close form jar, ring base jar, carinated bowl, large bowl, cylindrical jar (of Uruk period?)

2

11

Flint

Light gray

Flint

Light gray, gray, Flint brown

Flint

Dark brown, brown, dark red, Flint light gray

Light gray, light brown, brown, Flint dark brown, black

Gray, brown

11 (including Light gray, one black, red Obsidian)

10

11

4

1-3

0.5-3.5

1-3

1-3.8

0.5-4

3

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

100

M2

L11

L10

L9

K22

- Quantity: 19 - somehow dense and no visible inclusion - very small grits visible on some slipped in pale yellow - average size: 3-8cm

- Quantity: 3 - dense, no visible inclusion - average size: 3-5cm

- Quantity: 6 - dense, no visible inclusion - some sherds seem to be Islamic with thin slip

- Quantity: 68 - almost gritty - very small grits visible - wash slipped - average size: 3-8cm

- Quantity: 28 - dense, no visible inclusion - eroded surface - average size: 3-5cm

- Quantity: 16 - dense, - some black core and eroded surfaces - some sherds have a thin slip - some straw tempered

- Quantity: 20 - Gritty - some dense and no visible inclusion - average size: 3-5cm

- Quantity: 7 - Dense, no visible inclusion - eroded surface - average size:2-4cm

- Quantity: 51 - dense, no visible - Quantity: 25 inclusion - dense - some very small - gritty black or red sands - slipped are granulated on the -BRBs: gritty and straw surface tempered - BRBs with straw - average size: 2-7cm and sand temper - average size: 2-9cm

- Quantity: 23 - gritty - small grits - wash slipped in pale yellow

- Quantity: 18 - Dense - somehow gritty - some white inclusions visible on the surface and the section - the color is changing to orange in some sherds - some are straw tempered - average size: 3-7cm - Quantity: 59 - Mostly gritty and washed surfaces - some dense bodies with no visible inclusion - air voids - slipped - Quantity: 604 - All material have washed surfaces - an example with very smooth creamy slip on a pale yellow and orange stuff. - There are some deformed sherds, which indicate over firing - some eroded texture - average size: 2-9 - Quantity: 110 - most of the sherds have washed and eroded surfaces -very small grits, - cracks on the surface, - a few are dense with no visible inclusion - slipped - average size: 2-7cm

Parallel bands in the interior surface of a large bowl

Bands, horizontal diamonds filled by hatches, hatches, solid small diamonds, narrow bands and fine dots

Solid bands, vertical lines, fine dots, small vertical bands, double solid circles encircling narrow circles, bands, solid vertical hourglasses, concentric rectangles, ladder, circles

Bands, solid painted areas, horizontal wavy bands, vertical separated frames with small horizontal dashes, large dots on the jars shoulder

Incised cross hatches

10

5

0

A handle, deep bowl, ring base jar, basal carinated jar, 4 shallow bowl and flaring jar

Ring base bowl, shallow bowl, deep bowl, narrow base jar, flat base bowl and small bowl

Short flaring neck jar, high neck jar, and slightly carinated bowl

Beveled rim bowl, band-rim jar, straight rim and thick 3 rim jar

Light brown, light gray

Dark brown, light gray, red, light gray

Light brown, light gray

Light gray

Flint

Flint

Flint

Flint

3

1.7-4

3

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

101

M24

M20

M12

M11

M10

- Quantity: 8 - dense but very small red and black grits granulated on the surface - chaff-tempered BRBs - average size: 3-7cm

- Quantity: 5 - Dense no visible inclusion - air voids - Very small grits visible on the surface, - black core - average size: 3-8cm

- Quantity: 218 - mostly eroded - some are dense with no visible inclusions - slipped - straw and grit tempered - average size: 2-5cm

- Quantity: 14 - gritty - very small grits - somehow slipped - cracks on the surface - average size 7cm

- Quantity: 3 - dense and no visible inclusion - eroded surface - air voids - gray core - average size: 5cm

- Quantity: 48 - dense and no visible inclusion - some sporadic sherds have straw tempered -straw voids visible on the surface - similar to Susa III stuff plain ware with a very thin white slip - some black core - straw and grit tempered - average size:2-6cm

- Quantity: 10 - dense, but very small grits visible - air voids - average size: 5cm

- Quantity: 71 - eroded surface - very small grits - some are dense, with no visible inclusion - average size: 6cm

- Quantity: 19 - dense, no visible inclusion - air voids on the surface - average size:4cm

- Quantity: 37 - dense - eroded surface - black core - some very small sand granulate on the surface - slipped - average size: 6cm

- Quantity: 497 - dense and no visible inclusion Bands, hatches, curvy bands, cross - slipped hatches, solid triangles, incised and - some with eroded impressed strips surface - straw and grit tempered - average size: 1-5cm

- Quantity: 11 - Dense - gritty - over heated bodies - average size: 4-11cm

Narrow bands, zigzag ladders and heavy wavy bands

Vertical hourglass or exaggerated butterflies, bands, vertical lines on the jar shoulder, grids and solid painted areas

- Quantity: 140 -there is an example of straw tempered body with wash slip - very small grits - air voids on the surface - average size: 3-7cm - Quantity: 21 - somehow gritty - a few sherds are dense with no visible inclusion - average size: 8cm

Grids, zigzag ladders, bands, stylized animals and narrow bands

- Quantity: 366 - gritty, - eroded surface - very small grits - some dense and no visible inclusion - average size: 6cm 14

6

1

Basal carinated bowl, high neck flared rim jar, thick rim jar, band-rim jar, flared rim jar, beveled rim bowl, 45 ledge rim jar, hole mouth jar with hatched strip on shoulder and groove rim jar

Small bowl, straight spout, narrow flat base jar and out curved rolled-over rim jar

Small jar

Bell shape bowl, basal 5 carinated bowl and small jar

High rim jar, deep bowl, close form jar, high flaring necked jar, flat base bowl, short rim jar, hole mouthed jar and jar with hatched strips (of Uruk period)

Light brown, brown, light gray, gray, red, dark red

Brown, light gray, black

Light brown

White, light brown, brown

Light brown, gray, light gray, white

Flint

Flint

Flint

Flint

Flint

1-4

3

2-5

2-7

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

102

O8

N18

N8

N6

- Quantity: 2 - gritty - small grits - wash slip in pale yellow - straw and grit tempered (in BRB)

- Quantity: 29 - mostly dense - some very small grits average size:6

- Quantity: 65 - Somehow gritty and less chaff temper bodies - eroded surface - air voids - average size:2-7cm

- Quantity: 7 - dense but very small grits visible - slipped - size: 3cm

- Quantity: 2 - sand - wash slipped

- Quantity: 3 - dense with no visible inclusion - straw void on the surface - average size:2-5cm

- Quantity: 42 - Dense - very small grits are visible in broken sections - black core - eroded surfaces - some have trace of large chaff air voids on the surface - some piece of cooking ware are in the collection. They have a relatively thin body, black color exterior and red color interior. Very small sands are granulated on both surfaces - chaff tempered - average size: 3-7cm

- Quantity: 2 - dense no visible inclusion - size: 4cm

High rim jar

- Quantity: 31 - dense and no visible inclusion - very small grits - slipped - eroded surface - size: 2-5cm

Solid painted areas

3 (including one Obsidian)

0

29 (including one Obsidian)

Flat base jar and small bowl 2

Slightly basal carinated bowl, flat base jar, flat base bowl, narrow ledge rim jar, straight neck jar, out turned expanded jar, rounded bevel rim bowl and conical spout

Zigzags, impressed strips

- Quantity: 45 - dense - very small grits and air voids - somehow gritty - very small grits - no visible inclusion, - slipped - this collection has presented some yellow ware with soft texture/ - average size2-7cm

A handle and beveled rim bowl

- Quantity: 102 - Mostly gritty - some chaff tempered bodies - thin slipped Cross hatches and convex node - in some the interior and decorations exterior surfaces have different colors - eroded surfaces - some dense bodies - average size: 1-7cm

Single bands, vertical narrow bands

- Quantity: 32 - dense and no visible inclusion - very small grits - air voids - eroded surface

brown, light brown, gray, light gray, dark red, black

Light gray

Light gray, black

flint

Flint

Flint

3

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

P21

O22

O9

103

- Quantity: 30 - Dense - eroded surfaces - some white inclusion visible - mica flakes visible - slipped - average size:2-5cm

- Quantity: 155 - gritty - small black sand granulate on the surface - slipped - some are dense and have very small sand - straw and grit temper - average size: 2-8cm

- Quantity: 19 - dense - eroded surface - gray core and some straw tempered - some very small sand (red and black in color) granulated on the surface - average size: 2-4cm

- Quantity: 76 - Dense and no visible inclusion - air voids. - Very small grits visible on the surface - black core - straw and grit temper - average size: 2-8cm

Fine dots, bands and incised cross hatches

Bands and solid painted areas

- Quantity: 292 - someone dense and high fired - gritty - very small grits Incised crossed bands and cross - straw tempered with hatches very small grits - some small black sands granulated on surface - straw and grit temper/ - average size:2-9cm

- Quantity: 28 - dense - no visible inclusion - someone has grits - wash slipped - some straw tempered - average size:1-5cm

- Quantity: 38 - mostly eroded and somewhat gritty - average size: 1-4cm

23

0

Open beaded rim bowl, flared rim jar with grooved lip, thick band-rim jar, round rim jar, beveled rim 80 (including bowl, flat base jar, deep one bowl, band-rim jar, ledge Obsidian) rim jar, basal carinated jar, ring base jar, incurved beaded rim bowl with heavy band-rim

Thick rim jar, flared rim jar, ring base jar, heavy flat base jar, ledge rim jar and beveled rim bowl

Carinated bowl and high rim jar

Gray, light gray, brown, light flint brown, red, black

Gray, light gray, brown, light Flint brown, dark brown, pink

Table 5.1: Description of Pottery and Chipped Stone Collected through the Controlled Sampling Survey at Tall-e Abu Chizan

- Quantity: 15 - dense but very small grit visible - eroded surface - average size:3cm

- Quantity: 6 - dense - no visible inclusion - air voids - average size:5cm

0.5-6

0.5-5

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Provisional date: Susiana d (LS1), Susiana e (LS2) and Uruk. Square ID No: D17 (1) GEC 76-79m. CEC:78m Natural Setting: attached to the Eastern Gully. The elevation implies difference between the gully and the stripped ridge in the southern sector. The surface soil was silty. Some small shrubs were visible in the gully cut along with patchy, low vegetation was scattered across the square. The nearby gully activity had dissected this area, which had since become a small hill distinct from the surrounding area. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: no visible cultural features in the southern corners. In the northern area a circular feature was visible that seemed to be a kiln or oven. The density of slag or wasters was low. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 1 piece of a greenish metal (copper?; 3 cm long, cylindrical with some twisted design on its surface). Four pieces of bone (unidentified), 9 pieces of slag (green interior and yellow exterior) and 2 fragments of spindle whorl (orange fabric and unpainted). Remarks: Overall, low artifact density Erosion has caused severe damage to the surface of the area. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Susiana d (LS1) and Uruk. Square ID No.: E11 (16) GEC: 77- 86 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located in the Stripped Ridges Zone, similar to square F12. Differences in elevation resulted in a steep slope in this square. Most of the surface materials were washed down from this square to the lower part of the site. Sampling: A recently exposed area in the middle of the square provided a chance to obtain a sample of in situ material. All materials were collected from a 2 x 2 square in that area. Surface Features: The whole area was gray to black in color (probable burnt by kiln activities or the like). The visible features included collapsed walls. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 fragments of bone (1-3 cm long) Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: E13 (10) GEC: 75- 82 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: upper part of this square was flat while on the western side the elevation dropped sharply to the 75 m contour line. No vegetation coverage in the upper part. The soil was remarkably light in color. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features.

Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 13 fragments of brick with an average length of 4-6 cm. The material was distributed sporadically all over the square. Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 Square ID No.: E14 (9) GEC: 78-82 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located a bit further from the center of the site and the main area of erosion. The vegetation pattern was similar to that in square F14. Sampling: Materials were collected in a 4 x 4 m square inside the area. Surface Features: Traces of gray to black surface (possibly a kiln or oven) was visible in this area. However, the outline of this feature was not clear. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, three pieces of slag with an average length of 3 cm Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Late Susiana and Uruk material (24 beveled rim bowl sherds but no other Uruk indicator). Square ID No.: E15 (5) GEC: 78-81 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in the upper part of the Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 1) with a relatively flat surface. Both sides of the square (east and west) were washed down by gully activity. The vegetation density at the bottom of the gully was dense due to the humid conditions there. In contrast the ground was bare in the upper elevation. The surface soil was white, soft and silty. Sampling: All materials were collected except for the material in the gully bottom. Surface Features: No visible cultural features. Sherds and Lithics were distributed all over the square. Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Middle to Late Susiana 1/ Susiana d and Uruk. Square ID No.: F9 (30) GEC: 75-82 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: focal point of this square, located in the Dewclaw Zone (Zone 2) was a large collapsed unit. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square inside the area. Surface Features: It seems that this pile of material was removed from the area around square F10. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 3 brick fragments including some larger ones with an average size of 6 and 1 cms in maximal dimension and slag fragment Provisional date: Late Middle and Late Susiana and Uruk. Square ID No.: F10 (27) GEC: 77-89 m CEC: 87m Natural Setting: located in Zone 1,the most eroded sector of the site. The upper part of the square had a relatively moderate slope while erosion had formed a steep slope 104

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations elsewhere in this square. No vegetation was visible in this square. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square inside the area. Surface Features: All areas were of gray to black color (possibly indicative of presence of ovens or kilns). Apart from several pieces of slag and a black surface, most of the original features here have not remained intact. In spite of the steep slopes in the square, material density was relatively high. Several diagnostic sherds, bones and stone hoes were found near each other at elevation of 87m. This collection of material was most likely a result of the washing down process. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stones, 4 brick fragments, 2 stone hoes, 7 pieces of slag and an unperforated roundel Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and Late Susiana material. Square ID No.: F11 (18) GEC: 82- 89 m CEC: 87m Natural Setting: soil was grayish black. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square in the middle of the square Surface Features: No specific features, but the area was heavily burnt Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 4 spindle whorls, 1 terracotta ring, 14 pieces of kiln or oven lining, 3 slag and 8 bone fragments Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and Late Susiana (the latter transported from upper elevations to this area). Square ID No.: F12 (13) GEC: 80-84 m CEC: 83m Natural Setting: located to the north of the Zone 1. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square in the west of the area. Surface Features: The major feature was a series of collapsed mud brick walls, which were distinctively recognizable even from a distance because of their dull orange color and signs of heavy burning along with thousands of potsherds and bones. The materials seem to have remained in their original context. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stones, 28 brick fragments, 1 stone ball, 2 spindle whorls, 4 bone fragments and 16 wasters Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana Square ID No.: F14 (8) GEC: 75-78 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: the northwestern section of this area was relatively flat and signs of erosion were infrequent. Vegetation density was low in the flatter areas and higher in the gully cut. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square in the gray area within F14.

Surface Features: Traces of a kiln or possibly a large oven were visible on the surface in the northwestern sector. Most of this area was gray to black in color. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 8 pieces of slag and an unperforated roundel Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana/Late Susiana and Uruk. Square ID No.: F17 (6) GEC: 75-78 m CEC: 75m Natural Setting: located at the southern end of Zone 1. The activities of the eastern gully have caused this area to look like a new terrace. Patchy vegetation covered this area. The ridges were low. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features. Surface Artifacts: Pottery Remarks: This area was most likely to have been eroded. The low density of material, much of which was transported from the upper areas, was due to the effects of water. Provisional date: Uncertain Square ID No.: G5 (40) GEC: 77-80 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: separated from the main body of the site by the Old Gully. Sampling: All materials were collected Surface Features: No visible features. Sporadic sherds. Surface Artifacts: Chipped stone, 1 chaff-tempered body sherd Provisional date: Uncertain. Square ID No.: G7 (35) GEC: 77-81 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located in the Low Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 3). Its western edge was on the western Old Gully cut and this has caused a steep slope at the west section of the square where material gathers during and after rain storms and as a result of weathering during the drier seasons. Sampling: Materials were collected from the 4 x 4 m square inside the area. Surface Features: The only visible feature seemed to be traces of a kiln. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 11 pieces of chaff tempered dull orange ceramic bodies (brick fragments), 1 unperforated roundel and 6 slag fragments. A remarkable number of sherds have eroded surfaces due to the combined effects of transportation and salinity. Provisional date: Late Susiana 1. Square ID No.: G10 (26) GEC: 77-88 m CEC: 86m Natural Setting: some of the western sector of this square, located in Zone 4, had been removed down to the point where square 30 was located. 105

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square inside the area. Surface Features: No visible features except for dense sherd scatters. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 9 brick fragments, 1 pale yellow spindle whorl and an unperforated roundel Provisional date: Late Susiana with LS1 sherds dominant. Square ID No.: G11 (19) GEC: 81-87 m CEC: 85m Natural Setting: in the southern-most sector of the Striped Ridge Zone (Zone 1). Sherd density is relatively high because of the slope and the washing down of sherds. Sporadic vegetation. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features, however, part of the area exhibited a gray to black color Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 34 strawtempered buff and red sherds, 2 slag fragments, 1 terracotta ring, 1 cylindrical terracotta object, 1 animal figurine Provisional date: predominantly Late Middle Susiana with some LS1. Square ID No.: G12 (14) GEC: 78- 84 m CEC: 84m Natural Setting: part of the Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 1). Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square inside the area Surface Features: No visible features. Most material was concentrated in the upper part of the ridge where the soils had been removed by water action thereby exposing the sub-surface artifacts. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 8 chaff-tempered fragments with thick plaster cover c. 4 -10 cm wide Provisional date: Late Susiana 1. Square ID No.: G13 (15) GEC: 77-83 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: a relatively flat ridge. Both sides of the square were dissected by erosion. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 square, in which the material was densely scattered. Surface Features: Traces of a gray to black area were visible. Some sporadic slag and chaff tempered body sherds suggested the existence of a kiln or oven. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 3 chaff tempered brick fragments with an average size of 5cm and 4 pieces of 1-3 cm slag. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and Late Susiana 1. Square ID No.: G14 (11) GEC: 75-80 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located in the Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 1) close to the Eastern Gully. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural feature

Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 8 pieces of chafftempered, pale yellow fragments of kiln or oven lining and 1 fragmentary, perforated roundel. The density of material in this square was low. Provisional date: Late Susiana period. Square ID No.: G16 (7) GEC: 75-78 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located in the Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 1) in the southeast of the site. Vegetation covered most of the square. There was a flat area in the northwest of the square with silty soil and low vegetation coverage. Sampling: Materials in the lower part of the square seemed to have been moved and re-deposited from the upper parts and therefore all the materials were collected from CEC 78. Surface Features: No visible cultural features Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana Late Susiana 1 and one sherd of Late Susiana 2. Square ID No.: H2 (46) GEC: 77-79 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located in the northwest end of the Low Stripped Ridges in Zone 3 and separated from the rest of the zone by the Old Gully cut. The soil was soft and no vegetation was visible. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible features. Only some sporadic sherds were visible. Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Uruk and Islamic. Square ID No.: H4 (41) GEC: 77-80 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located in Zone 3, separated from the main part of the site (cf. G5). Most of the square was flat. Sampling: All material was collected Surface Features: Islamic Qanat in the north of the square. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stones, 2 orange/pale red brick fragments and one piece of glass (probably Islamic) Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and some Islamic probably related to the Qanat. Square ID No.: H6 (36) GEC: 78-80 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located in Zone 3, beside the Old Gully. The upper surface of the square was relatively flat and bare. Sampling: Materials were collected from the 2 x 2 m square inside the area. Surface Features: No visible features except for a concentration of sherds and gravel, which seemed to be in situ). Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 brick fragments 106

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and Uruk. Square ID No.: H7 (37) GEC: 79-81 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in the Low Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 3). Sampling: Materials were collected from the 4 x 4 m square inside the area where kiln wasters were densely scattered. Surface Features: Dense and concentrated distribution of sherds, slag and wasters mostly on the top of the ridge. These features appeared to relate to the remains of a kiln. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 23 pieces of densely scattered slag fragments and one unidentified object Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: H8 (33) GEC: 80-83 m CEC: 82m Natural Setting: located to the east of Zone 3 (Low Stripped Ridges), moderately flat. Ephemeral vegetation densely covered this square. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: A relatively large area with gray soil. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 7 orange/pale red brick fragments Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: H10 (25) GEC: 77- 87 m CEC: 85m Natural Setting: located in Zone 4, variation in elevation c. 10 m. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 square inside the area. Surface Features: No visible features except for a high density of sherds and gray-colored surface. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 18 brick fragments, 1 terracotta ring, 1 unidentified object, 1 spindle whorl and 1 gypsum fragment. Some pottery shows evidence of disintegration. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: H11 (20) GEC: 81- 84 m CEC: 82m Natural Setting: located in the Moderate Slope Zone (Zone 4). The density of material in this square was remarkably low. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square inside the area Surface Features: No visible cultural features. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 1 painted spindle whorl Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana Square ID No.: H14 (12) GEC: 57-81 m CEC: 80m

Natural Setting: located in Zone 1 in the southeastern part of the site; highly dissected as a result of erosion. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible cultural features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, 6 chaff-tempered sherds and one spindle whorl Provisional date: date uncertain. Square ID No.: I6 (42) GEC: 79-81 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in the middle of the Low Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 3). Sampling: All material was collected Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, 2 orange/pale red chafftempered body sherds, 1 terracotta ring and 1 piece of glass (probably late historic or modern) Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and possibly Uruk. Square ID No.: I7 (38) GEC: 79-81 m CEC: 81 Natural Setting: located in the Low Stripped Ridge Zone (Zone 3). The Old Gully bed separated this square from the neighboring one. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features except for densely scattered sherds. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 15 pieces of chaff tempered pale yellow and orange bodies with the average size of 2-8 cm, 4 unperforated roundels and 3 slag fragments. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Late Susiana 1, Terminal Susa A or Early Uruk. Square ID No.: I10 (29) GEC: 79-83 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located in Zone 4. Some sinkholes, caused probably by the erosion of the Eastern Gully, were visible in the eastern sector of the square. Sampling: All materials were collected Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 6 brick fragments Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: I11 (21) GEC: 79-84 m CEC: 82m Natural Setting: located in the Deep Gully Zone (Zone 5), sporadic gravel visible on the surface. Very patchy vegetation coverage. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery and 4 brick fragments. White plaster is visible on one of the fragments. An example of attaching clay near the exterior rim of the vessel has been noticed in this collection (Fig. 5.16). Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and one Uruk sherd. 107

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Square ID No.: J7 (39) GEC: 80-82 m CEC: 82 Natural Setting: located in the Moderate Slope Zone (Zone 4). In the northern part of the square the soil was remarkably soft, and rain had caused extensive erosion. Sampling: A 2 x 2 square at CEC was selected and all material gathered Surface Features: No visible features. The cultural deposits were more concentrated in the northern part of this square. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 7 chafftempered dull orange body sherds, a slag fragment and an unidentified object. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: J8 (34) GEC: 78-82 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located in the Moderate Slope Zone (Zone 4), a relatively flat area with sporadic, dense vegetation. Sampling: Materials were collected from the 4 x 6 m square inside the area. Surface Features: No visible features. Large exposures of artifactual material on the surface. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 5 slag fragments Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Late Susiana 1 and Uruk.

Fig. 5.16: Lump of Clay attached to the Exterior Rim of Vessels. Square ID No.: I21 (61) GEC: 75-79 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: Cf. K19. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Uruk. Square ID No.: J6 (43) GEC: 80-82 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: the continuation of the Moderate Slope Zone (Zone 4), relatively flat at the eastern corner of Zone 3. The sloping area of the square is covered by the vegetation but the soil was bare and salty in the upper part of the area. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, 4 chaff-tempered orange to pale red ceramic body sherds Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana.

Square ID No.: J9 (32) GEC: 78-82 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located at the western edge of the Deep Gully Zone. There were some small hillocks away from the site that were heavily dissected by the gully activities. On the top of these hills, there were several areas that were covered densely by cultural material. An example of the tunneling erosion process was visible in this square (Fig. 5.17). Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 m square inside the area. Surface Features: Sherds were densely scattered in three separate areas in the square. Some fragments of slag and some over-fired sherds were among the collection. It is likely that the area was associated with a kiln or oven. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 5 chaff-tempered sherds (fragments of a possible kiln structure), 4 slag fragments, 1 spindle whorl and 1 unidentified object Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and Uruk. Square ID No.: J10 (28) GEC: 77- 81 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located in Zone 5. Its southern edge was affected by the Eastern Gully. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 spindle whorls Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana.

108

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Surface Features: No visible features. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 4 brick fragments with dull orange fabric, 1 metal object (copper) and 1 slag fragment. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Late Susiana (?) and Uruk. Square ID No.: K6 (44) GEC: 80-82 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: Cf. square J6. Sampling: All materials were collected Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 5 pale orange brick fragments Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Uruk and Islamic (?).

Fig.5.17: An Example of the Tunneling Erosion Process at Square J9 Square ID No.: J11 (22) GEC: 76-81 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in Zone 5. The vegetation cover was dense in the upper area. In the lower section, at about 77 -78 m, the gully cut created several holes and a tunnel. At 76 m the whole area had been washed away by recent erosion. Sampling: All materials were collected. The density of material was low in this square. Surface Features: No visible features. Some sporadic pebbles were distributed on the surface. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 brick fragments with dull orange fabric and 1 slag fragment. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and Uruk. Square ID No.: J12 (58) GEC: 76-81 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located to the west of the East Gully but not directly affected by erosion. Overall, it has a slight slope with no visible dissection. Small plants were scattered on the surface. Sampling: All material was collected.

Square ID No.: K7 (45) GEC: 80-82 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in Zone 4 and influenced by the erosion in the Eastern Gully, hence the eastern part of this square had a steep slope towards the gully cut. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 square inside the area. Surface Features: A kiln with several wasters and slag. A gray to black surface was visible in the slope towards the gully cut. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 4 dull orange brick fragments and a spindle whorl Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and Uruk. Square ID No.: K9 (31) GEC: 76- 81 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located in the western edge of the Deep Gully Zone. The eastern part of the square was completely removed by the gully cut and several sinkholes were visible. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square inside the area. Surface Features: dense sherd scatter and small stone and gravel accumulation. The soil color in this area was gray. Surface Artifacts: chipped stone, 7 pieces of chafftempered orange, red and dull orange body sherds. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: K11 (24) GEC: 75- 80 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: Cf. square K13. The average size of the gravel was about 3-7cm. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 2 m square. Surface Features: The only visible feature was a spot in which a dense distribution of sherds, gravel and some brick fragments were distributed. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 14 brick fragments with dull orange fabric and an average length of 6 cm, one 2 cm long white shell 109

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: K13 (23) GEC: 75- 79 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located on a small hill beside the Main Gully in Zone 5. Fin Gravel was distributed on top of the square with an average size of 2 to 4 cm. They were watersmoothed with no sharp angles, possibly a consequence of the Qanat system near the site. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: Remains of a Qanat shaft were noted in the square. The density of flakes and stones was notable. Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: K19 (60) GEC: 76-81 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: the northwestern part of the square was dissected by erosion while the rest of the square was relatively flat. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, one slag fragment Provisional date: Uruk. Square ID No.: K22 (62) GEC: 75-77 m CEC: 76m Natural Setting: located in a relatively flat area, some signs of recent erosion in the northern part of the square. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Uruk. Square ID No.: L9 (52) GEC: 76-80 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located just to the west of the Main Gully. The eastern part of the square had been heavily Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features except for a Qanat shaft Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 43 dark brown brick fragments and 1 unidentified object Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: L10 (56) GEC: 77-81 m CEC: 78m Natural Setting: located to the east of the Main Gully in the Deep Gully Zone. The gully cut was deeper with well developed sinkholes Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: Two Qanat shafts were visible in the northwest corner and in the southern sector of the square. The northern one was largely collapsed. The density of sherds especially in the area beside the gully cut was high.

Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 1 unidentified object, 1 stone ball and 1 cylindrical clay object (an Uruk clay cone?) Provisional date: Late Susiana 1. Square ID No.: L11 (57) GEC: 76-81 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: Cf. square L10. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: An exposed Qanat shaft was visible. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 9 broken brick fragments and 1 unperforated roundel Provisional date: Late Susiana 1. Square ID No.: M2 (47) GEC: 79-80 m CEC: 80 Natural Setting: located at the northeastern end of the Low Stripped Ridges Zone. The soil was soft and no vegetation was visible. Sampling: All material was collected Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, 7 chaff-tempered brick fragments with pale yellow to dull orange fabric and 3 slag fragments. Erosion has caused some of the sherds to lose their diagnostic traits. Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: M10 (53) GEC: 79-81 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located in the Deep Gully Zone to the west of the Main Gully. This square was heavily dissected as the result of erosion. Low grass coverage was visible at the upper part of the square. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: A rounded feature was visible in this square. Scattered wasters and slag indicated that this feature was a kiln or oven. A quantity of collapsed similar material in the holes and new gullies that surrounded this square, imply that there are other kilns or ovens in this area as well, which have been destroyed by erosion. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 14 brick fragments, 3 slag fragments, 2 unperforated roundels and 1 unidentified object Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana and Uruk. Square ID No.: M11 (54) GEC: 77-81 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: Cf. square M10. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: A rounded feature – an oven or kiln along with some slag and waste around it was located in the northwestern part of the square. In the southern part of the square, a Qanat shaft, made of baked brick, was visible. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 chaff-tempered body fragments, 1 unperforated roundel and 1 unidentified object 110

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Provisional date: Late Susiana. Square ID No.: M12 (55) GEC: 77-80 m CEC: 77 Natural Setting: highly dissected by one of the eastern branches of the Eastern Gully, this had become more active since 2002 survey season. Many parts of the square were eroded and features such as Qanat shafts were collapsed. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: Except for a collapsed Qanat shaft, lined with stone, no other features were visible. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 2 unperforated roundels and 1 rounded stone Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: M20 (63) GEC: 75- 79 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: located near the Eastern Gully. The surface soil was soft and the northern part of the square was eroded. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 1 white marble vessel rim Provisional date: Uruk. Square ID No.: M24 (66) GEC: 81-85 m CEC: 83m Natural Setting: This square presented two landforms: a dissected, ridged and collapsed area and a flat terrain area. In the first area, the exposed sections showed alluvium deposits with no visible cultural material. In contrast in the second area (flat terrain) dense sherd scatters were prominent. The soil was soft and the vegetation density was low, probably due to the salinity of the soil. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible feature. Dense distributions of sherds and kiln wasters were scattered on the surface. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 63 slag fragments Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and Uruk, three Susa IV sherds and an Islamic sherd. Square ID No.: N6 (48) GEC: 81-83 m CEC: 82 Natural Setting: This square was located in the northern end of the Zone 4. There were some low ridges in the eastern part of the area. This feature might have happened as the result of the construction of the Islamic Qanat wells, one of which was exposed in the eastern part of the square. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: The density of material on the surface was very low. The only visible feature was the Islamic Qanat well. Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stones Provisional date: Late Susiana 1, Uruk and Islamic.

Square ID No.: N8 (49) GEC: 77-81 m CEC: 80 m Natural Setting: This square was located in the Deep Gully Zone (Zone 5). The main body of the gully was eroding rapidly towards the square from the south. In the 2002 reconnaissance survey around the site, this area was much more stable then the when visited during the CSS in 2005, when several Qanat shafts recorded in the earlier visit were no longer visible. All of them had either been eroded or obscured by degradation and aggradation. The gully cut created some valuable sections that showed at least this part of the site was not an occupational sector. Nevertheless, remains of kilns indicated that this area of the site was probably reserved for pottery making. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features. One Qanat shaft remains in this square. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 1 dull orange brick fragment, 1 highly polished, gray stone object (size: 8cm) and 4 unperforated roundels Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana, Terminal Susa A and Early Uruk. Square ID No.: N18 (59) GEC: 76-80 m CEC: 80m Natural Setting: located in the Uruk Zone. The whole area has been affected by the erosion of the Eastern Gully. Internal seasonal drainage systems have also changed the shape of the area. There were some slightly stretched ridges in the western part of the area and because of them differences in elevation were more evident in the western part of the Uruk zone than in the east. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 4 x 4 square at the kiln spot. A kiln was located on the edge of the ridge in the western sector of this smaller square. Surface Features: A kiln was visible in the western part of the square. The sherd density was high in this part and recent gully activities had largely exposed the sherds, lithics, backed bricks, numerous slag fragments and waste. The black burnt surface of this part was easily visible even from a distance. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 16 blackishgreen slag fragments Provisional date: Uruk Square ID No.: O8 (50) GEC: 79-82 m CEC: 81m Natural Setting: located in the Zone 4, cf. square N8. Sampling: All materials were collected. Surface Features: No visible features Surface Artifacts: Pottery, 2 brick fragments with dull orange fabric and 1 ceramic object Provisional date: Late Susiana and Uruk. Square ID No.: O9 (51) GEC: 81-82 m CEC: 82 m 111

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Natural Setting: located in the northwestern wings of the Deep Gully Zone. Remains of a Qanat shaft were visible in the northwestern corner of the square. The vegetation coverage was low. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features except for the Qanat shaft, made from heavily chaff-tempered, baked bricks. Surface Artifacts: Pottery Provisional date: Late Middle Susiana. Square ID No.: O22 (65) GEC: 78-79 m CEC: 79m Natural Setting: relatively flat. Vegetation coverage was low and the soil was soft and salty. Sampling: All material was collected. Surface Features: No visible features. Sherds were densely scattered in some areas. Surface Artifacts: Pottery and chipped stone Provisional date: Late Susiana 1 and Uruk. Square ID No.: P21 (64) GEC: 80-82 m CEC: 82m Natural Setting: a small plateau, in the middle of which were several small, eroded ridges. Sampling: Materials were collected from a 2 x 12 m square inside the area. Surface Features: 3 kilns were visible, each located on one of the ridges. Surface Artifacts: Pottery, chipped stone, 28 brick fragments and chaff-tempered body sherds, 132 slag fragments, 2 unidentified stone objects, 1 stone bowl rim of white marble, 1 clay sickle, 1 spindle whorl and a number of broken bones Provisional date: Early Uruk. Part Three- Excavations Introduction Two seasons of excavation were conducted at Tall-e Abu Chizan. The goal of our first season was to define the chronology of the site and to determine the nature of settlement in each cultural phase. Another aim was to adjust our research objectives and develop a strategy for excavation seasons over the ensuing years. Our first excavation campaign at the site began in January and continued until the middle of March, 2005. One 2 x 2 m trench (Area A) was opened and a section was cleared out (Area B) (Map 5.3). The second season of excavation began in January, 2006 and because of the weather condition it was terminated in February. The aims of this season were:

Extend the Area B section and open a 2 x 2 m trench beside it (Map 5.3) Open a trench in the area where the Uruk kilns were noted (area D) (Map 5.3) Methodology The system employed to record the excavated deposits was a layer and feature system. A total of 21 layers were recognized at Area A and numbered from top down with Area A-L1 being the uppermost and Area A-L 21 being the lowest layer above virgin soil. Each layer was distinguished on the basis of color, texture and cultural accumulations. These layers do not however, necessarily equate to specific structural features or period of occupation. Butzer suggested that five types of sediment contributed to the make-up of a tell. The first four result from the transportation of primary cultural deposits. The last type is natural (Butzer 1982: 87-90). Following this suggestion, at Tall-e Abu Chizan the cultural deposits were revealed after a very smooth scraping of the surface just under the very shallow surface soil layer. Individual units such as mud brick, mortar and plaster were recorded as features. Prehistoric buildings made of mud brick often have inclusions of sherds, stone, and occasionally plaster and organic refuse. As time passes, these different entities become modified through a variety of different processes, both natural and cultural. As noted by Kirkby and Kirkby (Kirkby and Kirkby 1976: 231232) these materials become transformed into secondary sediments. Thus, blending must always be considered in cultural deposits at ancient sites. This phenomenon can cause difficulties in differencing contexts, especially when the digging area only a 2 x 2 m trench. Therefore an effort was made to see archaeological fill as stratified deposits even when blending occurred, and special attention was paid to the floor surfaces in separating different layers and phases from each other. Measuring devices were employed to enable us to focus on the context in detail (in 40 x 40 cms) in order to record the location and specific information of each deposit, the spatial distribution of artifacts within it and detailed sampling information. The nature of the surface in each square was recorded along with the composition of the floor. Those units that represented several blended lenses – called “arbitrary layers” in this study- were treated in the same way as a natural layer.

Flecks Small Medium Up to 6 mm 6mm to 2cm 2cm to 6cm

To open one extended trench (Area C) in the south-central sector of the site where the gentle slope provided better conditions for broad, horizontal excavation (Map 5.3)

Large 6cm to 12cm

Table 5.2: Size terms used in this study to refer to cultural material found during the excavation.

112

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

Map.5.3: Topographic Map of Tall-e Abu Chizan, Showing the Location of the Squares Surveyed through the Controlled Sampling Survey, Excavated Areas and the Kilns at Area

The term “cut” was used to record those events when there was evidence of removal of material from a context. Such events could have happened during the occupation of the site, such as the digging of a posthole or the excavation of a burial pit. To distinguish between cultural phases, we relied on the pottery in each layer.

In the Area A, it was essential to document the ceramic and possibly architectural sequence of occupation at the site. All finds, including sherds, were numbered and triangulated in order to better understand the spatial distribution of all materials in this trench. D

The term “cluster” was applied to a group of artifacts like pottery, bone, lithics or a combination of different materials within such a unit. This facilitated the recording of the pattern of material distribution throughout the layer.

Area A This 2 x 2 meter trench was opened near the highest point of the site (Map 5.3; Table 5.3). The general aim in choosing this area was to investigate and establish the pattern of occupation and possible architectural remains at the highest point of the site, where the most reliable 113

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Location of Measurement Fixed reference point (the highest point) at Tall-e Abu Chizan The highest point of Area A The lowest point of Area A (virgin soil)

Elevation(m.a.s.l) 89.00m 88.08m 5.70m depth 82.23m

A

Table 5.3: Excavation elevation points in Area

Figure 5.18: Sherd density in Area

Stratigraphic Layers As noted above, a total of 22 layers were recognized in Area A (Fig. 5.19), from 22 (virgin soil) to 1 (latest). Area A-Layer 22 Extent: 1.5 x 1 m area with a thickness of at least 50 cm (-81.73 to -82.23) Layer Description: sterile, dull orange clay underlying the earliest occupation in Area A (layer 21); soft and sliceable with no inclusions. Cultural Phase: None (virgin soil)

Area A-Layer 21 Extent: 1.5 x 1 m area with a maximum thickness of 10 cm (-82.38 to -82.49) Layer Description: Consistency: loose, ashy deposit. The soil was relatively moist. Color: gray to green. Texture: clay, sand and silt but ash was dominant. Two narrow strips of silt lenses in the center and in the northeast corner of the trench were visible. Bedding: compound layering of different materials (mostly ash). The bedding of the layer was parallel and slightly sloping to the north Two small blades in light brown and gray, charcoal in small amounts and small bitumen fragments in black to dark brown were visible in the northeast corner of the trench. Post-Depositional Feature: Rodent holes were abundant. Two complete, medium size rodent skeletons were recovered. Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana A

chronological sequence would be identified. Initial surface survey had revealed a denser distribution of diagnostic sherds of different occupational phases here than in other parts of the site. The specific aim was to clarify the nature of the relationship between the Late Middle Susiana and Late Susiana 1 phases, which is still controversial due to the lack of stratigraphic evidence in the region. Another goal was to identify the earliest cultural occupation at Tall-e Abu Chizan. Surveys at site had suggested that there was no occupation prior to the Late Middle Susiana phase but only excavation could confirm this.

Area A-Layer 20 Extent: 1.5 x 1 m with a maximum thickness of 62 cm (-82.49 to -83.11) 114

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations bitumen pieces (Fig.5.28:15); large gray and light gray pebbles in; backed clay object (Fig.5.29:19) one large, dull orange baked brick. Post-Depositional Feature: Rodent holes were abundant across the surface and even in the balks (Fig. 5.20). Soil filling the rodent holes was relatively loose with small granulated balls. Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana

Fig.5.20: Rodent Holes Visible across the Surface and even in the Balks of Area A-Layer 20 Area A-Layer 19 Extent: 1.5 x 1m with a maximum thickness of 22 cm (-83.11 to -83.23 in the north and -83.33 in the south). Layer Description: Consistency: loose and ashy deposits. The soil is relatively moist. Color: gray and green Texture: clay, sand and silt but ash was dominant. Bedding: compound layered fine layers of different materials (ash). The bedding of the layers was wavy and inclined towards the northern end of the trench. It appeared that the layer was continuous across the trench but thicker in the south. Fills: Medium-sized animal bones; brown and light gray stone flakes; a white marble bowl (Fig.5.29:14), animal figurine (Fig.5.30: 6). Post-Depositional Features: some rodent holes in the eastern balk. Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana

Fig.5.19: Stratigraphy of Area

A

Layer Description: Consistency: A relatively moist, soft, friable layer. Color: dull orange at the eastern end and relatively light gray to gray in the northwestern Texture: clay and sandy deposits. Some very thin silt lenses were visible in the upper parts of the layer. Bedding: Generally parallel with some wavy silt lenses Small animal bones; one large (4 x 11cm), light gray to light brown stone tool (smoother/grinder); one small brown conical- piece of baked clay (Fig.5.28:36), small

Area A-Layer 18 Extent: 2 x1.25 with a maximum thickness of 2.25 m (-83.33 to -85.58). Layer Description: Consistency: A substantial mud brick structure (wall or platform, Feature no. 3) made this the thickest layer in Area A and was the earliest structural deposit of Late Middle Susiana date. Regular courses of mud brick held in place by grayish-orange mortar were clearly visible. It was not possible to measure the mud bricks because of their fragile nature. The upper part of the layer was relatively firm but the mud brick was hard and difficult to excavate. Color: Orange Texture: compact clay and silt

115

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Bedding: some very small green lenses were visible in the upper part of the layer. The general slope was towards the north. Fill: Small bitumen flakes; some medium to large-sized, gray or light gray pebbles; mud bricks were abundant. Feature: A mud brick wall (Feature 3) measuring (1.10 x 1.60 m). Post-Depositional Features: rodent holes were abundant, especially in the upper part of the layer. A considerable crack was visible in the northeastern and western parts of the trench, perhaps due to tectonic activity around the site (see under Site’s External Context) or because of movements in the Dewclaw Zone (see under Site’s Internal Spatial Organization) Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana Area A-Layer 17 Extent: 2 x1.5 m with a maximum thickness of 25cm (-85.58 to -85.80 in the north and -85.70 in the south) Layer Description: Consistency: soft in the upper part of the layer, otherwise compact. Color: Combination of different material and fills, postdepositional features such as rodent holes and thin lenses

have resulted in a diverse color spectrum ranging from dull orange to gray, green and black. Texture: silt, clay and compact clay (mud brick fragments). Bedding: a compact, white plaster floor with scattered sherds, vessels, objects on it. Material was lying in a visible slope to the north. Except for some areas with ash deposits there were no visible internal layers. All deposits seem to be heavily compressed and the layer itself was continuous (Fig 5.21). Fill: 20 medium blades and flakes in brown, light brown, brownish black, light gray, gray and white; bituminous objects and material (Fig.5.29:12); 3 cylindrical objects and several small and irregular flakes (Fig.5.28:30, also see Fig.A2.2); objects of baked clay including animal figurines (Fig.5.30: 7), terra-cotta implements (Fig.5.28:26), ornaments; slag and kiln wasters (5 small pieces); 1 piece of mother of pearl Cluster: A compact and dense accumulation of material mostly sherds and wasters (Cluster 7). Post-Depositional Feature: some rodent holes were visible. A crack was also apparent in the eastern balk of the layer near the northeast corner. Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana

Fig.5.21: Heavily compressed Deposits in Area-Layer 17

116

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Area A-Layer 16 Extent: 2 x1.5 m with a maximum thickness of 10 cm (-85.70-80 to -85.90-86.00) Layer Description: Consistency: compact layer of probable fragmented mud bricks or chineh. Color: greyish yellow Texture: clay and silt Bedding: this layer appeared to be concave. Deposits were more densely concentrated in two areas near the north and the south balks. The general trend of deposition was south to north and it was continuous. Fill: The center of the layer consisted of grayish-brown, sandy clay encircled by some broken pottery sherds; two medium brown and light brown blades; one animal figurine of dull orange clay (Fig.5.30:4), whose head is missing; one medium-size, rounded, light gray stone; one small brown ceramic disk; some fragmented bones; a piece of gray stone; burnt and backed clay objects (Fig.5.28: 13,14). Post-Depositional Feature: The aforementioned crack was visible in the eastern balk. Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana Area A-Layer 15 Extent: 2 x1.5 m with a maximum thickness of 15 cm (-85.90-86.00 to -86.20) Layer Description: Consistency: compact with several pieces of collapsed mud bricks. Color: Bright brown Texture: clay and silt Bedding: no internal layering, the overall slope was from south to north and continuous. Fill: Some sporadic, dispersed stones in the northern sector of the trench with very small charcoal and bitumen fragments. Baked clay objects (Fig.5.28:11) small buff spindle whorl (Fig.5.28:17), a small brown ball and a brown slingshot (Fig.5.29:5). Post-Depositional Features: Some rodent holes, the aforementioned crack in the eastern balk and a large crack in the western sector of the trench Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana Area A-Layer 14 Extent: 2 x1.5 m with a maximum thickness of 9cm (-86.26 to -86.35). Layer Description: Consistency: relatively firm Color: Orange Texture: silty Bedding: no internal layering was visible. The layer sloped from south to the north. Fill: A white small shell; a baked clay object (Fig.5.28:37), a small brown ball; one spherical bituminous object (Fig.5.28:9) and a broken bituminous vessel (Fig 5.22); two light brown blades; one small gray spherical stone (sling ball); small amount of charcoal fragments ; some gray pebbles Post-Depositional Feature: rodent holes were abundant.

Cultural Phase: Although some dot motif designs appear on the pottery of this layer, it still considered part of the Late Middle Susiana phase deposit. Area A-Layer 13 Extent: 2 x1.5 m with a maximum thickness of 53 cm (-86.35 to -86.88 in the north and -86.82 in south). Layer Description: Consistency: Some mud brick fragments and silt were present in this layer but it was relatively soft and easy to scrap. Color: dull yellow orange Texture: silt and clay Bedding: a very thin, soft green lens was visible in the upper part of the layer, which was associated with sherds, bones and charcoal or bitumen fragments. This lens was clearly visible in the eastern balk as a distinct area and continued to the southern and northern balks. The crack near the northeastern corner of the eastern balk ended in this layer. This layer was relatively flat and continuous. Fill: 12 small to medium blades and flakes in light brown, reddish brown, brownish black, light gray and white flint, one of which had some attached bitumen residue; ceramic and baked clay objects including a small, perforated ceramic of buff fabric and light brown paint ( Fig.5.28:34), a small backed clay ball (Fig.5.28:10), a small buff ceramic terra-cotta implement (Fig.5.28:23); small bitumen fragments; small amount of charcoal; medium to large mud brick fragments of dull orange and light brown color; some medium to large stones; one medium size reddish brown shell; one small to medium, greenish yellow slag fragment ; 7 medium to large chaff- tempered body sherds of dull orange color. Cluster: A few medium and large gray pebbles were recovered from the southern balk (Cluster 5). The space between these pebbles was filled with compact clay. The approximate dimension was 12 x 21 cm. The second cluster (Cluster 6) in this layer was a collection of large pottery sherds in the middle of the layer covering an area c. 100 x13 cm. Post-Depositional Features: some rodent holes Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana Area A-Layer 12 Extent: 2 x 2 m, with a maximum thickness of 15 cm (-86.82 to -86.97) Layer Description: Consistency: A relatively firm layer, with the deposit near the western balk being a bit softer and moister than the rest. A harder deposit, possibly consisting of collapsed mud bricks, was visible in the middle of the eastern balk. Color: Orange Texture: clay in the north and northwest, predominantly silt was in the eastern and southeastern part of the trench Bedding: No internal layering was visible. The eastern part of the trench contained a mixture of soft and hard material, most likely due to some irregularly placed mud bricks. The layer was flat and continuous. Fills: irregularly shaped mud bricks; 1 medium sized brown flint blade; objects made of baked clay including: 1 117

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.22: A Broken Bituminous Vessel Recovered from Area A-Layer 14

tag-shaped object, with two very small holes (fig.5.29:18) - most likely for passing string through, 2 medium-sized slingshots (Fig.5.29:4,10) made of dull brown and dull orange clay, 2 medium-sized , unidentified baked clay objects (Fig.5.28:37), of a dull brown and dull orange color, one of which may have been used as a seal (Fig.5.29:17), and one animal figurine of dull orange color (4 x 4 cm) (Fig.5.30:2). Bitumen was abundant in both small and large sizes. The interior of a relatively coarse body sherd whose was covered with bitumen, perhaps to prevent the leakage of a liquid. Small amounts of charcoal were also abundant. Four pieces of medium-sized , light yellow ceramic wasters and slag, a medium-sized, broken, yellow terra-cotta ring (Fig.5.28:31); some medium-sized, chafftempered ceramic body sherds of a dull yellow color and 1 piece of white and brown gypsum.

Cluster: 3 vessels (Cluster 4) were located near each other in the northeastern corner of the trench (see below) Post-Depositional Features:Cultural Phase: Late Middle Susiana material was rare, some Susiana d (LS1) diagnostics Area A-Layer 11 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 8 cm (-86.97 to -87.05) Layer Description: Consistency: the deposit was firm in the southeastern corner and softer in the northern part of the trench. Color: Orange in the softer area and dull brown in the harder area. Texture: A large circle of concentrated silt formed a distinctive patch in the northern area but in the southern

118

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations corner of the trench the density of sherds and most likely mud brick fragments has made the deposit’s texture more condensed and firmer. Bedding: two internal lenses with soft, reddish brown deposits were visible in the southeastern corner of the layer. In the rest of the layer the bedding was uneven. Fill: 7 medium-size blades of brown, light brown and gray flint; 2 small brown and white gypsum pieces; small bitumen fragments; 3 small metal pieces, green to brown; a terracotta implement (Fig.5.28:20) a miscellaneous ceramic object (rubber?); some irregular, possibly collapsed, mud bricks. Post-Depositional Feature: Some insects’ nests were visible in parts of the layer and the soil color in these areas was gray or black. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana 1(see Absolute dating for this layer in appendix 6) Area A-Layer 10 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 30 cm (-87.05 to -87.30 in north and -87.35 in south) Layer Description: Consistency: upper part of the layer was relatively soft and moist. The soil was ashy, especially in the area between the eastern and southern balks. The northern part of the layer was relatively dry and firm. Color: Greyish brown in the southern part of the trench and dull yellow in the northern part. Texture: clay and silt Bedding: multiple, fine green lenses (15 x 30cm wide) starting in the upper part of the layer and running from south to north Inclusions: Agglutinated salt Fills: fragmented animal bones (see Appendix 4 ); 5 medium-sized blades of light brown, brown, and light gray flint; 1 white marble (gypsum) miniature vessel rim ; 5 small, light brown and white, shell fragments; a large lump of red ochre; small fragments of bitumen; some chaff-tempered, a Terracotta implement (Fig.5.28:19) dull orange body sherds ; 1 unidentified, triangular object (4 x 2cm); some small and medium-sized, irregular gray stones Post-Depositional Feature: rodent holes and very small silt lenses Cultural Phase: Susiana d/ Late Susiana 1 Area A-Layer 9 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 10 cm (87.30 N - 87.35 S bottoms and 87.40 N- 87.45 S top). Layer Description: Consistency: loose, fragmenting and distributed across the trench. Color: Orange Texture: silt Bedding: no internal layering was noted except for some very thin lenses of silt near the surface of the layer Inclusion: Multiple charcoal flecks and white spots. Post-Depositional Features: some rodent holes, filled with a gray deposit that was different than the rest of the layer, near the northern balk.

Area A-Layer 8 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 7 cm (87.40 N- 87 45 S bottom and 87.45 N- 87.52 S top) Layer Description: Consistency: The northern side of the layer was soft and less moist than the southern which was more compact. Color: bright brown in the southern part of the trench and orange in the north Texture: silt and clay Bedding: fine, compact lenses in the northern part of the trench and ash and clay lenses in the southern part. The bedding of the layer was wavy with a general south to north slope. Post-Depositional Features: A rodent hole in the southern part of the layer. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana 1 or 2 Area A-Layer 7 Extent: 2 x 2m with a maximum thickness of 8 cm (87.45 N- 87.52 S bottom and 87.53 N- 87.57 S top). Layer Description: Consistency: a conglomeration of sherds, small pebbles, and animal bones. It was moist, soft and easy to excavate. Color: bright brown. The southwest corner was grey. Texture: silt and clay Bedding: wavy. The general slope was from south to north and the layer did not seem to be continued. Fills: Medium-sized, light brown, baked clay lumps; one blade of light brown flint; large amount of badly preserved animal bone (mostly mandibles); small to large light-gray to gray pebbles stones , blackened by fire Feature: A 35 x 63 cm, 16 cm deep pit (Feature 2) filled with bones, sherds, small pebbles, charcoal and bitumen Cultural Phase: Late Susiana 1or 2 Area A-Layer 6 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 8 cm (87.53 N- 87.67 middle- 87.57 S bottom and 87.57N- 87.75 middle and 87.63 S (top). Layer Description: Consistency: A lens of different deposits was found this layer. The layer was separated from layer 7 by a very thin, silty lens, including small but abundant fragments of moist charcoal and bitumen. The eastern part of the layer was relatively firm. The western part had a softer texture. Color: reddish brown in south western and north western corners and elsewhere brown Texture: silt and clay Bedding: Apart from the lens adjacent to Layer 7, the rest of the layer was a mixture of different materials such as ash, charcoal and bitumen. The layer was moist with continuous, wavy bedding. Fill: Poorly preserved animal bones were scattered all over the layer. A lump of bitumen (2 x 3 cm); some mediumsize, chaff-tempered, body, sherds of a pale yellow color (probably oven lining); medium-sized, gray pebbles; and charcoal fragments were present. In addition, small bitumen fragments were relatively abundant.

119

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Cluster: a 22 x 38 cm cluster of pebbles and sherds (Cluster 3) was recovered in the northern sector of the layer. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana Area A-Layer 5 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 21cm (87.57N- 87.75 middle and 87.63 S bottom and 87.67N87.93 middle, and 87.85 S top). Layer Description: Consistency: several collapsed mud bricks have made parts of this layer relatively firm. The layer was damp and as a result the mud bricks disintegrated easily Color: dull brown Texture: silt and clay Bedding: two different types of layering were present: one was hard with no striations. It was mostly composed of mud brick/chineh fragments; the second consisted of ashy lenses with stones, sherds and other artifacts. The bedding of the layer was wavy with a general northward slope. Except for the large mud brick fragments the rest of the deposit was quite moist. Inclusions: agglutinated salt Fill: Several fragmented animal bones with one relatively well preserved piece (see Appendix 4); objects made of baked clay including some irregularly shaped items and sling balls, a conical painted object and a broken spindle whorl fragment; 5 small to medium blades and 3 flakes in gray, light gray, brown, light brown and cream flint; abundant small charcoal and bitumen pieces; small to large gray and black pebbles. Cluster: In the southeastern corner of the layer was a compact cluster (Cluster 2) of sherds and pebbles. This extended into the eastern balk. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana Area A-Layer 4 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 13 cm (87.67N - 87.93 middle, 87.85 S bottom and 87.75N88.05 middle and 87.89S top) Layer Description: Consistency: soft and moist Color: reddish brown Texture: silt and clay Bedding: This fine layer was wavy and was divided by a later cut into two parts (north and south). Inclusions: agglutinated salt Fill: small to medium-sized fragmentary animal bones; one small, irregularly shaped object of baked clay; some medium to large black and gray pebbles Cluster: A 30 x 40 cm cluster of medium to large black and gray pebbles (Cluster 1) was located in the northeastern corner of the trench. Post-Depositional Features: a grave cut in the northeast corner of the trench. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana Area A-Layer 3 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 10 cm (87.75N- 88.05 middle and 87.89S bottom and 87.85N88.15 middle and 87.99 S top).

Layer Description: Consistency: friable but moist Color: bright reddish brown Texture: silt and clay Bedding: fine deposit. The layer was wavy and divided by a later cut to two parts (north and south). Inclusions: agglutinated salt crystals Fill: Some fragmentary animal bones; one irregularly shaped piece of baked clay. Features: One pit (Feature 1) cut the layer. It contained a few burnt pebbles, some large jar fragments and ash. The eastern part of the pit continued into the eastern balk. Post-Depositional Feature: a grave cut in the northeast corner of the trench. Area A-Layer 2 Extent: 2 x 2 m with a maximum thickness of 8 cm (87.85N- 88.15 middle and 87.99 S bottom and 87.89N88.23 middle, and 88.02 S top). Layer Description: Consistency: relatively moist and soft; the soil in the southern part of the trench was softer than in the north. Color: dull reddish brown Texture: clay and silt Bedding: fine lenses in the northern part of the trench. In the south, there were some very thin black and white lenses. The layer was wavy and divided by a later cut into two parts (north and south). Fills: One small irregularly shaped object of baked orange clay; small amounts of charcoal; some medium-sized, burnt gray pebbles; some large stone fragments in the northeast corner of the trench (related to the Islamic grave). Post-Depositional Feature: an Islamic grave in the northeastern corner of the trench Cultural Phase: Late Susiana Area A-Layer 1 Extent: 2 x 2m with a maximum thickness of 45 cm (87.85N- 88.23 middle, and 88.02 S bottom and 88.05N, 88.68 middle, and 88.11S top) Layer Description: Consistency: soft and relatively moist Color: Bright reddish brown Texture: silt and clay Bedding: A fine lens across the entire surface of the trench. In the middle and near the eastern balk, there was a cut filled with the same material which continued into layers 2, 3, 4, 5. The general slope of the layer was south to north. Fill: 2 medium-sized, highly fragmentary animal bones; 4 small to medium blade and flake fragments of white, gray and brown flint; 5 medium-sized, gray pebbles; 4 medium to large baked brick fragments of an orange color; some large stones sheets in the northeastern corner Post-Depositional Features: an Islamic grave cut into the northeast corner of the trench. Cultural Phase: Late Susiana

120

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Area B The erosion of the deep gully has affected the eastern side of the site, particularly the Moderate Slope Zone, resulting in the exposure of long sections. Area B is located at the western end of this vast exposure (Map. 5.2) and was initially selected to be cleaned for stratigraphical purposes. In 2005, a 2 x 2m section was cleaned, showing that this area contained a large and rich Late Middle Susiana pit. Due to the richness of the section in terms of animal bones and burned layers as well as the severe threat of ongoing erosion, a 2 x 2m trench was opened in 2006 behind the cleaned section. The highest point in Area B was 3.05 m lower than the site’s fixed datum point (Table 5.4). Excavation in Area B revealed a succession of nine layers and several lenses (Fig. 5.23), which will be described briefly as follows: Area B-Layer 9 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of more than 55 cm Layer Description: Consistency: soft and moist Color: Reddish orange Texture: Silt and clay Bedding: naturally overlapping lenses of silt and clay Inclusion: sporadic, small to medium-sized, rounded gray pebbles Cultural Phase: None (virgin soil)

Area B-Layer 8 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 20 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: relatively soft and moist Color: Light gray Texture: Ash, clay and silt Bedding: This layer had a concave shape. It seemed that the layer started from the west balk but was separated by some compact silt and clay lenses from the west balk. Inclusions: agglutinated salt crystals Fills: Small to medium-sized gray pebbles and sporadic sherds, mostly plain, large, buff ware fragments. Area B-Layer 7 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 50 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: This was a soft and relatively moist layer with some compacted and relatively firm lenses, mostly in the western side of the layer. Color: Yellow gray Texture: more silt and less clay combined with ash Bedding: This was a continuous layer with distinct lenses of water-laid silt of irregular shape, and lenses of compact silt and clay. A very thin lens of charcoal and ash was visible in the southwestern corner of the layer. Inclusion: Salt crystals Fills: Some sherds – both plain and painted - all buff ware. Some small to medium-sized gray pebbles and some small charcoal flecks

Location of Measurement

Absolute Height (m.a.s.l) 89.00m 85.95m 3.20m depth 82.75m

Fixed reference point (the highest point) at Tall-e Abu Chizan Top of Area B Lowest Level (the virgin soil)

B

Table 5.4: Excavation elevation points in Area

B

Fig.5.23: Stratigraphy of Area

121

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Area B-Layer 6 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 20 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: This is a firm and less moist layer of compact silt and clay. Some water-lain silt lenses were noted in the western part of the trench. Color: Reddish orange Texture: Compacted silt and clay Bedding: Some water-lain silt lenses have interrupted the continuity of this layer across the trench. Inclusion: Composed salt and clay nodules Fill: Some sporadic sherds of buff ware and small to medium-sized gray pebbles

of animal bones, 481g of which came from the charcoal and ash lens, two terracotta implements (Fig.5.28:21,22), were recovered. Some fragmentary mud bricks, medium to large-sized gray pebbles, charcoal and bitumen flecks were also recovered. Area B-Layer 4 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 45 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: compacted silt, charcoal and clay. Some lenses of water-lain silt and ash and clay were also visible. Color: Light Gray Texture: silt and clay. Bedding: A series of continuous lenses. Fill: This layer contained the largest number of sherds recovered in Area B (Table 5.5). Animal bones were abundant (567 g). Spindle whorls (Fig.5.28: 1,3), sling shot (Fig.5.29:6), terracotta implement (Fig.5.28:25), part of an animal figurine probable the horn (Fig.5.28:42), animal head a theriomorph (Fig.5.39:1) similar to Bakun A, Langsdorff and McCown 1932. Pl.18:17, pottery shovel (?) (Fig.5.29:13) Some small to medium-sized gray pebbles were also found.

Area B-Layer 5 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 62 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: lenses of grayish silt with angular white inclusions, water-lain silt, charcoal, and ash. It was relatively soft and less moist. Water-lain silt had the same consistency as the rest of the layer but the grayish silt layer was firmer due to the density of artifactual material such as sherds and mud brick fragments. The charcoal and ash lens was firm. Color: Bright Brown Texture: silt and some clay Bedding: Several lenses crossed this generally concave layer, mainly water-lain ones that overlapped each other. Fill: The density of sherds and other material such as bone was considerable. A large plain ceramic basin fragment with deformed rim was recovered in the southeastern corner of the trench. All sherds were buff. Over 795 g Layer

Type

Rim

1

Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted Plain Painted

8 5 4 3 14 8 15 3 5 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Neck 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Area B-Layer 3 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 50 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: A thick layer of burnt, reddish clay and various lenses of water-lain silt, grayish silt, charcoal and ash. The layer was not very moist. Color: Dull brown Texture: silt and clay

Body Small 58 5 22 47 226 12 330 12 179 5 62 1 11 1 17 0 0 0

Large 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 5.5: Distribution of sherds in Area B 122

Base

Total

1 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

71 11 29 50 247 20 347 17 197 6 68 3 11 1 17 0 0 0

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Bedding: the layer was continuous but interrupted by different lenses. Fill: sherd density was high. There was an accumulation of mud brick fragments in the center of the trench. Bones were fragmentary and not numerous. Some small to medium-sized gray pebbles and charcoal flecks were also noted. Area B-Layer 2 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 30 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: A relatively soft and moist layer. Color: Brownish Gray Texture: Clay, silt and ash Bedding: a continuous layer with a few small water-lain silt and ash lenses. Fill: few sherds, two bone fragments, a perforated roundel (Fig.5.28:33), a broken slingshot (Fig.5.28:41 and an animal figurine (Fig.5.30:5). A few small and mediumsized gray pebbles, as well as small charcoal and bitumen flecks were recovered. Area B-Layer 1 Extent: 2.2 x 2.2 m with a maximum thickness of 45 cm. Layer Description: Consistency: Soft and moist Color: Yellow gray Texture: weathered silt and clay Bedding: Except for an ashy lens near the southern and eastern balks, the rest of the layer showed no internal striation. Inclusion: Some charcoal flecks, decomposed by moisture Fills: sherds, a terracotta implement (Fig.5.28:24) and one spindle whorl (Fig.5.28:2). Area C Areas A and B were actually chosen before performing the Controlled Sampled Survey (CSS). Areas C and D were chosen after the CSS revealed that there were specific activity areas for pottery or stone tool workshops as well as areas that seemed to date to particular phases. Areas C and D were selected to clarify the extent of Late Susiana and Uruk deposits at Tall-e Abu Chizan. During the CSS, a relatively clear area with Late Susiana diagnostics was identified in the southwest of the Moderate Slope Zone. Compared to the rest of the site (except for the Uruk sector), this area was interesting since it seemed to demonstrate that Late Susiana occupation was more concentrated on the highest point of the site than elsewhere.

This recalled what Hole had postulated on the evidence of “status” in the Susiana settlement data. According to him “… certain sites [in this case Qabr Sheykheyn] had unusual buildings on their north ends and …… they might be “Khan’s houses,” using an analogy with modern times where local leaders sometimes set their houses apart from the village either spatially or vertically” (Hole 1987c: 88; cf. Flannery 1999:58). Additionally, no evidence of post-Late Susiana occupation was recognized in this area, and kiln waste and slag were also found here during the CSS. Thus, it seemed probable that this area might provide valuable evidence if excavated horizontally. A 5 x 9 m trench was therefore opened at the southernmost end of this area of densely scattered Late Susiana material (Map. 5.2; Table 5.6). Arbitrary units of 10 cm were employed in Area C to facilitate the careful recovery and recording of both architectural features and objects. All excavated soil, except for that containing carbonized material, was sifted through a 5 mm mesh dry sieve. All light deposits (ashy and carbonized deposit) were retained for flotation. Another priority was to recover faunal and floral samples in association with distinct architectural units, if possible. Twelve days of excavation in Area C revealed a poorlypreserved complex of kilns, Islamic burials and mud brick walls. Unfortunately, frequent severe rain prevented us from digging deeper below the surface (layer 1). Thus, we had to leave Area C without achieving our initial goals. Below is a general description of the excavated surface of Area C. To describe the surface we employed a grid system (Similar to Hole 1977: 43 and Pl.26.f) with numeric order in the horizontal axis and alphabetical order in the vertical axis. Each square measured 1x1 m (Fig. 5.24). Description of the Excavated Area in the Grid System A1. Most part of this square was filled by ash and silt. There was a large lump of melted mud brick in the western corner. Part of burial 1 (Feature 2; for description of features see below) was located in this square. A2. An ashy lens had extended into this square from the south west. A burial cut (Feature 2) had disturbed most of the square. Traces of Feature 4 were visible in the south eastern corner of the square.

Location of Measurement Fixed reference point (the highest point) at Tall-e Abu Chizan The highest point of Area C The lowest point of Area C

Absolute Height (m.a.s.l) 89.00m 88.63m 63cm depth 88.00m

Table 5.6: Excavation elevation points in Area C 123

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.24: 1x1 m Squares at Area

A4. Most of this square was covered by traces of a mud brick wall. It had a hard surface. The outlines of the mud bricks were clearest in the northeastern corner of the square. Finds: perforated roundels (Fig.5.28.32), a conical piece of backed clay (Fig.5.28.39), backed clay (Fig.5.30:8). A5. Part of Feature 4 was located in this square. The rest of the square was covered with soft, bright reddish-brown soil. Some water-lain silt had intruded into the square. B1. This square was mostly filled with ash. The stones of a second burial cut (Feature 11) appeared in the eastern part of the square. Some pieces mud brick was also present. B2. The second burial cut (Feature 11) occupied most of this square.

B3. Feature 11 occupied most of the northwestern corner of the square. The rest of the square was taken up by Features 4 and 5. Several chineh or mud brick elements formed a circle. In the southeastern corner, the cut section enabled us to see Feature 4 (mud brick wall), showing that it was at least 43 cm high. C

A3. A small part of Feature 2 extended into this square from the west and cut Feature 4. It was difficult to assess the mud brick wall from the eastern section of Feature 2 due to the cut and the homogeneity of the soil.

B4. Features 5 and 4 occupied this square. Feature 4 was unearthed in this square and the way in which the mud bricks were lines was clear. B5. This square was completely occupied by Feature 4 which extended into the east balk. C1. The entire square was covered by ash from Feature 1 (see below). Some 20 cm of this ashy layer was excavated and the excavated soil was collected for flotation. Bitumen lumps, charcoal flecks, objects made of baked clay and sherds were abundant. C2. The square was occupied by the ashy layer in the west, the burial cut in the south and the mud brick/chineh wall

124

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations (Feature 6) in the east. The feature was filled with soft deposits. C3. Broken mud bricks or chineh covered the entire square. Part of the burial cut of Feature 11 was located in this square. C4. This square contained Features 5 and 6. It had a hard surface due to the aforementioned mud bricks/chineh of Feature 6. C5. This square was relatively compact and associated with parts of Feature 4. D1. A relatively firm area (probably chineh) was found in the western side of the square. The eastern side was taken up by an ashy layer containing several lumps of bitumen. D2. This was a complex square of burials, mud brick/ chineh and an ashy layer. Two child burials had cut through the square; one in the south (Feature 12) and another in the northeast (Feature 13). A wall (Feature 6) continued into this square. Pottery, bitumen lumps, charcoal and kiln wasters were recovered from the ashy layer. D3. As in the previous square (D2), part of Feature 13 continued in the western side of the square. Part of Feature 6 formed a small chamber in this square. D4. This square had a relatively firm surface that was probably chineh or compact clay. Another intrusive burial (Feature 3) was located in this square. A cluster of small to medium-size gray pebbles was noted (Cluster 1) D5. Feature 3 continued into the middle of this square from the northwest. The burial had cut through the hard surface of mud brick or chineh. E1. The surface in the western part of the square was relatively hard. The rest of the square was dominated by Feature 1 (probably a kiln/oven) and the ashy deposits most likely related to Features 1 and 10. E2. E3. The main part of Feature 1 with its burned surface, ashy deposits and large stones was located in these squares. Traces of Feature 7 were visible in the east of E3. E4. E5. Both of these squares consisted of a hard surface with traces of a mud brick/chineh wall. F1. A surface of the square was ashy and, in the western part, hard. F2. This square was mostly covered by ashy deposits. Part of feature 1 was visible. F3. Part of the square was filled with ashy deposits from the west and a trace of mud brick / chineh of belonging to Feature 7 was visible at the eastern edge of the square.

F4. F5. The surfaces of these squares were hard, most likely due to the existence of melted mud bricks or chineh. Some medium to large-sized gray pebbles were located near the eastern balk of F5 (Cluster 2). G1. This square had a hard surface. In its northeastern corner the clay was darker as a result of the burned surface of Feature 10. Part of Feature 12 was visible. G2. G3. Most of the burned surface, broken mud bricks/ chineh and stones of Feature 10 were present in these squares. The child burial (about 40 cm long and 15 cm wide) had made a shallow cut (less than 20 cm deep). The skeleton was poorly preserved. G4. G5. The hard surface continued into this square. Some small to medium- sized pebbles were located in G4 (Cluster 3). H1. This square had a hard surface with some scattered, medium to large-sized stones in the western corner and a burned surface in the eastern part of the square due to its proximity to Features 8 and 10 H2. This square was partly covered by Feature 8 from the north and Feature 10 from south. H3. As in the previous square, this square was covered by Feature 10 in its south and Feature 9 in its north. H4. H5. These squares were mostly covered by Feature 9 in the west and sporadic melted mud bricks in the east. The hard surface continued here as well. I1. I2. The bulk of Feature 8, consisting of burnt clay, pebbles and ashy deposits, was located in these squares. I3. I4. I5. The bulk of Feature 9 (straw tempered clay, burnt clay, ashy deposits, wasters and sporadic broken mud bricks/ chineh) was located in these squares. As shown in Table 5.6, the maximum depth of excavation in Area C was 63 cm, which was mostly in the burials (Features 2 and 11) while the depth of the actual surface of the trench was 20-40 cm. Thus, it should be noted that the following description of the Area C features is not definitive and hopefully it will be possible during future seasons to clarify these features. Feature in Area C Feature 1: This feature measured 2.32 (east-west) x 1.40m (north-south). It consisted of 4 stone slabs below and burned clay above. Its general shape was round; however, since the upper surface of the feature was completely washed out, the actual shape of this feature was not clear. Several painted pottery sherds, small objects i.e Spindle whorls (Fig. 5.28: 6, 7) bead (Fig. 5. 25: 8) terracotta implement (Fig. 5. 28: 18), bitumen lumps (Fig.5.28:43,

125

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.25: The Exposed Kilns Located on One of the Ridges at Area D after Excavation F.5.29:15, 16, Fig.5. 30: 9, 12, 13), slingshot (Fig.5. 29: 1), stone tools, slag and wasters were recovered among the ashy deposits beside the feature.

Feature 5: Feature 5 was a hard surface, associated with Feature 4, which was encircled by mud bricks/chineh and had a 73 cm radial extent.

Feature 2: Feature 2 was an Islamic burial c. 1.70 m long, 65 cm wide and 63 cm deep. The head faced to the northwest (towards Mecca). Following the local Arab tradition some large stones were placed above the body’s head. The skeleton (probably a male) was well-preserved and no burial gifts were found. Feature 2 had been cut into a mud brick wall (Feature 6) in the southeastern corner of the trench. The fill of the burial cut was soft and moist, and was put through a dry sieve.

Feature 6: This was a mud brick/chineh wall dividing the center of the trench. It was probably related to Feature 1.

Feature 3: Feature 3 was an intrusive child burial about 1m long, 41cm wide and 37cm deep. The skeleton was well-preserved and the head faced northwest. This burial was cut through a hard surface, which was most likely paved by chineh or mud bricks. Feature 4: Feature 4 was a mudbrick wall of alternating headers and stretchers c. 1 m wide which extended for 4 m in a northeast-southwest direction. Lumps of bitumen in irregular shapes were recovered beside this feature, Fig.5.30:10 is an example.

Feature 7: This was another mud brick/chineh wall, 3 m long, which extended from the eastern balk and continued to the area between two kilns (Features 10 and 1). It was difficult to assess this feature, both because of our limited excavation and the similarity of the wall and the surrounding deposit. Feature 8: This feature measured about 1.76 x1.18 m. It consisted of compact clay, a burned surface and ashy deposits. A rounded, chamber-like structure was located in the middle of the feature. Its uppermost part was covered with chaff-tempered plaster. It seems very probable that this was a kiln, as kiln wasters and slag were recovered from the ashy deposits around the structure (Fig.5.31). A small mud brick or chineh wall, which seemed to be related to this structure, was found beside it. Some finds around this feature: one rounded object (Fig.5.4), perforated roundels (Fig.5.28:27), part of a figurine (Fig.5.28.40).

126

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Feature 9: This was a kiln or oven measuring 1.80 x 1.40 m. Lumps of bitumen were abandoned , Fig.5.30:11 is an example. Feature 10: This was similar to Feature 1 (a kiln) with some stone slabs and burned clay and ashy deposits, over fused sherds, kiln fragments, slags around it (Fig. 5. 32). It measured approximately 2.19 m long and 1.50 m wide. Slingshots are abundant here (Fig. 5. 29: 2, 3, 7, 8, 9) and one spindle whorl (Fig. 5. 28: 5), Feature 11: This was a burial about 1.60 cm long, 50 cm wide and 60cm deep. It was dug vertically from the surface and on the left at the bottom a horizontal chamber was opened for burial. This custom is still being practiced among the local Arabs for female bodies. The skeleton faced toward northwest and the fill soil was soft and moist. The skeleton was well preserved. Some stone slabs were located above the head of the dead. Feature 12: This was a child burial, about 78 x 18 cm, and 36 cm deep, with its head facing towards Mecca. The fill of the burial was soft. Feature 13: Another burial cut had been dug into the ashy deposits between Features 1 and 6. It was about 70 x 17cm, and 38 cm deep. Its head faced Mecca. The skeleton was poorly preserved. Map.5.4: Plan of the Exposed Kilns Recovered at Area was extremely rich in ceramic material. The scraping also revealed differences between the kilns in terms of their size and condition. The kilns were located with an almost fixed distance of 4.82 m between them (Map 5.4). These kilns were labeled D1, D2 and D3, respectively, from west to east; a brief description of each is presented below: D

Feature 14: An infant burial measuring 32 x 12cm, and less than 20 cm deep, in very poor condition. The burial had cut through the burned clay of Feature 10. The head faced Mecca. Area D During the CSS in the Uruk Zone, three squares were identified with relatively dense concentrations of kiln wasters and slag (59, 64 and 66 pieces in each). In addition, one of these squares (square no. M24, see above under CSS) showed traces of at least three kilns. Since there was no Uruk occupation in Areas A, B and C, it was clear that the pattern of the Uruk occupation (if any) must have been different than that of earlier phases at the sits. This assumption was partially answered during the CSS as we realized the Uruk diagnostics were mostly concentrated as a distinct enclave in the eastern sector of the site. The exposed kilns in the Uruk Zone persuaded us to use this opportunity to work in this area in order to better understand this Uruk enclave and its function, particularly as this was an area which was threatened with ongoing erosion. As mentioned earlier, several low stripped ridges characterized the Uruk Zone. The exposed kilns were located on one of these ridges (Fig. 5.25). An area of about 20 x 10 m was opened to examine the kilns and any features associated with them. The entire area was carefully scraped. Apart from the three kilns, there were no other architectural remains. However, the exposed area

D1. This kiln was not well preserved since erosion had destroyed its upper parts and southeastern corner (Fig. 5.25). It has an oval plan measuring 1.53 x 1.43 m and 36.2cm in depth. Hundreds of slag fragments, wasters and sherds of different colors and sizes were scattered nearby. The interior surface was completely covered with grooves in green and black. The bottom of the kiln had a hard, burnt surface in dark reddish brown. Inside, the kiln was filled with ash, soot, pottery sherds, lithics, wasters and slag. A broken red ware jar was recovered in the southern section of the kiln. Both the fire box and firing chamber of the kiln were found in one single pit. D2. This was the best preserved kiln (Figs. 5.26-27). It had an oval plan of 2.10 x 1.40 m with a north-south orientation and was 1.14 m deep. Baked bricks were scattered alongside the northern corner of the kiln with wasters, slag and sherds were abundant in its vicinity. Like D1, D2 was also made of brownish-yellow clay that was heavily chaff-tempered and mixed with small pebbles. The wall of the kiln had a downward curve. Near the lip of 127

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Fig.5.26: Area D-Kiln D2, After Excavation

Fig.5.27: Area D-Kiln D2 the kiln the curve was sharp. D2 seemed to be a doublechambered kiln and the top of the kiln wall must have been covered by a temporary, vaulted dome of clay before each firing. The limitations of the excavation prevented us from further elucidating this structure and revealing it in its entirety. Based on present evidence, no trace of a grate was found, although some sporadic baked bricks outside the northeastern wall of the kiln may have once been part of a grate. There were also some baked bricks in the southern corner of the kiln; their function was not clear. The fill of this kiln was carefully excavated and included heavily compacted clay, pebbles, wasters and ash. As a control for the deposits, we left a 30 cm section in the

northern sector and continued the excavation to the bottom of the kiln. From the top down, the first 34 cm of deposit consisted of compact clay, wasters, pebbles, and slag. The second layer was 27.2cm thick and consisted of heavy, compact clay of a reddish brown color. In the second layer, pottery sherds (mostly beveled rim bowls and large jars), baked brick fragments, animal bones, lithics and lumps of clay were abundant. The third layer consisted of grayish ash and wasters. D3. This was the worst-preserved kiln (Fig. 5.25). Originally, it was probably oval in plan, measuring about 1.20 x 1 m and 56 cm deep at the conclusion of the excavation. Most likely it was oriented on a north-south axis. The condition and inclusions of this kiln were similar to that of D1. 128

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations Summary This chapter has examined Tall-e Abu Chizan in terms of 1) location, 2) condition and physical characteristics, 3) material culture and 5) chronology. It may be helpful to reiterate some of the salient points. The site is located on a fan adjacent to the southern slopes of the Zagros Mountains, and has been highly affected by the Naft Sefid fan environment. For almost 1500 years the site enjoyed the availability of fresh soil/silt, water, pasture, bitumen and fleck (?) resources. Moreover, the site is located along the most accessible route of contact between the plains of Greater Susiana and the intermontane valleys of the Zagros highlands. In view of the visible sections and differences in elevation on and around the site, the surrounding landscape was probably dominated by hills. This conclusion should be tested by further geomorphological study. In terms of the site’s condition, the site is in danger because of the highly dynamic stream activities around it. Close observations by CSS indicate that channel shifts are changing the topography of the site rapidly. In particular, the erosion of channels in Zone 5 is severely damaging the site. The CSS also indicates that the erosion rate is relatively high in the southern sector of the site due to its higher elevation, scarce vegetation cover and softness of its soils. Moreover, modern land use by nomads has caused the site’s surface to be highly susceptible to periodic erosion. Intensive surveys around the site also indicate that material from the site is being transported hundreds of meters to the southwest. Land use in the past 1300 years (Islamic period) has also caused severe damage to the site. More than eleven Qanat shafts were documented in the northern and eastern sectors of the site. Installing such a feature in the clay and silt environment around Tall-e Abu Chizan caused damage to the physical fabric of the site. The subsequent abandonment of the Qanat system has also caused the surface of the site to sink in some areas. In terms of material culture, Tall-e Abu Chizan is the richest mounded settlement in the Eastern Plain. Both CSS and limited excavations yielded plentiful evidence of different production patterns between the Late Middle Susiana and Middle Uruk Phases. Ceramic production was considerable. From the CSS it is clear that different activity areas existed at Tall-e Abu Chizan. At least 14 squares of the CSS with a high density of chipped stone, débitages, cores and un-retouched flakes produced as a result of core modifications were discovered which indicate that these could have been potential lithic workshops. An interesting coincidence was seen in those squares in which both pottery and stone tools produced (Table: Square IDs: D17; F14; G13; K7; M24; N18; P21). With the exception of one square, all possible lithic workshops were found in squares in which Uruk material was present. The distribution pattern of workshops at the site through time is not yet clear, however, especially those

manufacturing pottery. Nevertheless, we may note tentatively that the western sector of the site was mostly dominated by squares with LMS/LS material and traces of kilns or ovens. Elsewhere on the site, indications of the Uruk phase have also been found together with those of LMS and LS. More specifically, in the Uruk Zone all kilns were used during the Uruk Period. Excavations in Area A showed that the architectural features in the upper layers were poorly preserved due to taphonomic processes. A mudbrick wall was found in layer 18 (the deepest layer) but due to its state of perservation its function is not clear. In Area B, excavations revealed more evidence of fauna remains than in Area A. This area contained a large pit used mostly in the Late Middle Susiana phase. The limited excavations in Area C indicated that this part of the site, at least in the Late Susiana phase, was used as a pottery workshop, rather than a residential area, with abundant wasters, slag, fused sherds, burned surfaces and kiln fragments recovered. The architecture of this area is not well-understood due to the limitations of the excavations and several intrusive graves (Features 2, 3, 11, 12, 13, and 14). Nevertheless, there is a mudbrick wall in the southern sector of the area (Feature 4) and lumps of chineh partitions (regular and irregularly arranged) in other areas, mostly around Feature 1. Bitumen (flecks, lumps and objects) were found both in Area A and Area B. In Area A, the clearest evidence of this material has been found in layers 17 to 1. In Area C, the bituminous matrix has been found mostly around the Features 1, 6, and 12. Area D is the Uruk segment of the site. Here our excavations revealed three kilns. The limited excavation does not allow us to define the wider context in which these kilns functioned. Nevertheless, the largest kiln (2.10 x 1.40 m in diameter) contained at least one large stoking hole (we could not identify a ventilation shaft). The curvature of the kiln suggested the existence of a domed superstructure supported by a foundation of pressed clay and fired bricks. Detailed studies on pottery, lithics, fauna, flora and bitumen from Tall-e Abi Chizan are presented in the Appendices. Tall-e Abu Chizan was established in the Late Middle Susiana and abandoned around the Middle Uruk period. The sounding in Area A revealed phases from the Late Middle Susiana/Susiana c, Late Susiana 1/Susiana d and Late Susiana 2/Susa A periods However, in the CSS, indications of Terminal Susa A (a few sherds) and Early to Middle Uruk periods have been found as well. Four out of five C14 samples were contaminated by bitumen. Thus, our attempt to establish an absolute chronology in Area A was not successful. The only absolute date, c. 4200 B.C., came from layer XI (11) (for details see Appendix 6).

129

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

No. 1

Area-LayerFeature B-L.4

2

B-L.1

3

B- L.4

4 5

C-L.1/F.8 C-L.1/F.10

6 7

C-L.1/F.1 C-L.1/F.1

8

C-L.1/F.1

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

A-L.14 A-L.13 A-L.15 A-L.14 A-L.16 A-L.16 A-L.20 C-L. 1 A-L.15 C-L.1/F.1

19

A-L.10

20

A-L.11

21

B-L.5

22

B- L.5

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

A-L.13 B-L.1 B-L.4 A-L.17 C-L.1/F.8 C-L.1/F.1 C –L.1 A-L.17 A-L.12

32 33

C –L.1 B-L.2

34 35 36 37 38 39

A-L.13 C –L.1 A-L.20 A-L.12 A-L.14 C-L.1

40

C-L.1/F.8

41

42 43

Object

Material

Dimension

Color

Spindle Whorl

Pottery

height 25mm, thickness 9mm

B-L.2

Light yellow Decoration in brown Spindle Whorl Pottery height 35mm, thichness10mm, diameter unknown Pale yellow Decoration in dull reddish brown Spindle Whorl Baked clay diameter 46mm, height 16mm, central hole Dull yellow orange diameter 6mm ? Stone diameter 5.5-7 mm, thickness 3mm Dark reddish brown Spindle Whorl Baked clay Diameter 28.5mm, height 13mm, hole diameter Bright brown 5mm Spindle Whorl Baked clay-pottery 32x28x15.5mm, hole diameter 4.5mm Dull orange Spindle Whorl clay diameter 39mm, height 23mm, central hole Dull reddish brown diameter 4.5mm Bead Stone diameter 6.5 mm, thickness 2.5mm, hole diameter Light yellow orange 1.5mm ? Bitumen Diameter 1cm Black ? Baked clay Diameter 1cm Dull yellow orange ? Baked clay Diameter 1.5cm Light yellow orange ? Burnt clay Diameter 2.5cm Black ? Baked clay Diameter 3cm Light yellow orange ? Baked clay Diameter 3cm Light yellow orange ? Bitumen diameter 13.5mm Black ? Clay diameter 13mm Dull orange Spindle Whorl Clay 17x11.5mm Light yellow orange Terracotta implement Pottery 33x20x8mm Pale yellow Decoration in brown Terracotta implement Pottery 41x20mm Light yellow orange Decoration in black brown Terracotta implement Pottery 34x19mm Light yellow orange Decoration in brown Terracotta implement Pottery Thickness 3mm, length 32mm, width 4.5-19.5mm Pale yellow, faded Decoration in brown? Terracotta implement Pottery length 17mm, width 11mm, thickness 4mm Light yellow Decoration in brown Terracotta implement pottery 20x11mm Pale yellow Terracotta implement Pottery length 15mm, width 3.5-13mm, thickness 3mm Dull yellow orange Terracotta implement Pottery length 14mm, thickness 3mm, width 2-8.5 mm Pale yellow Terracotta implement Pottery 19x 14mm Pale yellow Perforated roundel Pottery diameter 27mm, thickness 4mm Grayish yellow ? Baked clay 21x21x12mm Dull orange to brownish black ? Light yellow Orange ? Bitumen 27x11mm Black Piece of a terracotta pottery 14x8cm Pale yellow ring Perforated roundel pottery 13mm Pale yellow Perforated roundel Pottery diameter 16mm, thickness 2.5mm, hole diameter Grayish yellow 6mm Perforated roundel pottery 13mm Pale yellow/decoration in brown ? pottery 18mm Dull yellow orange ? Baked clay 16mm height, base diameter 13mm Dull yellow orange ? Baked clay 11mm Dull orange ? Baked clay 14mm Grayish yellow A conical piece of Baked Clay Base diameter 13.5mm, height 17.5 mm, top is Brownish gray Baked clay broken Part of a conical piece Pottery length 46mm, base diameter 6 mm Dull yellow orange of pottery Decoration in brownish black Slingshot Clay length 30mm (not complete), thickness 22.5 mm Grayish brown

B-L.4 C-L.1/F.1

Part of a figurine? ?

Clay Bitumen

25x19x11mm 24x26mm

Figure.5.28

130

Dull reddish brown black

s

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavation

Figure.5.28

131

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Area-Layer-Feature C-L.1/F.1 C-L.1/F.10 C-L.1/F.10 A-L.12 A-L.15 B-L.4

Object Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot

C-L.1/F.10

Slingshot

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

C-L.1/F.10 C-L.1/F.8 A-L.12 C-L.1 A-L.17 B-L.4 A-L.19 C-L.1/F.1

Slingshot Slingshot Slingshot ? ? pottery shovel Part of a stone vessel ?

16

C –L.1/F.1

?

17 18 19

A-L.12 A-L.12 A-L.20

? Tag ?

Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay

Material

Clay Clay Clay Baked clay Bitumen Pottery Stone Bitumen with traces of straw Bitumen with traces of sand Baked clay Baked clay Baked clay

Dimension length 52mm, thickness 33mm length 53mm, thickness 33mm length 53mm, thickness 32mm length 29mm, thickness 16mm length 29mm, thickness 15mm length 65.5 mm, thickness 33mm length 44 mm (one end is broken), thickness 31mm length 42mm, thickness 28mm length 39mm, thickness 24mm length 42mm, thickness 28mm 13.5 mm 24x11mm 131x111x11mm 41x8mm 29x29x7mm

Color Dull orange Dull reddish brown Dull reddish brown Dull reddish brown Dull reddish brown Brown

31x25mm

Black

22x22mm 61x 36x 7mm 16x12mm

Reddish brown Reddish brown Grayish yellow

Figure.5.29

132

Dull reddish brown Dull orange Dull reddish brown Dull reddish brown Brownish gray black Dull yellow orange White and brown Black

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavations

Figure.5.29

133

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin No. Area-Layer-Feature 1 B-L.4 2 3 4 5

A-L.12 C-L.1 A-L.16 B-L-2

Object Animal head, theriomorph Animal figurine Animal figurine Animal figurine Animal figurine

Material pottery

6

A-L.19

Animal figurine

Baked clay

7 8

A-L.17 C-L.1

Animal figurine ?

Baked clay Baked Clay

length 59mm, width 28-41mm, thickness 21mm 34x23x12mm thickness 9-15mm - 45.5x41

9 10 11 12 13

C-L.1/F.1 C-L.1/F.4 C-L.1/F.9 C.L.1/F.1 C.L.1/F.1

? ? Piece of bitumen Lump of bitumen? Lump of bitumen used as glue

Bitumen Bitumen Bitumen Bitumen Bitumen

38x30x11mm 50x44x18mm 34x26x11mm 30x30x23mm 78mm x26mmx14mm

Baked clay Baked clay Baked clay Baked clay

Dimension 59mm outer end of horns, base diameter 3638mm, height 18-28mm 33x27x17mm 43x21x14mm 37x22x17mm length 38mm, width 32mm, thickness 17mm

Figure.5.30

134

Color Light yellow orange Decoration in dull reddish brown Reddish brown Light yellow orange Dull brown Light yellow Decoration in olive brown Dull orange Light yellow orange Dull brown Black Black Black Black Black

s

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavation

Figure.5.30

135

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Figure.5.31

136

s

Tall-e Abu Chizan (KS 1663): Context, Surveys and Excavation

Figure. 5. 32

137

CHAPTER 6 Summary and Conclusion

This study has sought to re-evaluate the previous understanding of the Later Village Period (5000-3500 BC) in Greater Susiana by focusing on the settlement patterns and landscape of the Eastern Plain, one of the least known areas in the region. The assessment started from Chapter 1 with a definition of the spatial and temporal parameters of this study and a review of previous studies in the Greater Susiana Plains, focusing both on the achievements and the shortcomings of prior research. In Chapter 2, previous formulations of social organization and economy in the region during the Later Village Period were reviewed in order to provide a meaningful context in which to evaluate the role of the Eastern Plain. Chapters 3, 4 and 5 were devoted to deepening our knowledge of settlement and society in an area which is not as naturally well-endowed for purposes of intensive agriculture as the extended plains of Greater Susiana are. The goal of Chapter 3 was to examine modern landscape, land use, society and configuration of settlement, paying particular attention to such factors such as the road system and accessibility to prime resources, e.g. water, land and pasture. The discussion stressed the advantages of the unique signatures on the landscape constructed during the Sasanian period in the Eastern Plain in order to show, first, the contrasts between the irrigated landscapes and those dependant on rainfall and dry farming; and secondly, to link the extensive changes, which are happening now in the landscape, to the interference of human communities inhabiting this plain. Chapter 4 was an assessment of the long history of settlement in the region. Based on the existing evidence we saw that the configuration of settlement in the landscape of the Eastern Plain was not very different to that described in Chapter 3, neither with respect to natural resources nor cross-country routes and socio-economic fundamentals, at least for most of the later historical periods. In different maps, we illustrated the development of settlement throughout 7000 years of human-nature interaction in this particular plain. The evidence attests to the fact that the Karun River flood plain was and still is one of the less attractive niches to be settled by human groups. Our reflections about the Old Karun and New Karun throughout human history are supported by archaeological evidence. Further detailed studies are needed to clarify the picture. Settlement patterns during the Later Village Period are a microcosm of the entire history of settlement in the Greater Susiana Plain. The evidence presented here underscores the idea that the easternmost region in the Greater Susiana

flourished from the Late Middle Susiana phase onwards (cf. Hole 1978: 33; Nissen 1976: 276). Linking this fact with the growth of Chogha Mish, and its role in the Susiana cultural landscape, poses many questions about the social, economic and political configuration of Greater Susiana society before the Susa A phase. Much more work is needed in order to truly understand the processes by which the prehistoric societies in this region developed. Despite the new evidence presented in Chapter 5, there is still much to be done at such a highly endangered and unquestionably important site as Tall-e Abu Chizan. Many questions still remain; where did the inhabitants of this tell live? What kind of architecture did they construct? Unfortunately, the botanical samples gathered during the excavations are not adequate to reconstruct the subsistence economy of the settlers at the site. We only know both wild plants and domesticated crops are present. We saw, however, that the habitants of the site were exploited the full range of domesticated animal: sheep, goats (90%) and possibly cows and pigs were herded, while a range of wild animals such as wild boar, foxes and wild cattle were hunted. The archaeological evidence is abundant for craft production at Tall-e Abu Chizan, predominantly pottery making, stone tool manufacture and bitumen extraction from nearby sources. Our ceramic study (Appendix 1) demonstrates very close similarity between the ceramics of Chogha Mish and Tall-e Abu Chizan during the Late Middle Susiana phase. During the Late Susiana 1 phase several unassigned forms and designs were recorded from the ceramic assemblage of Tall-e Abu Chizan that have no actual parallel in the other plains of Greater Susiana. The relative similarity with Susa and Chogha Mish was attested once again in the Late Susiana and Uruk assemblages. We believe that Instrumental Neutron Activate Analysis on ceramics from Tall-e Abu Chizan and other settlements in the region will answer some of the questions which arose from this study: who were the consumers of the pottery produced at Tall-e Abu Chizan? Our emphasis in Chapter 2 on the location of the certain tells during the Later Village period was sparked by a close analysis of the location and material remains from Tall-e Abu Chizan. We saw that the location of certain tells like Abu Chizan, situated in an unfavorable environment for agriculture, points to in the necessity of involvement in wider networks of contact. The clearest evidence of this is the movement of products such as stone and pottery and bitumen that were distributed from their source over a vast area. The study of the bitumen samples from our 138

Summary and Conclusion excavations opened a new window on social, political and economic organization during the Later village period (Connan et al 2008). Several earlier studies have already deepened our knowledge of the socio-economic complexity of prehistoric societies based on such a highly utilized commodity as bitumen or, as Hole and his collogues termed it, “natural asphalt” (Hole et.al.1969: 21-22; Marschner et.al. 1978; Wright 1981: 268; Connan & Deschesne 1996; Boeda et.al 1996; Potts 1997: 100; esp. Connan. J. et.al. 1999; 2005). A more recent study outlines numerous uses of this petroleum-based material in prehistoric life: as mortar in building construction; as a water proofing agent both for building roofs and coating household objects such as mats, baskets, storage jars; for the caulking of boats; as an adhesive to repair broken vessels; as a glue in hafting stone blades to the wooden handles of sickles; as a plaster to make decoration and jewelry; and as a preservative used in mummification (Connan et.al 1999: 34-38 and table 1). Bitumen studies at five sites in (Susa, Jaffarabad, Chogha Mish, and Sharafabad in the Susiana plain and Farukhabad in the Deh Luran Plain) show the role of bitumen in the growth of technology and commerce (Marschner et.al. 1978:110). This study documented at least 18 modern and ancient bitumen sources in southwestern Iran, mainly located between Deh Luran in the northwest and Ram Hormoz in southwest (Marschner et.al. 1978: Fig.1; cf. Connan et.al. 1999: fig 1). Thus, the proximity of many tells during the Later Village Period to such an immensely used commodity must have been of great economic and social importance. Yet many questions remain. For instance, would it be possible that extensive tells like Ahowan in the Mehran Plain, Musiyan in Deh Luran, Chogha Mish in the Susiana plain, Tall-e Abu Chizan in the Eastern Plain (see Chapter 4), Tol-e Geser (Ghazir) in the Ram Hormoz plain, Tape Sohz and Chogha Sofla in the Behbahan/Zohreh plains, were able to flourish economically throughout the millennia because of their access to bitumen sources, e.g. as suppliers who dealt in the extraction of bitumen from nearby sources or as consumers that acquired processed or unprocessed bitumen from the producers? Unfortunately, we know so little about any similar Later Village period sites in other areas like Masjed Soleyman where the bitumen sources are well documented (Connan. J et al 1999: fig.1).

the previously Iranian supply to Tell el’Oueili (Connan et.al.1999: 41). Later, and until the third and second millennium, Hit –Abu Jir become the main suppliers for Tell el’Oueili (Ibid). Clearly the bituminous substances from Tell el’Oueili are demonstrative of the changing sources of bitumen through time. Such changes may have had many cultural, economical and political reasons. It is interesting to compare the available bitumen analyses with those of abovementioned ceramics because at roughly the same time a major shift in ceramic production occurred in Greater Susiana (Le Breton 1957: 88-89; Alizadeh 1992: 20-26; 2006: 97), and links with Mesopotamia grew weaker, while growing stronger with the Zagros regions. These, and similar questions, may be answered by future work at Tall-e Abu Chizan and other sites in the Eastern Plain. For the moment, however, this dissertation has hopefully demonstrated the rich potential of this area for our understanding of prehistoric social and economic developments in southwestern Iran at a critical time in its evolution.

Although it is evident that Mesopotamia had its own bitumen sources available in Hit, Ramadi, and Abu Jir in the southwest and Qalat Shergat and Kirkuk in the northeast, during the Ubaid 0 to Ubaid 2 periods (5800-4550 BC), Tell el’Oueilis’ bitumens were mainly imported from nearby Iranian sources thanks to the existence of symbiotic relationships between Susiana and Mesopotamia at this time (Huot 1994; Connan et.al. 1999:41). The direction of supply gradually shifted through the next period, Ubaid 3 (4550-4000 BC), while new south-north links emerged and the southerners perhaps obtained their bitumen from Kirkuk in the north. This resulted in the abandonment of 139

Bibliography

Abdi, K. 2001 “Nationalism, Politics, and the Development of Archaeology in Iran”, American Journal of Archaeology 105/1: 51-76. 2003 “The Early Development of Pastoralism in the Central Zagros Mountains”, Journal of World Prehistory 17/4:  395-448. Adams, R. McC. 1962 “Agriculture and Urban Life in Early Southwestern Iran”, Science 136: 109-122 2004 “Reflections on the Early Southern Mesopotamian Economy”, in Archaeological Perspectives on Political Economies (ed. G. M. Feinman and L. M. Nicholas), Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press, pp. 4161. Alavi, M 1980 “Tectonostratigraphic evolution of the Zagrosides of Iran”, Geology 8: 144-149. Alden, J. 1979 Regional Economic Organization in Banesh Period Iran, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan. 1987 “The Susa III Period”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 157-170 . Algaze, G 1990 (ed.) Town and Country in Southeastern Anatolia, vol. 2, Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 1993 The Uruk World System: The Dynamics of Expansion of Early Mesopotamian Civilization, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Alizadeh, A 1992 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns and Cultures in Susiana, Southwestern Iran, Technical Reports of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, no. 24, Ann Arbor. 2003 “Letter from the Field, Oriental Institute Returns to Iran”, News and Notes, No. 177, Oriental Institute University of Chicago. 2006 The Origins of State Organizations in Prehistoric Highland Fars, Southern Iran: Excavations at Tall-e Bakun, Chicago: Oriental Institution Publications 128. 2008 “Chogha Mish, Volume II. The Development of a Prehistoric Regional Center in Lowland Susiana, Southwestern Iran”: Final Report on the Last Six Seasons of Excavations, 1972–1978 Alizadeh, A., N. Kouchoukos, T.J. Wilkinson, A.M. Bauer and M. Mashkour 2004 “Human-environment Interactions on the Upper Khuzestan Plains, Southwest Iran. Recent Investigations”, Paléorient 30/1: 69-88.

Ambraseys N. N. and C. P. Melville 1982 A History of Persian Earthquakes, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Amiet, P. 1966 Elam, Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 1992 “Sur l’histoire e´lamite”, Iranica Antiqua 27:75-94. Ammerman, A. J. 1981 “Surveys and Archaeological Research”, Annual Review of Anthropology 10: 63-88. 1985 “Modern Land Use versus the Past: A case study from Calabria”, in Papers in Italian Archaeology IV. Part I: The Human Landscape (eds. C. Malone and S. Stoddart), Oxford, British Archaeological Reports 243. 1993 (in Book Reviews) “Landscape Archaeology as Long-Term History: Northern Keos in the Cycladic Islands, By: J. F. Cherry; J. L. Davis; E. Mantzourani”, Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 20, No. 3. (Autumn, 1993), pp. 367-372. Attai, M.T. 2005 “Gozaresh-e Gomaneh zani Tappe Darugheh (KS 1593) (Test Excavation in Tappe Darugheh KH 1593)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 477–95. Baeteman, C., Heyvaert, V.M.A. & Dupin, L. 2004/2005 “Geo-environmental Investigation”, In: Gasche, H. (Ed): The Persian Gulf Shorelines and the Karkheh, Karun, and Jarrahi Rivers, a Geoarchaeological Approach. Akkadica 125/126, 91 pp.513/151-215. Baladhuri, Ahmad b. Yahya 1866 “Liber expugnationis regionum (Fotuh al-Buldan)”, M.J. d. Goeje (ed.). Leiden, Brill. Banning, E. B. 1996 “Highlands and Lowlands: Problems and survey frameworks for rural archaeology in the Near East”, Bulletin of the American Schools for Oriental Research 301: 25-45. Beale T. W. 1973 “Early Trade in Highland Iran: A View from a Source Area,” World Archaeology 5: 133-48. Berman, J. 1986 “Ceramic Production and the Development of Complex Polities in Late Prehistoric Southwest Iran”. Ph.D diss, City University of New York. 1987 “Ceramic Production and its implications for the Sociopolitical Organization of the Suse Phase Susiana.” Paleorient 18: 77-88. 1994 “The Ceramic Evidence for Sociopolitical Organization in Ubaid Southwestern Iran”, in

140

Bibliography Chiefdoms and Early States in Near East, the Organizational Dynamics of Complexity, (ed by Gil Stein and Mitchell. S. Rothman. Monographs in World Archaeology 18. Madison, WI: Prehistory Press. Binford, L. 1964 “A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design”, American Antiquity 29: 425-441. 1984 Faunal Remains from Klasies River Mouth. London: Academic Press. Binford, L. R. and Bertram, J. B. 1977 “Bone frequencies and attrittional processes”, in For theory building in Archaeology (ed. L.R. Binford), London: Academic Press, pp. 77-153. Bivar, A.D.H. and Shaked, S. 1964 “The Inscriptions at Shimbar”, BSOAS 27: 265–90. Blanton, R. E., P. N. Peregrine, D. Winslow and T. D. Hall (eds.). 1997 Economic Analysis beyond the Local System, Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America. Blissenbach, E 1954 “Geology of Alluvial Fans in Semiarid Regions”, Bulletin of Geology Society of America 65: 175-190. Bloss Lynch, H. 1891 “Notes on the Present State of the Karun River, between Shushtar and the Shat-el-Arab”, Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society and Monthly Record of Geography, New Monthly Series 13 (10): 592-595. Boessneck, J. 1969 “Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries Linné) and Goat (Capra hircus Linné)”, in Science in Archaeology (2nd Edition), (eds. D. Brothwell and E. Higgs). London: Thames and Hudson, pp. 331-358. Boi’da, E., J. Connan, D.Dessort, S. Muhesen, and N. Mcrcicr, H. Valadas and N. Tisnerat 1996 “Bitumen as a hafting material on Middle Palaeolithic artefacts”, Nature 380: 336-338. Bordenave, M.L., R. Burwood, 1990 “Source rock distribution and maturation in the Zagros Orogenic Belt: Provenance of the Asmari and Bangestan reservoir oil accumulations”, Organic Geochemistry 16, 1-3, 369-387. 1995 “The Albian Kazdhumi Formation of the Dezful Embayment, Iran; One of the Most Efficient Petroleum Generating Systems”, in Petroleum Source Rocks (ed. B. Katz), Springer-Verlag, pp. 183-207. Brain, C. K. 1981 The Hunters and the Hunted: An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brown, A. G. 1997 Alluvial Geoarchaeology: Floodplain archaeology and environmental change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bryan, R. B. and J. A. A. Jones 1997 “The significance of Soil Piping Processes”, Geomorphology 20: 209-218. Bull, G. and Payne, S. 1982 “Tooth eruption and epiphyseal fusion in pigs and wild boar”, in Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from

Archaeological Sites. BAR British Series 109 (eds. B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne), Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, pp. 55-71. Bull, W. B. 1977 “The alluvial-fan environment”, Progress in Physical Geography I: 222-270. Butzer, K. W. 1975 “Patterns of Environmental change in the Near East during the Late Plistocene and Early Holocene Times”, In Problems in the prehistory: North Africa and Levant (eds. F. Wendorf and A.E. Marks), Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press. 1982 Archaeology as Human Ecology: method and theory for a contextual approach, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. Caldwell, J. R., 1968 “Tell-i Ghazir”, Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatishcen Archaologie F-G: 348-355. 1977 “Interaction Spheres in Prehistory”, in Hopewellian Studies, (eds. J. R. Caldwell and R. L. Hall), Springfield: Illinois State Museum, pp. 135-143. Canal, D. 1978a “La terrasse de l’Acropole de Susa”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 9: 11-15. 1978b “La haute terrasse de l’acropole de Susa”, Paléorient 4: 169-176. Carter, E. 1971 Elam in the Second Millennium B.C.: The archaeological evidence, Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Chicago. 1980 “Excavations in the Ville Royal I at Susa: The Third Millenium B.C. Occupation”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 11: 11–134. Carter, E. and M. Stolper, M. 1984 Elam: Survey of Political History and Archaeology, University of California Publications, Near Eastern Studies 25. Berkley: University of California Press. Carter, R.A. , K. Challis, S.M.N. Priestman and H. Tofighian 2006 “The Bushehr Hinterland: results of the first season of the Iranian-British Archaeological Survey of Bushehr Province, November-December 2004”, Iran 44: 63-104. Chevalier, N. 1997 (ed.) Une mission en Perse: 1897-1912, Paris: Reunion des musées nationaux. Christensen, P. 1993 The Decline of Iranshahr: Irrigation and Environments in the History of the Middle East, 500 B.C. to A.D. 1500, Museum Tusculanum Press: University of Copenhagen. Connan, J. 1988 «Quelques secrets des bitumes archéologiques de Mésopotamie révélés par les analyses de géochimie organique pétrolière», Bulletin des Centres Recherches Exploration-Production Elf-Aquitaine 12(2), 759-787. 1999 “Use and trade of bitumen in antiquity and prehistory: molecular archaeology reveals secrets of

141

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin past civilizations”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London, B354: 33–50. Connan, J., C. Breniquet and J. L Huot 1996 “Les objets bituminés de tell el’Oueili: des témoins de la diversité des réseaux d’échanges commerciaux de l’Obeid 0 à l’Uruk récent”, in Oueili. Travaux de 1987 et 1989, (Ed. ERC), Paris, pp. 413-453. Connan, J., R. Carter, 2007 «A geochemical study of bituminous mixtures from Failaka and Umm an-Namel (Kuwait) from the early Dilmun to the Early Islamic period», Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18: 139-181. Connan, J., R. Carter, H. Crawford, M. Tobey, A. CharrriéDuhaut, D. Jarvie, P. Albrecht and K. Norman. 2005 “A comparative geochemical study of bituminous boat remains from H3, As-Sabiyah (Kuwait), and RJ2, Ra’s al-Jinz (Oman)”, Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 16, 21-66. Connan, J., O. Deschesne 1996 Le bitume à Suse-Collection du Musée du Louvre. Coédition Elf Aquitaine-Réunion des Musées Nationaux, collection Monographies, Pau et Paris, France. 2001 «Matériau artificiel ou roche naturelle ? Les surprises du mastic de bitume», La Recherche 347, 2-3. Connan, J., O. Kavak, E. Akin, M. N. Yalçin, K. Imbus, and J. Zumberge 2006 «Identification and origin of bitumen in Neolithic artefacts from Demirköy Höyük (8100 BC): Comparison with oil seeps and crude oils from southeastern Turkey», Organic Geochemistry 37, 1752-1767. Connan.J, J. Zumberge, K. Imbus, A. Moghaddam 2008 “The bituminous mixtures of Tall-e Abu Chizan: A Vth millennium BC settlement in southwestern Iran”, Organic Geochemistry 39 (2008) 1772–1789. Contenau, G. and Ghirshman, R. 1935 Fouilles de Tepe Giyan, pres de Nehavand, 1931-32. Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Paris. Curzon, G. 1890 “The Karun River and the Commercial Geography of South-west Persia”, Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society and Monthly Record of Geography, New Monthly Series 12(9): 509-532. Davidson, D. A. 1976 “Processes of tell formation and erosion”, in Geoarchaeology (eds. D. A. Davidson and M. L. Shackley), London: Duckworth, pp. 255-66. de Brichambaut G. P. and Wallen C. C. 1963 A study of agroclimatology in semi-arid and arid zones of the Near East, Technical note no 56, FAO/ Unesco/Wmo Interagency Project on Agroclimatology. Degerbøl, M. and Fredskild, B. 1970 “The Urus (Bos primigenius Bojanus) and Neolithic domesticated cattle (Bos taurus domesticus Linné”, Det Kongelige Danske Videnskaberned Selskab Biolgiske Skrifter, 17: 1-234. Delougaz, P.

1952 Pottery from the Diyala Region, Chicago: Oriental Institute Publication 63. Delugaz P. and H. J. Kantor 1972 “The 1971 Season of Excavation of the Joint Iranian Expedition”, Bastan Chenassi va Honar-e Iran, 9/10:88-96. 1996 Chogha Mish Volume I: The first five seasons of excavations, (ed. A. Alizadeh), Chicago: Oriental Institution Publications 101. de Mecquenem, R. 1928 “Notes sur la céramique peinte archaique en Perse”, Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique en Perse 20: 99-132. 1934 “Foilled de Suse 1929-1933”, Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique en Perse 25: 177-188. 1943 “Foilled de Suse 1933-1939”, Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique en Perse 29: 3-161. de Morgan, J. 1894 Mission Scientifique en Perse, Paris: Leroux 1900 Fouilles à Suse en 1897-1898 et 1898-1899, Mémoires de la Mission archéologique en Perse. 1902 La Delegation en Perse du Ministeàre de l’instruction publique 1897 aà 1902, Paris. 1912 “Observations sur les couches profondes de l’Acropole se Suse”, Mémoirs de la Délégation en Perse 13: 1-25. Dewar, R. E. 1991”Incorporating Variation in Occupation Span into Settlement-Pattern Analysis”, American Antiquity 56, No. 4. pp. 604-620. Dieulafoy, M. A. 1893 L’Acropole de Suse d’après les Fouilles Exécutées en 1884, 1885, 1886, Paris. Dittmann, R. 1984 Eine Randebene des Zagros in der Frühzeit: Ergebnisse des Behbehan – Zuhreh surveys, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient Band 3, D. Reimer, Berlin. 1986 Betrachtungen zur Frühzeit des Südwest-Iran: regionale Entwicklungen vom 6. bis zum frühen 3. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend, Berliner Beiträge zum Vorderen Orient Band 4, D. Reimer, Berlin. Dollfus, G. 1975 “Les fouilles à Djaffarabad de 1972 à 1974, Djaffarabad, périodes I et II”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 5: 11-62. 1978 “Djaffarabad, Djowi, Bandebal: Contribuions a l’étude de la Susiane au Ve millénaire et au début du IVe millénaire”, Paléorient 4: 141-167. 1983a “Tépé Bendebal, travaux 1977, 1978”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 13: 133-275. 1983b “Tépé Djowi: Contrôle stratigraphique, 1975”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 13: 17-131. 1985 “L’occupation de la Susiane au Ve millénaire et au début IVe millénaire: réflexions et comparisons”, Paléorient 8: 107-115. Driesch, A. von den

142

Bibliography 1976 A guide to the measurement of animal bones from archaeological sites, Harvard University. Dunnel R. C. and W. S. Dancey 1983 “The Siteless Survey: A regional scale data collection strategy”, Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 6: 267-287. Dyson, R. 1965 “Problems in the Relative Chronology of Iran: 80002000 B.C.” in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (ed. R. W. Ehrich), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 215-256. 1966 ‘Excavations on the Acropolis at Susa and problems of Susa A, B and C. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University. Earle, T. 2002 Bronze Age economics: the beginnings of political economies, Boulder, Colo.; Oxford: Westview Press. Eckis, R. 1928 “Alluvial Fans of the Cucamonga District, Southern California”, Journal of Geology 36: 224-47. Egami, N. and Sono, T. 1962 Marv Dasht II: The Excavations at Tall-i Gap 1959, The Yamakawa publishing Co., LTD., Tokyo. Ervynck, A. 2002 “Sedentism or Urbanism? On the Origin of the Commensal Black Rat (Rattus rattus)”, In Bones and the Man (eds. K. Dobney and T. O’Connor), Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 95-109. Falcon, N 1961 “Major Earth Flexuring in the Zagros Mountains of Southwest Iran”, Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London 117: 367-376. Flannery, K. 1965 “The ecology of early food production in Mesopotamia”, Science 147:1247-1256 1999 “Chiefdoms in the Early Near East: Why it is so hard to identify them?” in The Iranian World: Essays on Iranian art and archaeology presented to Ezat O. Negahban, (ed. A Alizadeh, Y. Majidzadeh and S. Malek Shahmirzadi), Tehran: Iran University Press, pp, 44-63. Gasche, H. (ed.) 2004/2005 “The Persian Gulf Shorelines and the Karkheh, Karun, and Jarrahi Rivers, a Geo-archaeological Approach”, Akkadica 125/126, pp.141-215/1-43. Gautier, J. E. and G. Lamper 1905 “Fouilles de Moussian”, in Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse 8: 59-149. Ghirshman, R. 1952 “Cinq campagne de fouilles àSusa, 1946-1951”, Révue d’assyriologie 46: 1-18 1953 “Mission archéologique en Susiane en hiver, 19521953”, Syria 30: 222-33. 1954 “Village Perse-Achémenide” Mémoires de la Mission archéologique er Iran 34. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 1964 “Susa, campagne de fouilles 1962-1963, Rapport préliminaire”, Arts Asiatiques 10: 3-10. 1976 Terrasses sacrées de Bard-e Nechandeh et Masjid-i Solaiman, MDAF 45.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D. P. 1989 “Ethnographic analogues for interpreting modified bones: some cases from East Africa”, In Bone Modification (eds. R. Bonnichsen and M.H. Sorg), Orono: Centre for the Peopling of the Americas, pp. 179-246. Gremliza, F. G. L. 1962 Economy and Endemic Diseases in the Dez Irrigation Pilot Area: A Report to the Khuzestan Water and Power Authority and Plan Organization of Iran. New York: Development Resource Corporation. Haerinck E. and B. Overlaet 1996 Hakalan and Dum Gar Parchinah. The Chalcolithic Period (= Luristan Excavation Documents I), Brussels. Hallock, R.T. 1969 Persepolis Fortification Tablets, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Halstead, P. 1985 “A study of mandibular teeth from Romano-British contexts at Maxey”, In Archaeology and Environment in the Lower Welland Valley 1 East Anglian Archaeology 27 (eds. F. Pryor and C. French), pp. 219-224. 1992 “Dimini and the ‘DMP’: faunal remains and animal exploitation in Late Neolithic Thessaly” Annual of the British School at Athens 87: 29-59. in press. “Faunal remains from FN-EH Nemea Tsoungiza: husbandry, butchery, consumption and discard of animals”. Halstead, P., Collins, P. and Isaakidoub, V. 2002 “Sorting the Sheep from the Goats: Morphological Distinctions between the Mandibles and Mandibular Teeth of Adult Ovis and Capra”, Journal of Archaeological Science 29(5): 545-553. Hamzehpour, B., D. Paul and E. Wiesner 1999 “Views on the Structural Development of the Zagros Simply Folded Belt in Khuzestan Province, Iran”, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 150: 167-188. Harvey, A. 2004 “Alluvial Fan”, in Encyclopedia of Geomorphology (ed. A.S. Goudie), London; New York : Routledge, pp.15-19. Hatt, R. T. 1959 The Mammals of Iraq, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Helbaek, H. 1969 “Plant Collection, Dry-farming and Irrigation Agriculture in Prehistoric Deh Luran” in Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain: An Early Village Sequence from Khuzestan, Iran, (eds. F. Hole, K. V. Flannery, J. A. Neely), Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 1, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, pp. 383-426. Henrickson, E. F. 1994 “The Outer Limits: Settlements and Economic Strategies in the Central Zagros Highlands during the Uruk Era”, in Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East: The Organizational Dynamics of Complexity,

143

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin (ed. G. Stein and M. S Rothman), Madison, Wis.: Prehistory Press, pp. 85-102. Henrickson, E. F. and Thuesen, I (eds.) 1989 Upon this Foundation. The Ubaid reconsidered. Proceedings from the Ubaid Symposium Elsinore may 30th-june 1st 1988. The Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Ancient Near Eastern Studies. Copenhague, University of Copenhagen - Museum Tusculanum Press. Heyvaert, V.M.A. and C. Baeteman 2007 “Holocene Sedimentary Evolution and Palaeocoastlines of the Lower Khuzestan Plain (SWIran)”, Marine Geology 242 (1) pp. 83-108. Hirth, K. G. 1996 “Political Economy and Archaeology: Perspectives on Exchange and Production”, Journal of Archaeological Research 4: 203-239. Højlund, F. 1994 “Other finds from periods I-V”, in Qala’at alBahrain. The Northern City Wall and the Islamic Fortress, vol. 1, (eds. F. Højlund, H. H. Andersen), Jutland Archaeological Society Publications XXX: 1, Aarhus University Press, Aarhus-DK, pp. 361-416. Hole, F. 1962 “Archaeological Survey and Excavation in Iran, 1961”, Science 137: 524-526 1969 Preliminary Reports of the Rice University Project in Iran 1968-1969, Houston: Rice University, Department of Anthropology (Mimeograph). 1974 “Tepe Tula’i, an Early Campsite in Khuzestan”, Paléorient 2: 219-242 1977 (ed.) Studies in the Archaeological History of the Deh Luran Plain: the excavation of Chagha Sefid, Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan 1978 “The Comparative Stratigraphy of the Early Prehistoric Periods in Khuzestan”, Paléorient 4: 229232. 1979 “Rediscovering the Past in the Present: ethno archaeology in Luristan, Iran”, in Ethnoarchaeology: Implications of ethnography for archaeology (ed. C. Kramer). New York: Columbia University Press. 1980 “Archaeological Surveys in Southwest Asia”, Paléorient 6: 21-44. 1983 “Symbols of Religion and Social Organization at Susa”, in The Hilly Flanks and Beyond: Essays on the prehistory of southwestern Asia, presented to Robert J. Braidwood (eds. T. Young, P. Smith and P. Mortensen), Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 36, Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 1984 “Analysis of Structure and Design in Prehistoric Ceramics”, World Archaeology 15: 326-347. 1985 “The Organization of Susiana Society: Periodization of Site Distributions”, Paléorient 11/2: 21-24. 1987 (ed.) The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press. 1987a “Themes and Problems in Iranian Archaeology”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed.

F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 19-27. 1987b “Archaeology of the Village Period”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 29-78. 1987c “Settlement and Society in the Village Period”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 79-105. 1989 “Patterns of Burial in the Fifth Millennium”, in Upon this Foundation. The Ubaid reconsidered (eds. E. F. Henrickson and I. Thuesen), Proceedings from the Ubaid Symposium Elsinore may 30th-June 1st 1988. The Carsten Niebuhr Institute of Ancient Near Eastern Studies. Copenhague, University of Copenhagen Museum Tusculanum Press, pp. 149-180. 1990 “Cemetery or mass grave?: Reflections on Susa I”, in Contribution à l’Histoire de l’Iran. Mélanges Jean Perrot (ed. F. Vallat), Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations. n.d. “Report on the Survey of Upper Khuzestan”, in Preliminary Reports of the Rice University Project in Iran, 1968-69 (ed. F. Hole), Houston: Rice University Department of Anthropology. 1994 “Environmental Instabilities and Urban Origins”, in Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East (eds. G. Stein and Mi Rothman), Madison: Prehistory Press, pp. 121-151. Hole, F. and K. V. Flannery 1968 The Prehistory of Southwestern Iran: A Preliminary Report,” Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 22, 1967, pp. 147-206.  Hole F. and Heizer, R. F. 1973 An Introduction to Prehistoric Archeology, 3rd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Hole, F., K. V. Flannery and J. A. Neely 1969 (ed.) Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain: An Early Village Sequence from Khuzestan, Iran. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 1, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Huot, J.-L. 1994 Les premiers uillageois de la Misoflotamie. Paris: Armand Colin 1989 «Les Sumériens», Éditions Errance, pp. 19-23, 6670. Ibn Hawqal, Muhammad 1938–39 Kitab surat al-Ard, ed. J.H. Kramers, Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum 2. Brill, Leiden. Johnson, G. A. 1973 Local Exchange and Early State Development in Southwestern Iran, Anthropological Papers of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, no. 51, Ann Arbor. 1987 “Nine Thousand Years of Social Change in Western Iran”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest,

144

Bibliography (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 283-291. Kantor, H. J. 1974 “The Excavations at Chogha Mish”, in Proceedings of the Second Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran (ed. F. Bagherzadeh), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, pp. 15-22. 1976 “The Excavations at Chogha Mish, 1974-1975”, in Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran (ed. F. Bagherzadeh), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, pp. 23-41. Karimi, J 2005 “Peyvast-e Chaharom. Estefade az fanavari-ye sanjesh az dur (RS) va systemha-ye etelaat-e joghrafiaii (GIS) baraye samandehi-ye etelaate bastanshenasi be dast amade az barresiha-ye bastanshenakhti-e dasht-e Mianab-e Shushtar (Appendix 4. Application of RS and GIS in Archaeological Surveys of the Mianab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 541-546. Kozlowski, J.K. 1999 “Gravettian/Epigravettian Sequences in the Balkans: environment, technologies, hunting strategies and raw material procurement”, In The Palaeolithic Archaeology of Greece and Adjacent Areas, (eds. G.N. Bailey, E. Adam, E. Panagopoulou, C. Perles and K. Zachos), Athens, British School, pp. 319-329. Kozuh, M. 2003 “Inscribed Bricks”, in News and Notes No. 177. Oriental Institute, University of Chicago. Khaliliyan and Nokandeh, J. n.d “Baresi va shenasai-ye shahrestan-e Mehran (Archeological Survey of the Deh Luran Plain)”, Unpublished Report, Document and Archive Center of the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (In Persian). Khosrow Zadeh, A., M. Zeidi, Sh. Soleymani, A. Aali, M. T. Ataii, B. Faryadian, A. Lazardusti, A. Moghaddam, N. Miri. 2005 “Tosif-e Makanha va Mohavateha-ye Bastani-ye Dasht-e Mianab (Description of the Archaeological Sites, Minab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhtiye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran) (ed. A. Moghaddam), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 37-105. Kirkby, A. V. T. 1973 The Use of Land and Water Resources in the Past and Present in the Valley of Oaxaca, Mexico, Memories of the Museum of Anthropology No. 5, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Kirkby A. V. T. and M. J. Kirkby 1976 “Geomorphic Processes and Survey Surface of Archaeological Sites in Semi-arid Areas”, in Geoarchaeology: Earth Science and the Past (eds.

Davidson, D. A. and M. L. Shackley), London: Duckworth, pp. 229-253. Kirkby, M. J. 1977 “Land and Water Resources of the Deh Luran and Khuzestan Plain”, in Studies in Archaeological History of the Deh Luran Plain: The excavations of Chogha Sefid (ed. F. Hole), Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 9, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, pp. 251-288. Kirkby M. J. and A. V. T. Kirkby 1969 “Provisional Report on Geomorphology and Land Use in the Deh Luran and Upper Khuzistan”, in Preliminary Reports of the Rice university Project in Iran 1968-1969 (ed. F. Hole), Houston: Rice University Department of Anthropology. Kouchoukos, N. 1998 Landscape and Social Change in Late Prehistoric Mesopotamia, Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale University. Kouchoukos, N., and F. Hole 2003 “Changing estimates of Susiana’s prehistoric settlement”, in Yeki bud, Yeki nabud: Essays on the Archaeology of Iran in Honor of William M. Sumner (eds. K. Abdi and N. Miller), Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, UCLA, pp. 53-59. Langsdorff, A. and McCown, D E. 1942 Tall-i Bakun A: season of 1932, Oriental Institute Publications 54. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Layard, A. H. 1846 “A Description of Province f Khuzestan”, Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 16: 1-205. Le Breton, L. 1947 “Note sur la céramique peinte aux environs de Suse et à Suse”, Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique en Iran 30: 120-219. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 1957 “The Early Periods at Susa, Mesopotamian Relations”, Iraq 19: 79-124. Le Brun, A 1971 “Recherches stratigraphiques à l’Acropole de Suse, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 1: 163-216. 1978 La glyptique 17B de l’Acropole (campagne de 1972), Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francais en Iran 8: 61-79. Lees, G. M. and N. L. Falcon 1952 “The Geographical History of the Mesopotamian Plains”, Geographical Journal 118: 24-39. Leopold, L. B., and W.B. Bull 1979 “Base Level, Aggradation, and Grade”, Proceedings of American Philosophical Society 123(3): 168-202. Loftus, W. K. 1857 “Travels and Researches in Chaldea and Susiana”. London: Nisbet & Co. Malek Shahmirzadi, S. 1986 “A Review of the Development of Archaeology in Iran”, Asar 12-14: 133-160 (in Persian).

145

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin 1987 “History of the Archaeological Research in Iran”, Iranian Journal of Archaeology and History (Majalleye Bastanshenasi va Tarikh) 2: 57-73 (in Persian). 1990 “Development of Archaeological Research in Iran”, in Proceedings of the 1st Symposium of Iranian Studies (ed. A. Mousavi Garmarudi), Tehran: Institute of Political and International Students of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (in Persian). 1997 “Pishnahadi baraye tadvin-e jadaval-e gahnegariye Khuzestan (A Proposal for the Chronology of the Khuzestan)”, in Proceedings of the 1st Archeological Symposium after the Islamic Revolution, Susa, 1373, Tehran: Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization (In Persian), pp. 395-419. Marschner. R.F., L.J. Duffy and H. Wright 1978 “Asphalts from Ancient Town Sites In Southwestern Iran”, Paléorient 4: 79-112. Marschner, R.F., H. T. Wright 1978 “Asphalts from Middle Eastern Archaeological Sites” Archaeological Chemistry 21: 51-171. Mashkour, M. 2005 “Observations on the faunal remains of Tall-e Abu Chizan (Khuzestan) first eason of excavation (February 2005)”, (unpublished report). McCown, D. E. 1942 The comparative stratigraphy of early Iran. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Menant, J. D. 1887 “The French Expedition to Susiana”, The American Journal of Archaeology and of the History of the Fine Arts 3(1/2):87-93. Miller, N. 1977 “Preliminary Report on the Botanical Remains from Tepe Jaffarabad, 1969-1974 campaigns”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Francaise en Iran 7: 49-53 1981 “The Plant Remains”, in An Early Town in the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad (ed. H. T. Wright), Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology No. 13, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, pp. 227-232. 1983 “Paleoethnobotanical Results from Bendebal and Jaffarabad”, Cahiers de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran 13: 277-284. 2003a “Plant Remains from the 1996 Excavation” in Excavations at the Prehistoric Mound of Chogha Bonut, Khuzestan, Iran Seasons 1976/77, 1977/78 and 1996 (by A. Alizadeh), pp. 123-128. 2003b “Dar Khazineh 2003, Botanical report”, MASCA Ethnobotanical report 36. Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Museum (on file). Miller, N. and K. Abdi (eds.) 2003 Yeki Bud, Yeki Nabud, Essays on the Archaeology of Iran in Honor of William Sumner, Los Angles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California. Miller Rosen, A. 1986 “Cities of Clay: The Geoarchaeology of Tells”, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Prehistoric Archeology and Ecology Series.

Minze Stuiver and Henry A. Polach, 1977 “Discussion: Reporting of 14C Data”, Radiocarbon 19, no.3: 355-363. Miri, N 2005 “Tosif va tabaghe bandi-ye sofalha-ye Shush-e IV (Susa IV Pottery from the Mianab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 121-123. Miri, N. and M. Zeidi 2005a “Tosif va tabaghe bandi-ye sofalha-ye pish az tarikhi-ye dasht-e Mianab (Prehistoric Pottery from the Mianab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian),pp. 109-114. 2005b “Tosif va tabaghe bandi-ye sofalha-ye dore-ye Uruk (Uruk Pottery from the Mianab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 115-120. 2005c Gozaresh-e gomane-ye azmayeshi-ye Tappe Abu Amud Nejat - KS 1558 (Report on the Test excavation at Tappe Abu Amud Nejat - KS 1558)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 451-476. 2005d “Gozaresh-e gomane-ye azmayeshi-ye Tappe Meshval 3 - KS 1617 (Report on the Test excavation at Tappe Meshval 3-KS 1617)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian), pp. 525-540. Miroschedji, P. de 1986 “La localization de Madaktu et l’organisation politique de l’Elam à l’époque Neo-Elamite”, in De Meyer, L., Gasche, H. and Vallat, F. eds. Fragmenta Historiae Elamicae: Mélanges offerts à M.J. Steve: 209-25. Paris. Mofidi Nasrabadi, B. 2005 “Eine Steininschrift des Amar-Seuna aus Tappe Bormi (Iran)”, ZA 95: 161–71. Moghaddam, A. 2002 “Excavations at Andam-e Abgir-e Darioun”, Unpublished Report, Document and Archive Center of the Iranian Center for Archaeological Research (In Persian). 2005 (ed.) Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain, Southwestern Iran), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research (In Persian). 2005a “Tosif-e Olguha-ye Esteghrari-ye Dasht-e Mianab (Description of the Settlement Pattern of the Mianab Plain)”, in Baresiha-ye Bastanshenakhti-ye Mianab-e Shushtar (Archeological Surveys in Mianab Plain,

146

Bibliography Southwestern Iran (ed. A. Moghaddam), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archeological Research, pp. 416450 (In Persian). 2005b “Preliminary report of 2005 excavation at Tall e Abu Chizan” (unpublished report). 2008 (in press) “A note on the Gargar Irrigation System”, in Mazdesn Shapur ke cihr az yazdan: Essays in Memory of A. Shapur Shahbazi (ed. K. Abdi), Tehran and Persepolis: Iran University Press and Parsa-Pasargadae Research Foundation. Moghaddam A. and N. Miri, 2003 “Archaeological Research in the Mianab Plain of Lowland Susiana, Southwestern Iran”, Iran XLI: 99137. 2007 “Archaeological Surveys in the Eastern Corridor, Southwestern Iran”, Iran XLIV: 23-55. Moghaddam, A., M. Tengberg, M. Mashkour, A. Mohaseb, R. Naderi 2007 “Tall-e Abu Chizan (Tol-e Borchizun), dar bastare Bastan shenakhtiye avakhere doran-e rousta neshini shushan –e bozorg (Tall-e Abu Chizan in the Greater Susiana Later Village Period Context), Tehran: Journal of the Research Institute of I.C.H.T.O, Nos 20&21, Autumn 2007 & Winter 2008. Special Issue if Archaeology.pp. 35-58. Mott, S. 2004 Tatera indica (on-line), Animal Diversity Web June 22, 2006. http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/ accounts/information/Tatera_indica.html. Mousavi, A. 1992 “Jack de Morgan and Excavations at Susa”, Iranian Journal of Archaeology and History (Majalle-ye Bastanshenasi va Tarikh) 11-12: 13-19 (in Persian). 1996 “Early Archaeological Adventures and Methodological Problems in Iranian Archaeology: the evidence from Susa”, Iranica Antiqua 31: 1-17. Neely, J. A. 1969 “Preliminary Report on the Archaeological Survey of Deh Luran”, in Preliminary Reports of the Rice University Project in Iran 1968-1969, ed. F. Hole, Houston: Rice University, Department of Anthropology (Mimeograph), pp. 9-24. 1970 “The Deh Luran Region”, Iran VIII: 202-203. 1974 “Sassanian and Early Islamic Water-Control and Irrigation Systems on the Deh Luran Plain, Iran”, in Irrigation’s Impact on Society, ed. T. E. Downing and M. Gibson, Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Neely, J. and H. Wright. 1994 “Early Settlement and Irrigation on the Deh Luran Plain”, Iran, Technical Report 26, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology. Nissen, H. 1976 “The Behbehan Plain in the Fifth Millennium B.C.”, in Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran (ed. F. Bagherzadeh), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, pp. 273-279. 1985 Problems of the Uruk-Period in Susiana, View from Uruk, Paléorient 11/2: 39-40

1988 The Early History of the Ancient Near East, 90002000 B.C. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Nissen, H. J. and Redman, C. L. 1970-71 “Preliminary Notes on an Archaeological Surface Survey in the plain of Behbehan and the Lower Zuhreh Valley”, Bastan Chenasi va Honar-e Iran 48-50. Nokandeh, J. 2010 “Archaeological Survey in the Mehran Plain, South Western Iran”, in Proceedings of the 6th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East May, 5th-10th 2008, “Sapienza” - Università di Roma Volume 2, pp. 483-509. Oates, J. 1978 “Religion and Ritual in Sixth-Millennium B.C. Mesopotamia”, World Archaeology 10 (2): 117-124. 1978 “Ubaid Mesopotamia and its Relation to Gulf Countries”, in Qatar Archaeological Report: Excavations 1973 (ed. B. De Cardi), Oxford University Press: 39–52. 1993 “Trade and Power in the Fifth and Fourth Millennia B.C.: new evidence from northern Mesopotamia”, World Archaeology 24: 403-422. Oates D. and J. Oates 1976 “Early Irrigation Agriculture in Mesopotamia”, In Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology (eds. G. de G. Sieveking, I. H. Longworth, and K. E. Wilson), London: Duckworth. 2004 “The Role of Exchange Relations in the Origins of Mesopotamian Civilization”, in Explaining Social Change: studies in honor of Colin Renfrew, Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, pp. 177-192. Payne, S. 1973 “Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Asvan Kale”, Anatolian Studies 23: 281-303. Payne, S. and Bull, G. 1988 “Components of variation in measurements of pig bones and teeth and the use of measurements to distinguish wild from domestic pig remains”, Archaeozoologia 2: 27-66. Perkins, A. 1949 “Archaeological News”, American Journal of Archaeology 53(1): 36-57. Perrot, J. 1977 La séquence archéologique de Suse et du sud-ouest de l’Iran antérieurement à la période achéménide”, Paléorient 4: 133-140. 1978 “Introduction aux Actes de la rencontre internationale de Suse (Iran) du 23 au 28 octobre. Petri, C. A., A. Asgari, and M. Seyedin 2005 “From Anshan to Dilmun and Megan: the spatial and temporal distribution of Kaftari and Kaftari related ceramic vessels”, Iran 43: 49-86. Pollock, S. 1983 “Style and Information: an analysis of Susiana Ceramics”, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2: 354-390. 1989 “Power Politics in the Susa A Period”, in Upon this Foundation: The Ubaid reconsidered (eds. E.

147

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Henrickson and I. Thuesen), Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, pp. 281-292. 1999 Ancient Mesopotamia: the Eden that never was, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pottier, E. 1922 Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, Fascicule I. Musée du Louvre (Fasc. 9). Paris. Potts, D.T. 1997 Mesopotamian Civilization: the material foundations, London: Athlone. 1999 The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State, Cambridge University Press. n.d. “The Persepolis Fortification Texts (PFTs) and the Royal Road: Another Look at the Fahliyan area”. Potts, D. T. and K. Roustaei 2006 The Mamasani Archaeological Project, Stage One: A report on the first two seasons of the ICAR-University of Sydney expedition to the Mamasani District, Fars Provience, Iran, Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, Deputy of Research. Pournelle, J. R. 2003 Deltaic Landscapes and the Evolution of Early Mesopotamian Civilization, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, San Diego. Prater, S. 1980 The book of Indian Mammals. India: Bombay Natural History Society. Rahbar, M. n.d. “Shushtar Excavations Unpublished Report”, Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization Documentation Center. Rachocki, A. 1981” Alluvial Fans”. Chichester: Wiley Rawlinson, M. 1839 “Notes on a March from Zohab, at the foot of the Zagros, along the Mountains to Khuzistan (Susianan)”, Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 9: 26-116. Redding, R. 1981 “The Faunal Remains”, in An Early Town in the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad (ed. H. T. Wright), Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology No. 13, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan, pp. 233-261. Reimer PJ, MGL Baillie, E Bard, A Bayliss, JW Beck, C Bertrand, PG Blackwell, CE Buck, G Burr, KB Cutler, PE Damon, RL Edwards, RG Fairbanks, M Friedrich, TP Guilderson, KA Hughen, B Kromer, FG McCormac, S Manning, C Bronk Ramsey, RW Reimer, S Remmele, JR Southon, M Stuiver, S Talamo, FW Taylor, J van der Plicht, and CE Weyhenmeyer 2004 Radiocarbon 46:1029-1058. Renfrew, C. 1974 “Beyond a Subsistence Economy: the evolution of Social organization in prehistoric Europe”, in Reconstructing Complex Societies (ed. C. B. Moore), pp. 69-85 1977 “The Later Obsidian of Deh Luran-The Evidence of Chogha Sefid”, in Studies in the Archaeological

History of the Deh Luran Plain: The excavation of Chogha Sefid, ed. F. Hole, Ann Arbor, pp. 289-311. Renfrew C. and P. Bahn 2000 Archaeology: Theories, methods and Practice, London: Thames and Hudson. Roberts, N. 1991 “Late Quaternary Geomorphological Change and the Origins of Agriculture in South Central Turkey”, Geoarchaeology 6:1-26. Roseberry, W. 1989 Anthropologies and Histories: Essays in culture, history and political economy, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Rothman, M. S. 1987 “Graph Theory and the Interpretation of Regional Survey Data”, Paléorient 13/2:73-91. 2001(ed.) Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors, Santa Fe: School of American Research. Sahlins, M. 1972 Stone Age Economics, Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Sanders, W. T. 1968 “Hydraulic Agriculture, Economic Symbiosis and the Evolution of States in Central Mexico”, in Anthropological archeology in the Americas, Washington, Anthropological Society of Washington, pp. 88-107. Schacht, R. M. 1976 “Some Notes on the Development of Rural settlement on the Susiana plain”, in Proceeding of the 4th Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran, 1975, Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, pp. 446-62. 1987 “Early Historic Cultures”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 171-203. Schwarz, P. 1896 Iran im Mittelalter nach den arabischen Geographen. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz. Selby, W. B. 1844 “Account of the Ascent of the Karun and Dizful Rivers and the Ab-i-Gargar Canal, to Shushtar”, Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 14: 219-246. Service, E. R. 1962 Primitive Social Organization: An evolutionary perspective, New York: Random House. Sherratt, A. 1980 “Water, Soil and Seasonality in Early Cereal Cultivation”, World Archaeology 11:313-330. Silver, I. 1969 “The ageing of domestic animals”, In Science in Archaeology 2 (eds. E.S. Higgs and D. Brothwell), London: Thames and Hudson, pp. 283-302. Small, R. J. 1989 Geomorphology and Hydrology, Harlow, Essex, England: Longman. SPSS 2004. SPSS v 13.0.1 for Windows. Chicago, SPSS Inc.

148

Bibliography Stein, A. 1936 “An Archaeological Tour in the Ancient Persis”, Iraq 3: 112-225. Steve, M. J. 2001 “La Tablette Sumerienne de Sustar”, Akkadica 121: 5-12. Steve M. J. and H. Gasche 1971 L’Acropole de Suse, Mémoirs de la Délégation Archeologique en Iran 46, Paris: Geuthner. 1990 “Le Tell de l’Apadana avant les Achemenides”, in Contribution à l’Histoire de l’Iran. Mélanges Jean Perrot (ed. F. Vallat), Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, pp.15-60. Subramanian, V. S. and and M. F. Van Osten 1959 Report on the Semidetailed Soil and Land Classification of the Ram Hormuz Plain, Khuzestan, Iran. Prepared for the Khuzestan Water and Power Authority by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Soil Research Organization, Tehran, Unpublished Manuscript in the archives of the KWPA, Andimeshk, Khuzestan. Sumner, W. M. 1989 “Population and Settlement Area: An example for m Iran”, American Anthropologist 91: 631-641. Tabari, Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir 1999 Tarikh al-rusul wa’l muluk (The history of al Tabari). English. Selections, vol. V: Sasanids, the Byzantines, the Lakmids, and Yemen. Translated and annotated by C. E. Bosworth. State University of New York Press, Albany. Van Andek, T. H. and Runnels, C.N. 1995 “The earliest farmers in Europe”, Antiquity 69: 489500. van der Veen, M. and N. R. J. Fieller 1982 “Sampling seeds”, Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 287-298. Vanden Berghe, L. 1973 “Le nécropole de Hakalan”, Archeologia 57: 49-58. 1975 “Fouilles au Lorestan: La nécropole de Dum Gar Parchinah”, in Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research in Iran (ed. F. Bagherzadeh), Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, pp. 45-62. 1987 “Luristan, Pusht-e Kuh au chalcolitique moyen (les nécropole de Parchinah et Hakalan)”, in Préhistorie de la Mésopotamie: La Mésopatamie préhistorique et l’exploration récente du Djebel Hamrin, by J.0L. Huot, Colloque international du Centre national de la recherché scientifique. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, pp. 91-106. Vanden Berghe, L. and Schippmann, K. 1985 Les reliefs rupestres d’Elymaide (Iran) de l’époque parthe, Gent. Veenenbos, J. 1958 Unified Report on the Soil and Land Classification Survey of Dezful Project, Khuzestan Iran, Tehran: Khuzestan Development Service. Voigt M. and R. H. Dyson

1992 “The Chronology of Iran, ca. 8000-2000 BC.”, in Chronologies in Old World Archaeology, (ed. R.W. Ehrich),Chicago: university of Chicago Press, pp.122178. Weiss, H. 1976 Ceramics for Chronology: Discrimination and cluster analysis of fifth millennium ceramic assemblages from Qabr Sheykheyn, Khuzestan, Ph.D Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 1977 “Periodization, Population and Early State Formation in Khuzestan”, in Mountains and Lowlands: Essays in the archaeology of greater Mesopotamia (eds. L. Levine and T. Young). Malibu, CA: Undena. Weiss, H. and T. C. Young 1975 “The Merchants of Susa: Godin V and plateaulowland relations in the late fourth millennium B.C.”, Iran 13: 1-17. Wenke, R. J. 1975-6 “Imperial Investments and Agricultural Developments in Parthian and Sasanian Khuzesan: 150 B.C. to A.D. 640”, Mesopotamia 10-11: 13-221. 1977 “Parthians and the Evolution of Empires in Southwestern Iran”, JAOS 101(3): 303–15. White, L. A. 1959 The Evolution of Culture: the development of civilization to the fall of Rome, McGraw-Hill, New York. Whitcomb, D. 1971 The Proto-Elamite Period at Tal-i-Ghazir, Iran, M.A. Thesis, Department of Archaeology, University of Georgia. Wilkens, B. 1996 “The fauna from Italian excavations on Crete”, In Pleistocene and Holocene Fauna of Crete and its First Settlers, (ed. D.S. Reese), Madison, Prehistoric Press, pp. 241-262. Wilkinson, T. J. 1990 Town and Country in Southeastern Anatolia, vol. 1, Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. 2000 Regional Approaches to Mesopotamian Archaeology: The Contribution of Archaeological Surveys”, Journal of Archaeological Research 8: 219-267. 2003 Archaeological landscapes of the Near East, Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Wright, H. 1969 Archeological Survey in the Areas of Ram Hormoz, Shushtar and Gutwand, Manuscript, On file, University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Ann Arbor. 1977 “Toward an Explanation of the Origin of the State”, In Explanation of Prehistoric Change, (ed. J. N. Hill), Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, pp. 215-230. 1979 (ed.) Archaeological Investigations in Northeastern Xuzestan, 1976. Technical Report 10. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan and Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research Survey Report No. 1. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.

149

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin 1981 (ed.) An Early Town in the Deh Luran Plain: Excavations at Tepe Farukhabad. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology No. 13, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan. 1984 “Prestate Political Formations”, In On the Evolution of Complex Societies: Essays in Honor of Harry Hoijer (ed. T. Earle), Malibu: Undena, pp. 41-77. 1987 “The Susiana Hinterland during the Era of Primary State Formation”, in The Archeology of Western Iran. Settlement and Society from Prehistory to the Islamic Conquest, (ed. F. Hole), Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press pp.141-155. 1994 “Pre-state Political Formations”, In Chiefdoms and Early States in the Near East (eds. G. Stein and M. S. Rothman), Madison: Prehistory Press, pp 67-84. 1998 “Uruk States in Southwestern Iran”, in Archaic States (eds. G. F. Feinman and J. Marcus), Santa Fe, N.M.: School of American Research Press, pp. 173-197. 2000 “Modeling Tributary Economies and Hierarchical Polities”, in Cultural Evolution: Contemporary viewpoints, (eds. G. M. Feinman and L. Manzanilla), New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 197-213. 2001 “Cultural Action in the Uruk World”, in Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors (ed. M. S. Rothman), Santa Fe: School of American Research, pp. 123-148. Wright, H. T. and Bernbeck, R. 1996 “Flaked Stone Assemblages From Hacinebi Tepe”, In “Uruk Colonies and Anatolian Communities: An Interim Report on the 1992-3 Excavations at Hacınebi, Turkey”, by Gil Stein, Reinhard Bernbeck, Cheryl Coursey, Augusta McMahon, Naomi Miller, Adnan Mısır, Jeffrey Nicola, Holly Pittman, Susan Pollock, and Henry Wright, American Journal of Archaeology 100: 205-260. Wright, H.T. and G. Johnson 1975 “Population, Exchange and Early State Formation in Southwestern Iran”, American Anthropologists 77: 267-289. Wright H. T., J. A. Neely, G. A. Johnson and J. D. Speth 1975 “Early Fourth Millennium Developments in Southwestern Iran”, Iran 13: 129-147. Wright, H. T., N. Miller, J. a. Neely and R. W. Redding 1999 “A Late Susiana Society in southwestern Iran”, in The Iranian World: Essays on Iranian art and archaeology presented to Ezat O. Negahban, (ed. A Alizadeh, Y. Majidzadeh and S. Malek Shahmirzadi), Tehran: Iran University Press, pp. 64-79. Wright H. T. and E. Rupley 2001 “Calibrated Radiocarbon Age Determinations of Uruk-related Assemblages”, in Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors: Cross-cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation, ed. M. S. Rothman, 85-122, School of American Research Advanced Seminar Series. Santa Fe: SAR Press. Wright, H. T. and Carter, E. 2003 “Archaeological Survey on the Western Ram Hormoz Plain”, in Yeki Bud, Yeki Nabud, Essays on the Archaeology of Iran in Honor of William Sumner (eds.

Miller, N. and K. Abdi), Los Angles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, pp. 61-82. Zadok, R. 1977 “On five Biblical names”, Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89: 266–68. Electronic Sources Encarta 2006 Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Online Source http://www.irimo.ir (Islamic Republic of Iran Meteorological Organization website).

150

APPENDIX 1 Excavation Pottery Collection

Introduction

The prehistoric pottery of Tall-e Abu Chizan comes from Areas of A, B and C, while Area D contained Uruk material. Pottery attributes were recorded in a database that covered a broad range of fields including pottery provenance, each sherd’s field ID number,1 weight, temper, paste color of paste, designs, fabric type, average thickness, surface treatments and decorating methods. As regards the study of the designs, structure of the designs and designs elements were also recorded in specific fields for further possible studies. The system employed here follows the classification of Chogha Mish’s large pottery collection (following Delougaz’s system, Delougaz 1952). This considers form and design as well as the texture of the pottery and is one of the most comprehensive systems of its kind for the study of the pre- and proto-historic pottery of southwestern Iran. Hopefully this classification will be used more widely and become increasingly comprehensive through further investigations and studies of other sites in the region. The Chogha Mish pottery classification system is especially comprehensive as regards the MS and Uruk periods. As for the LS potteries, since the excavated area from this period at Chogha Mish was limited (cf. Hole 1987: 88), the quantity and diversity of the sherds was not as broad or inclusive as in the preceding and following periods and the classification is less useful. From the LMS, LS and Uruk pottery recovered and recorded in the pottery database, a number of pieces were chosen from each period for more detailed analysis. Selection was based on forms and/or design. As regards the incorporation of the Tall-e Abu Chizan sherds into the classification of pottery families, while the rims are generally most diagnostic, bases can often be assigned to multiple forms and therefore are the least helpful. Body sherds have been assigned to different families as much as possible based on their decoration, particularly where the form is unknown. Late Middle Susiana Pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan

The LMS pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan comes from Area A, layers 14-21 and Area B. In addition, a few sherds come from the LS Layers 11-13 of Area A.

 The pottery ID number is the registration number, which has been given to all pottery sherds recovered and recorded in Abu Chizan. P stands for Pottery, followed by a five digit number starting from 00001.

Most of the LMS pottery of Tall-e Abu Chizan is comparable in fabric, form and design to contemporary examples from other previously excavated sites such as Jowi, Bendebal, Jaffarabad and Chogha Mish and also with some examples from the neighboring plains of Behbahan and Zohreh. Two major categories of LMS pottery -buff ware and orange/ red ware- are represented at Tall-e Abu Chizan, with the buff ware forming the majority, while a few examples of LMS gray ware were also found. The buff wares belong to previously defined (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 178-9) sub-groups of standard buff ware (dense, mineral tempered with some variety in the amount and size of the grits), fine buff ware (dense with no visible inclusions), gritty buff ware (with considerable amount of grit as temper) and straw-tempered buff ware. They vary in color shades from yellow to pale yellow, grayish yellow, light yellow, dull orange, light yellow orange and dull yellow orange. Plain, red-washed and buff-slipped red wares (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 179) represent the red wares - mostly in orange tones. A few examples of gray ware were also recorded in the collection. The Families of LMS Pottery at Tall-e Abu Chizan

Twenty-five of the previously defined LMS families (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 178-211) are attested at Tall-e Abu Chizan (Figs. A1.1-A1.6). Since these families are well defined, only the differences between Tall-e Abu Chizan and their corresponding families at Chogha Mish will be discussed here. The texture, color and designs of the Tall-e Abu Chizan LMS pottery are similar to what is known at contemporary sites in Susiana (mainly Chogha Mish). However, undoubtedly due to the nature of the available local raw materials, some differences exist. For example, some well-known forms and designs that are known in buff wares at other sites are represented in orange-red pastes at Tall-e Abu Chizan (Table A1.1). These groups are introduced as new families in this study. Examples of LMS families VIII-2 and XIII from Chogha Mish as well as similar material from Jowi and Bendebal are known in buff ware, while at Tall-e Abu Chizan almost all examples belong to the orange-red ware group (Fig. A1.6:P00952, P01001, P01146, P01002). The Tall-e Abu Chizan variants of families VIII-2 and XIII are therefore introduced here as the new families XLI and XLII.2

1

  The numbering of new families follows the number of the last family of LMS wares at Chogha Mish, XL (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 211).

2

151

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Family

Fabric Type at Chogha Mish

Fabric Type at Tall-e Abu Chizan

IXb

Standard Buff Ware

Gritty Buff Ware

VIII-1

Fine Buff Ware

Straw-tempered Buff Ware

XXIV

Standard Buff Ware

Standard and Fine Buff Ware

XXXIa

Standard and Plain Red Ware

Standard and Fine Buff Ware

XXXIb

Normally Standard Buff Ware

Fine Buff Ware

XXXIV

Standard Buff Ware

Gritty and Fine Buff Ware

Table A1.1: Fabric Differences between 6 families at Tall-e Abu Chizan and Chogha Mish LMS Pottery

There are also some pieces with no parallels in the Chogha Mish LMS collection or elsewhere. These represent new families previously unattested in Southwestern Iran. In addition to families XLI and XLII, new families include XLIII, XLIV and XLV (Fig. A1.7:P01148, P01091, P01165, P01127). Two of these families are plain wares. New Families

Family XLI (Fig. A1.6:P01099, P01056): From a form and design point of view, this family is comparable to LMS Family VIII-2 (Delougaz and Kantor 1996:182) but is differentiated from it because of its paste color. Examples of family XLI are made of a grit-tempered, orange paste. They may have buff slip that will place them in the category of red-washed red or buff-slipped red wares. - Family XLII (Fig. A1.6: P00952, P01001, P01146, P01002): From a form and design point of view, this family is very comparable to LMS Family XIII (Delougaz and Kantor 1996: 188). However, as noted earlier, family XLII is in red-orange rather tan-buff. Examples are slipped with the same or similar color as their fabric (red-washed red ware). Small grits and sometimes white inclusions have been used as temper. Decoration is in brownish black or dark red. -Family XLIII (Fig. A1.7:P01148): This new form and design was previously unknown at other LMS sites. This is a miniature vessel with buff paste, mineral temper and vertical decorations in brown paint. It is slightly similar in form to an example from Tall-e Nokhodi IVb (comparable to Bakun type IXb), although it is smaller in size and not contemporary with it. - Family XLIV: This family of small jars with orange paste is represented by only one sherd (Fig. A1.7: P01127). A similar form has been found at Bendebal, Level 19 (Dollfus 1983a: Fig. 58: 8). - Family XLV: This family includes plain buff ware bowls with slightly concave or straight walls (Fig. A1.7: P01091, P01165).

Late Susiana Pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan

Late Susiana pottery was found in Areas A (Layers 2-13) and C. The collection includes many forms and designs not attested in Chogha Mish or elsewhere. It has been suggested that the LS collection of Chogha Mish belongs to the later phase of this period (the so-called LS2 phase; Alizadeh 1992: 22-3). If this is correct, it would mean that the pottery of the earlier phase of this period (LS1) was not represented there at all. Even if this suggestion remains unconfirmed, the limited collection of LS pottery from Chogha Mish means that further and broader excavation at sites with larger LS pottery assemblages, such as Tall-e Abu Chizan (and other LS sites in Susiana), should be expected to yield a much more diverse range of material, in both form and decoration, than that found at Chogha Mish. Although the Choga Mish system of classification has been used in this study, as regards the LS pottery it has been necessary to introduce new families of forms and designs recovered at Tall-e Abu Chizan (discussed below). Standard buff ware with no or few small visible inclusion and a dense to granular texture constitutes the majority of the collection. It is found in different colors including yellow, dull yellow, light yellow, pale yellow, light yellow orange, dull yellow orange, olive yellow and grayish yellow. Fine buff ware with a dense texture and no visible inclusions is also found in large quantities. Red ware varies in color from orange, dull orange, reddish orange, pale orange, yellow orange to dull yellowish brown, brown, dull brown, yellowish brown and reddish brown. The collection includes a few example of grey ware (in light grey and yellowish grey) as well. Designs are usually painted in different shades of dark brown, black and dark olive, with a few examples of dark or dusky red paint. The Families of LS Pottery at Tall-e Abu Chizan

With respect to form, many of the LS sherds are comparable to examples from other sites in Susiana (Jaffarabad, Bandebal, Chogha Mish and Susa) as well as those in the Behbahan and Zohreh Plains, but the great diversity of designs is very significant with many of the motifs unparalleled. Twenty-six out of 30 LS pottery families established by Delougaz and Kantor (Delougaz and 152

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

Kantor 1996: 170-8) based on the Chogha Mish and Susa collections are represented at Tall-e Abu Chizan (Figs. A1.9-21). The attribution of some sherds, particularly small ones, to specific families might not be absolutely definite, as some of them are attributable to more than one family. This is specifically true of families IV, XVIII, XIX and XX (beakers), the distinguishing factor between them being the rim diameter and the vessel’s height, variables which cannot be determined from a small sherd. For this reason, except for cases where there is a larger sherd and a higher certainty of categorization, sherds representing families IV, XVIII, XIX and XX are grouped together. New Families

Seven new families are identified in the LS collection from Tall-e Abu Chizan. Many of these sherds are not the first examples of their kind and have parallels at contemporary sites in Susiana but since the Chogha Mish LS pottery classification was limited, they are introduced here as new families. -Family XXXI: This is represented only by one sherd (Fig. A1.21:P00036) and is basically the buff version of red ware jars categorized as family XXIX. -Family XXXII: This includes small vessels of buff ware, the walls of which show a double curvature – concave above and convex below (Fig. A1.21:P00859). More complete examples of this form have been recovered elsewhere (cf. Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 36: A, 40: D; Wiess 1976, Fig. 13:12). The main decoration seems to be a series of parallel zigzags between filled spaces. -Family XXXIII: This comprises buff ware miniature jars which can be divided into subfamilies XXXIIIa and XXXIIIb based on the presence or absence of painted decoration (Fig. A1.21: P01341 and P01307). -Family XXXIV: Medium to large size bowls of buff ware with straight walls and painting on their exterior (Figs. A1.21:P00066, P00689 and A1.22). Family XXXV: Deep buff bowls with incurving rims or, rarely, a barrel-like shape (Fig. A1.23). The main decoration is on the outer surface with a single band along the interior of the rim. -Family XXXVI: This family includes (probably deep) bowls with either concave or double curvature walls (Fig. A1.24: P00444 and P00798). The small size of the two sherds that represent this family does not allow their grouping under one or the other of these forms. This family seems to be descendant of MS families VIII-3 or XV. Main decoration is on the outer surface with a single band along the interior lip. -Family XXXVII: This family includes medium-sized deep bowls with convex walls and a single band of paint on their everted ledge rim (Fig. A1.24: P00232, P00121,

P00057). They are differentiated from family I miniature bowls by their larger size, although in form they are very similar (cf. Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: D). Apart from these new families, the scope of some other families has been extended to include more varieties or larger/smaller sizes of a specific form or a more diverse range of design motifs. Family XXI (unpainted buff ware jars) is represented only by plain, hole-mouth examples in the Chogha Mish LS collection. This family can now be broadened by the inclusion of other varieties of holemouth jars (Fig. A1.18: P00447-P00084) such as those with diagonally flattened rims, whose mouth diameter is between 13 to 18 cm with one exceptionally large example (24 cm). In contrast, family XXVIII (unpainted red ware jars) is not represented by plain rims, while plain, holemouth red ware jars from Tall-e Abu Chizan with 14-24 cm in diameter rims (Fig. A1. P00240, P00266, P00483) can also be included in this family. Uruk Pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan

Apart from sherds picked up during the CSS, the rest of the Uruk pottery from the site comes from Area D. In spite of their limited number, these sherds included major diagnostic forms, such as a large number of beveled-rim bowls (Figs. A1.40-42). The Uruk material mostly belongs to the Early and Middle Uruk periods. Different shades of buff ware including light, pale and dull yellow, dull yellow orange and light yellow orange are the dominant colors of the Uruk pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan followed by orange and red wares. Most of the sherds are both vegetal and mineral tempered. The Uruk Pottery Families at Tall-e Abu Chizan

Ten families of Uruk pottery from Chogha Mish have parallels at Tall-e Abu Chizan (Figs. A1.40-45). The rest of the collection consists of forms that are not easily attributable to known families, although some have generally similar parallels. These may represent local forms, in contrast to widespread types like beveled-rim bowls. Unattributed examples include 15 different forms represented only by a single sherd. These include several types of low- and high-necked jars, closed-mouth vessels, and bowls. Initial Conclusions

In general the LMS pottery from Tall-e Abu Chizan is in accordance with the forms and designs known from other sites in Khuzestan with contemporary material such as Jowi, Bandebal, Jaffarabad and Chogha Mish. There are, however, differences that seem inevitably to be the result of the site’s location and hence the kind of clay available for pottery production. This has resulted in some differences in texture and paste colors between parallel forms represented at Tall-e Abu Chizan, Chogha Mish or other aforementioned sites.

153

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

LS pottery shows great diversity in designs, many of them (so far) exclusive to Tall-e Abu Chizan. The initial study of this period’s pottery from Area A-Layers 2-13 does not support the hypothesis that the LS period comprises two phases, LS1 and LS2 (Alizadeh 1992: 22). There is no clear division based on the design trends of the pottery form Tall-e Abu Chizan’s LS period sequence. The socalled characteristic designs of each of these hypothesized phases such as the dot motif are found in different layers with no specific quantitative dominance in either earlier or later layers, implying the absence of such a division.

exterior (Fig.A1.7:P01096), hatched diamonds (Fig. A1.5:P01097), solid triangles (exterior) and parallel vertical narrow bands (interior) (Fig.A1.6:P01099), heavy zigzags, solid paint (dark red) in the interior, white slip on the exterior and suspended elements dark brown paint and red paint, in the interior, large festoons in the interior and reversed solid triangles on the exterior. Technical remarks: The sherds found in this layer are relatively well-produced. In terms of paint preservation some examples of exhibit paint decomposition on their surfaces (Fig. A1.7:P01087, Fig.A1.6:P01099).

Area A

Layer 19 Sixteen sherds in different color and sizes were recovered. They comprised two groups: 1- Buff ware with a dense paste; very small sand granules on all parts of the sherd; dense air pockets were visible on both surfaces; some pieces had a black residue on their interior surface; coarse, straw-tempered bodies were also found (probably part of oven wall or cooking ware); 2 - Orange ware with dense paste and white inclusions both on the surface and in section of sherds; red wares were also recovered; these also had a dense texture with no visible inclusions; one example was heavily chaff-tempered. Forms: Decoration: festoons in the interior and bands on the basal carination (Fig.A1.8:P01075) as well as parallel bands. Technical Remarks: One piece has some pinkish spots on its interior surface, probably due to the firing process.

Since the majority of the Tall-e Abu Chizan pottery was recovered in Area A, a more detailed description of their forms, designs and other characteristics is presented below in stratigraphic order - from Layer 21 to Layer 1. This allows for a careful examination of changes in decoration and form throughout this long sequence. Layer 21 Eight sherds of varying color (buff to dull orange) and size were dispersed across the layer. Generally, unpainted plain ware with a soft and slipped body and no visible inclusions were dominant. Some body sherds were grit tempered - Forms: hole-mouth jar (Fig. A1.6:P01124), short necked jar (Fig. A1.7:P01127), flat based bowl, plate or tray (Fig. A1.7:P01126) Decoration: Central patterns (Fig.A1.7:P01126), solid bands, ladders and vertical parallel bands. Technical Remarks: Fig.A1.7:P01129 has a pink spot in its interior body that was probably made during the firing process. One example has a solid dark slip on its interior surface. It might have been covered with bitumen. Its exterior surface is plain with some chaff voids. Layer 20 Thirty-six sherds in different color and sizes were recovered from this layer. They represented six distinctive groups: 1) Buff ware with a generally dense texture, somewhat gritty, and wash-slipped. In some cases there are some very small black sands granules on the surface. Bodies with dense air voids on their surfaces (interior and exterior) also were found ;2) Orange ware that is generally dense, although some body sherds have a gritty texture and white inclusions; 3) Dull orange ware that is dense although some examples have grits and white inclusions in their temper. Dense air voids are visible on the surfaces of some sherds; 4) Red ware dominated by straw tempered body sherds with a black core. Some sherds with a dense texture were also present; 5) Heavy chaff-tempered pieces (probably part of oven walls); and 6) black or burnt ware, just one example. Forms: high necked jar, ring base bowl (Fig.A1.3:P01089), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.7:P01091). Decoration: Circles and cross (Fig.A1.7:P01087), medium sized dots on the jar shoulder, center patterns (Fig. A1.7:P01090), ladder and solid bands (Fig.A1.5:P01094), anthropomorphic (dancers) designs on the interior and

Layer 18 Sixty-one medium and large-sixed sherds in different colors were recovered in this layer. It is likely that they have come off from a mud brick wall. They belonged to three groups: 1 - buff ware, mostly gritty with a thick slip (pinkish) on both surfaces; some examples have chaff air voids on their surfaces; a few sherds have a dense texture; examples with traces of a (bitumen) residue on their interior were found as well; 2- Straw- and grit-tempered orange ware with a few representative sherds that mostly belonged to cooking wares; straw- and grit-tempered red ware with a black core was also found. Forms: deep bowl (Fig.A1.1:P01060), hole-mouth jar (Fig. A1.6:P01062), flat based bowl or jar and shallow bowl. Decoration: solid scallops, bands, wavy band (Fig. A1.5:P01059), wavy band, narrow horizontal band with vertical narrow festoon and line (Fig.A1.1:P01060), large festoons on the exterior and parallel band on the interior surface (Fig.A1.8:P01061) Layer 17 One hundred and forty-six sherds in different sizes and colors were recovered from this layer. Buff ware makes up the majority of the sherds. They are dense in texture, with slipped surfaces. Some have traces of bitumen residue on their interior surface. There are also some grit-tempered pieces. Orange ware with a predominantly dense texture and a very smooth, light slip was also represented. Some examples have small grits in their temper. Grit- and strawtempered red ware was also recovered. 154

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

Forms: Small bowl (Fig.A1.7:P00983), beakers (Fig. A1.3:P00984), carinated bowl (?) (Fig.A1.5:P00992), deep bowl with spout (Fig.A1.A1.2:P00995), deep bowl (Fig. A1.3:P00996), plate (Fig.A1.2:P00999), large open bowl (Fig.A1.4:P01015), closed form jar (Fig.A1.3:P01017), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.2:P01054). Decoration: Bands (Fig.A1.3:P00983), vertical solid bands on the exterior with in-filled scallops on the interior surface (Fig.A1.3:P00984), hatched triangles (Fig.A1.5:P00992), wavy zigzag (Fig.A1.1:P00994), suspended scallops (Fig. A1.2:P00995), large festoons on the exterior and in filled scallops on the interior surface (Fig.A1.6:P01002), horned animal (goats) and solid bands (Fig.A1.1:P01013), ladder (Fig.A1.4:P01015), scallops (Fig.A1.3:P01023), bands and wavy bands (Fig.A1.2:P01054). Technical Remarks: some over-fired deformed bodies of pale yellow ware were found whose color had turned to olive green. Some large pieces had eroded surfaces with several visible cracks.

However, some of them are grit-tempered or have white inclusions with black cores. Forms: bowl with basal carination, small beaker (?) (Fig. A1.6:P00952), plain bowl, open mouth bowl Decoration: vertical and horizontal hatches, chain like diamond, strands of hair (Fig.A1.8:P00949), vertical bands on the exterior and in filled scallops on the interior surface (Fig.A1.6:P00952), scalloped circle, animal with small dots (Fig.A.18:P00955), medium-sized dots under the exterior band rim. Technical Remarks: Some over-fired body sherds with olive green paste were present.

Layer 15 Eighteen sherds in medium and large sizes were found, which are relatively dispersed and seem to have belonged to mud brick fragments. Buff ware with dense texture, invisible inclusions and visible air voids was the dominant type. Some examples have bitumen residue on their interiors. Orange ware with dense texture and no visible inclusions was also represented. Some have grit inclusions with visible air voids. Forms: Large bowl (Fig.A1.3:P00960), bell-shaped vessel with basal carination (Fig.A1.4:P00962). Decoration: Horizontal narrow bands (Fig.A1.8:P00959), basal band (Fig.A1.4:P00962), hatched (Fig.A1.8:P00963), birds’ head (Fig.A1.8:P00964).

Layer 13 Seventy-six medium to large sherds were found in this layer. Buff ware is dominant. It has a dense texture, although some examples exhibit very small grits in the break. Some have a light or dull orange slip. Examples with visible air voids, bitumen residue on the interior surface or over-fired bodies were also represented. A straw- tempered piece (Fig.A1.29:P00915) and a sherd whose exterior was covered by a thick orange plaster were also found. Chaff air voids are visible in this plaster. Orange ware with a generally dense texture and no visible inclusions formed the rest of the collection. Some had red paint on their interior surface. Grit-tempered red wares, a few with black cores, were also found. Some have sand or white inclusions. Forms: small and ring base bowl (Fig.A1.12:P00870), large and plain deep bowl (Fig.A1.16:P00871), flaring necked jar (Fig.A1.18:P00884), large and painted deep bowl (Fig. A1.4:P00909), high necked jar, small rounded bowl (Fig. A1.31:P00912), plain open bowl (Fig.A1.29:P00915), shallow open bowl (Fig.A1.28:P00918), small jar (Fig. A1.3:P00919), plain deep bowl (Fig.A1.14:P00932), basal carinated bowl (Fig.A1.33:P00933), hole-mouthed jar (Fig. A1.18:P00938), flat base small jar (Fig.A1.30:P00941). Decoration: parallel bands in different directions on the interior (Fig.A1.12:P00870), band on neck (Fig.A1.18:P00884), large hatched triangles (Fig. A1.4:P00885), ladder (Fig.A1.35:P00888), narrow bands and sigmas (Fig.A1.5:P00893), grids (Fig.A1.35:P00894), stylized ibex along with solid, wavy and narrow band (Fig. A1.5:P00908), band on the rim, zigzag ladder, narrow and solid bands (Fig.A1.4:P00909), scalloped circle and probably stylized animal (Fig.A1.5:P00911), carnivorous animal (Fig.A1.4:P00913), band on the rim and scalloped band (Fig.A1.3:P00919), hatched diamonds (Fig. A1.37:P00920), vertical solid bands (Fig.A1.37:P00920), crossed band with narrow short bands (Fig.A1.37:P00940), butterfly and hourglasses (Fig.A1.30:P00941).

Layer 14 Twenty-three sherds in different color and sizes were recovered. Buff and orange wares with dense texture and no visible inclusions were dominant. Some buff examples have a yellowish slip. Bitumen residue is visible on the interior surface of a few sherds. Orange wares have a slipped surface. Some also had grit inclusions. A few sherds in a red variant with dense texture were also found.

Layer 12 Two hundred and two sherds in different colors and sizes (medium to large) were found. Two complete and one almost complete vessel were also recovered in the northeastern corner of the trench (Cluster 4). Three other potsherd clusters were also recorded in the center and southeastern corner of the trench. Beside the main wares types of buff, orange and red ware, two examples of black

Layer 16 Twenty-nine medium and large sherds were found. They included buff wares with a dense texture and no visible inclusions, some with a slip as well as orange ware with a generally dense texture. A few examples have very small grit inclusions. Forms: Carinated bell-shaped bowls (Fig.A1.4:P00967), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.2:P00968), ledge-rim jar (Fig. A1.5:P00973), and straight-walled bowls. Decoration: Bands on the rim (Fig.A1.2:P00965, Fig.A1.2:P00968) and on the basal carination (Fig. A1.4:P00967), ladder (Fig.A1.5:P00973), vertical narrow bands, wavy bands and solid paint (Fig.A1.7:P00976) Technical Remarks: One piece has a buff interior and a red exterior. Very small sands granules are visible on the surface of a few sherds.

155

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

ware with a dense texture were also found. Some grits and small sand granules were visible on their surface. Forms: sharp carinated bowl (Fig.A1.10:P00663, Fig.A1.31:P00745), miniature bowl, ring base bowl (Fig.A1.12:P00665, Fig.A1.32:P00740), open bowl (Fig.A1.25:P00672), limited flat base bowl (Fig. A1.12:P00678), plain shallow bowl (Fig.A1.15:P00684), large open bowl (Fig.A1.16:P00688) flaring neck jar, cup (Fig.A1.3:P00722), small bowl (Fig.A1.27:P00753), internally everted rim (Fig.A1.28:P00764), closed form jar (Fig.A1.18:P00767), flat base jar or bowl (Fig. A1.33:P00769), carinated bowl (Fig.A1.30:P00782), inner ledge rim jar (Fig.A1.5:P00830), hemispherical bowl (Fig. A1.23:P00831), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.11:P00847), small jar (Fig.A1.11:P00849) Decoration: rim and base bands, framing bands, wavy bands and butterflies (Fig.A1.10:P00663), multiple bands (Fig.A1.9:P00664), simple suspended bands on the interior (Fig.A1.12:P00665), bands and solid and hatched diamonds (Fig.A1.16:P00688), solid paint on the neck, bold ladder (Fig.A1.23:P00714), grid (Fig. A1.37:P00716), fine dots (Fig.A1.37:P00723), concentric rectangles (Fig.A1.17:P00726), stylized S form shapes (Fig.A1.27:P00753), vertical band and scallops (Fig. A1.34:P00759), vertical bands and wavy lines (Fig. A1.35:P00775), crossed bands (Fig.A1.18:P00797), inner solid paint (Fig.A1.24:P00798), bands and wavy bands (Fig.A1.34:P00803) vertical lines (Fig.A1.11:P00804), ladder (Fig.A1.10:P00805), horizontal hatched diamonds (Fig.A1.37:P00807), animal row and multiple bands (Fig.A1.25:P00808), hourglasses (Fig.A1.17:P00810), multiple bands (Fig.A1.26:P00811), medium size dots framed by solid band (Fig.A1.25:P00816), solid circle surrounded by small dots (Fig.A1.37:P00820), fine dots (Fig.A1.37:P00829), a solid dot surrounded by a large circle (Fig.A1.23:P00831), panels of design with curvy narrow bands, solid bands that frame medium size dots (Fig.A1.38:P00837), motifs framed by ladder (Fig. A1.35:P00841), stylized ibex (Fig.A1.4:P00842), curvy vertical bands (Fig.A1.10:P00844), interior design panels (Fig.A1.11:P00847), grids filled by solid dots (Fig. A1.35:P00848), dots (Fig.A1.18:P00855), horizontal zones of zigzags joined by horizontal bands (Fig.A1.21:P00859), vertical zones of zigzags joined by vertical bands (Fig. A1.13:P00866) Technical Remarks: There are some over fired body sherds and examples with a cream slip among the buff ware with a pale yellow paste. Layer 11 Fifty-one sherds in different colors and sizes (medium to large) were found in this layer. Buff ware with a dense texture, no visible inclusions and a cream slip is dominant. Orange wares are dense, some with very small grits and some with a light yellow orange slip. Forms: relatively rounded base with a slight carination (Fig.A1.31:P00609), open bowl (Fig.A1.14:P00611), small bowl (Fig.A1.9:P00614), flat based bowl (Fig. A1.32:P00634), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.11:P00638), bowl with basal carination (Fig.A1.29:P00641), deep bowl (Fig.

A1.20:P00642), small jar (Fig.A1.29:P00644), ring base bowl or jar (Fig.A1.32:P00646), flaring necked jar (Fig. A1.5:P00657), flat based jar (Fig.A1.33:P00660). Decoration: basal solid band (Fig.A1.31:P00609), large diamond attached to a framing band (Fig.A1.36:P00610), multiple bands (Fig.A1.14:P00611), bold checkered zone (Fig.A1.37:P00618), bold concentric rectangle (Fig. A1.17:P00621), vertical zigzag bands (Fig.A1.37:P00622), solid bands (Fig.A1.38:P00628, Fig.A1.9:P00629), concentric bolded rectangles (Fig.A1.17:P00636), horizontal zones of zigzags joined by horizontal bands (Fig.A1.37:P00639), solid circle surrounded by larger circle, small festoons on the exterior surface of small bowl (Fig.A1.13:P00647), small ducks in water (Fig. A1.25:P00655), suspended bands in the interior of bowl (Fig.A1.11:P00656), solid paint on the flaring jar rim (Fig. A1.5:P00657). Layer 10 Two hundred and ninety sherds in different colors and sizes (medium to large size) were recovered from this layer. Buff ware is dominant. Most body sherds are dense with no visible inclusions in most of the sherd. However, in some sherds small grits are visible. Some are slipped and air voids are visible of the surface of some other pieces. Designs are in reddish brown, red (ochre), and green color. Orange to dull orange wares have a dense texture, although some very small grits are visible as well. Red wares have a dense texture with a thick buff slip on the exterior. In addition, some straw-tempered cooking wares in light brown ware were also found. Forms: hole-mouth jar (Fig.A1.20:P00403 and Fig. A1.18:P00447), flat base jar/basin (Fig.A1.32:P00416, Fig.A1.31:P00369, Fig.A1.32:P00372, Fig. A1.33:P00391), large plain bowl (Fig.A1.27:P00420), open mouthed bowl (Fig.A1.22:P00434), deep plain bowl (Fig.A1.28:P00440), small flaring rimmed bowl (Fig. A1.24:P00444), heavy flat base jar (Fig.A1.31:P00446), small bowl (Fig.A1.24:P00453, Fig.A1.10:P00454 Fig. A1.22:P00364, Fig.A1.11:P00402), small cup (Fig. A1.P00466), ring based bowl (Fig.A1.30:P00471), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.31:P00473), beaker (Fig.A1.17:P00474), closed pot (Fig.A1.28:P00531), flaring necked jar (Fig. A1.19:P00547), sharp basally carinated bowl (Fig. A1.30:P00591). Decoration: fine dots (Fig.A1.36:P00409, P00389, Fig. A1.37:P00384), incised hatch (Fig.A1.36:P00417), stylized animal framed by bands (Fig.A1.36:P00429), triple bands near the exterior rim (Fig.A1.22:P00434), solid triangles in different direction composed with solid dots (Fig. A1.24:P00444), bird with long neck (Fig.A1.24:P00453), multiple bands (Fig.A1.10:P00454), multiple bands framing stylized animals (Fig.A1.26:P00456), grid, basal band and wavy band (Fig.A1.11:P00466, Fig. A1.31:P00369, Fig.A1.33:P00391), curved bands (Fig. A1.17:P00474), scallops (Fig.A1.19:P00481), negative paint of stylized animal on the interior surface of a bowl (Fig.A1.12:P00484), panels of grids and ticking (Fig. A1.37:P00485), vertical wavy bands in different panels (Fig.A1.34:P00486), stylized zoomorphic designs (Fig. 156

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

A1.36:P00487), animals in line (Fig.A1.14:P00489), small ducks in water (Fig.A1.25:P00493, Fig.A1.23:P00516, Fig.A1.23:P00523, Fig.A1.22:P00364), wavy chevrons and ibex horn (Fig.A1.36:P00496), dot motif and solid triangle (Fig.A1.36:P00548), solid circle surrounded by large circle (Fig.A1.23:P00561), interior design of panels and chevrons (Fig.A1.12:P00564), medium size dots (Fig.A1.26:P00565), crossed hatched triangles (Fig. A1.36:P00587), vertical solid bands (Fig.A1.22:P00602), ibex with large horns (Fig.A1.36:P00607), sigmas (Fig. A1.24:P00375) Technical Remarks: some cracks are visible on the surfaces of some sherds. Some of the straw-tempered sherds have a piece of baked clay attached to their exterior surface. One over-fired sherd was also recorded (Fig.A1.28:P00500).

flat base jar (Fig.A1.33:P00263), small flat base bowl (Fig.A1.33:P00263), high neck jar (Fig.A1.15:P00267). Decoration: row of dots (Fig.A1.35:P00226, P00252, P00273), vertical wavy bands and grid (Fig.A1.35:P00243), multiple bands, small animals in row and zoomorphic design (Fig.A1.14:P00244), irregular incised decorations (Fig.A1.28:P00246), thick exterior band rim (Fig. A1.26:P00237, Fig.A1.10:P00249), small solid triangles (Fig.A1.24:P00251), medium dot motif with small ticking on the interior lip (Fig.A1.24:P00253), multiple bands and triangle (Fig.A1.16:P00259 and Fig.A1.35:P00260), multiple bands and solid diamond on the neck and small ticking on the lip (Fig.A1.15:P00267), interior concentric bands (Fig.A1.12:P00269), small ducks in water (Fig. A1.25:P00277), row of birds (Fig.A1.25:P00278).

Layer 9 Only a few very small sherds in buff, orange and red ware were found in this layer.

Layer 6 Sixty-three medium to large sherds in different colors were found. Buff ware with a dense texture, some with visible grits, predominated. Some examples have a cream slip. Straw air pockets were visible on some pieces. Orange ware has a dense texture as well, some with a buff slip and some with a small amount of grit in their paste. Red ware was rare in this layer, represented by a few sherds with gray cores and relatively dense texture. Forms: sharp carinated bowl (Fig.A1.29:P00171), low rim jar (Fig.A1.27:P00208), plain basin (Fig.A1.15:P00212), small bowl (Fig.A1.9:P00221, Fig.A1.9:P00224). Decoration: multiple bands framing zigzag bands (Fig.A1.35:P00166), solid triangles and bands (Fig. A1.24:P00168), curvy vertical bands (Fig.A1.35:P00172), vertical panels with different designs of cross hatching and solid zones (Fig.A1.15:P00181), multiple bands (Fig. A1.9:P00221), stylized animal framed by bands (Fig. A1.9:P00224).

Layer 8 Seventy-four medium-sized sherds in different colors were found. Buff ware with a dense texture and no visible inclusions is dominant. There are also some sherds which are grit-tempered. Wash slip and cream slip is common. Very small air voids are visible on some examples. Red wares are relatively dense and very small grits and mica flakes are visible in their breaks. There is one dull orange sherd which is highly chaff-tempered. Forms: small bowl (Fig.A1.11:P00284, P00314, Fig. A1.9:P00348), flat base jar (Fig.A1.33:P00311), ring based bowl (Fig.A1.32:P00321), narrow base jar (Fig. A1.32:P00334), small beaker (Fig.A1.17:P00342), heavy flat base (Fig.A1.31:P00357) Decoration: birds or animals with long neck in a row (Fig.A1.17:P00342), fine dots (Fig.A1.35:P00285), solid triangles and bands in the interior side (Fig.A1.11:P00314, Fig.A1.25:P00354), band with ticking (Fig.A1.12:P00320, Fig.A1.36:P00332), triangle motif (Fig.A1.36:P00330), multiple bands and Z motif (Fig.A1.9:P00348), bands and grids (Fig.A1.36:P00352) Layer 7 Seventy-nine medium to large sherds in different colors were recovered. The buff ware, with some examples in a remarkably light yellow is dominant. Their texture is dense but some very small grits are visible. Some pieces have a cream slip. Orange wares are also dense, although some small grits are visible. Some of them have a buff slip. There are also some dull orange pieces, which seem to belong to cooking wares. Some wash-slipped, chafftempered bodies are present as well. Forms: small open mouth jar (Fig.A1.24:P00232), deep bowl (Fig.A1.26:P00237, Fig.A1.20:P00240, Fig. A1.14:P00244) small bowl (Fig.A1.28:P00246, Fig. A1.10:P00249, Fig.A1.24:P00251, Fig.A1.16:P00259, Fig.A1.14:P00261, Fig.A1.24:P00275), ring base jar/ basin (Fig.A1.32:P00247, P00265), hole mouth jar (Fig. A1.20:P00240, P00266), small cup (Fig.A1.27:P00262),

Layer 5 One hundred ninety-eight medium to large sherds in different colors were recovered in this layer. The buff wares ranged from yellowish brown to dull brown and light yellow. All of them are slipped and have a dense texture with very small grit inclusions. Orange wares also had a dense texture and were smoothly slipped. There was only one straw-tempered sherd. Red ware with a dense texture, sometimes with white slip on the exterior surface, was also found. One piece of gray burnished ware was recovered from this layer. It has a relatively dense texture with very small grits visible in its break. Forms: small beaker or cup with basal carination (Fig. A1.30:P00081), closed jar (Fig.A1.18:P00084), shallow bowl (Fig.A1.22:P00093), ring based jar/bowl (Fig. A1.32:P00096, Fig.A1.34:P00132), flat based jar (Fig. A1.33:P00106, Fig.A1.33:P00133), small ledge rim jar (Fig.A1.24:P00121), deep bowl (Fig.A1.23:P00131), small beaker (Fig.A1.23:P00141), flaring necked jar (Fig. A1.11:P00143). Decoration: vertical bands (Fig.A1.35:P00069), band with ticking (Fig.A1.35:P0077, Fig.A1.13:P00078), vertical wavy bands in interior (Fig.A1.25:P00079), Xs with multiple accompanying narrow and solid band 157

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

(Fig.A1.9:P00080), row of birds (Fig.A1.25:P00091, Fig.A1.25:P00103,P00108, P00109, P00134, Fig. A1.23:P00141, Fig.A1.25:P00160, Fig.A1.17:P00161, P00162), multiple horizontal bands (Fig.A1.18:P00094, Fig.A1.35:P00144), vertical zigzag (Fig.A1.35:P00100), vertical bands and solid triangles (Fig.A1.35:P00113), large scallop (Fig.A1.35:P00114), multiple bands (Fig. A1.35:P00119, Fig.A1.24:P00121), solid butterfly (Fig. A1.35:P00123), stylize animal framed by narrow and solid bands (Fig.A1.23:P00131), fine dots along with large V design (Fig.A1.35:P00135), band on the jar neck (Fig. A1.11:P00143), solid dots (Fig.A1.19:P00145), fine dots (Fig.A1.35:P00148). Layer 4 Thirty-one small to large sherds in different colors were recovered from this layer. Buff ware, with a dense texture and small grits visible on the surfaces and breaks, was dominant. Some over-fired sherds were found in this layer. A few orange wares with dense bodies and small grit inclusions formed the rest of the collection. Forms: open mouthed bowl (Fig.A1.16:P00062, Fig. A1.21:P00066) and narrow, flat based bowl (Fig. A1.31:P00063) Decoration: row of birds (Fig.A1.25:P00065), rim band and fine dots (Fig.A1.21:P00066), cross-hatched triangles (Fig.A1.16:P00067), zigzag bands (Fig.A1.34:P00068). Technical Remarks: -

Orange wares also had a dense paste. One exceptional piece was decorated with black paint. Red ware was only represented by 3 pieces, all with a dense texture. One had a buff slip on its exterior. Forms: small carinated bowl (Fig.A1.34:P00018). Decoration: horizontal zones of zigzags joined by horizontal bands (Fig.A1.35:P00012), bold checkered zones (Fig.A1.35:P00014), puzzled diamond (Fig. A1.34:P00018) Layer 1 This layer contained 27 small to medium sherds in different colors. Buff ware with a dense texture and very small grit inclusions was dominant. Some sherds had a cream slip. The orange ware of this layer, mostly in light yellow orange, was also dense and grit-tempered.

Layer 3 This layer contained 57 small to large sherds in different colors. Buff ware with a dense texture and very small grit inclusions was dominant. Some had a cream slip. The interior surface of one example was covered by a thin layer of bitumen. A dense covering of fine black sand was visible on both surfaces of one piece. Orange wares with a dense texture and some small grit inclusions comprised the rest of the collection. Some had a cream slip on their exterior. A grit- and straw-tempered orange ware with gray core was also found. Red ware with a dense and gritty paste, gray core, and air voids on the surface was also found. One example had a white slip on its exterior. Forms: small cup (Fig.A1.10:P00026), short-necked jar (Fig.A1.18:P00027), small bowl (Fig.A1.12:P00033), plain high neck jar (Fig.A1.21:P00036), and small ledge rim jar (Fig.A1.24:P00057) Decoration: vertical scallop (Fig.A1.19:P00025, P00034), animal in a row (Fig.A1.25:P00029), wavy bands (Fig.A1.34:P00031), zoomorphic design (Fig. A1.35:P00032), comb motif (Fig.A1.12:P00033), large V motif (Fig.A1.35:P00035), multiple bands and Xs (Fig.A1.9:P00037, Fig.A1.24:P00057), fine dots (Fig. A1.35:P00041, P00049), diagonal cross/negative cross (Fig.A1.35:P00042), multiple horizontal bands framing a short wavy band (Fig.A1.24P00050). Layer 2 Thirty-two small to medium sherds in different colors were recovered from this layer. Buff ware with a dense texture and small grit inclusion and cream slip was dominant. 158

Illustrated Catalogue of Pottery

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

B-5-6

P01164

Very small grits

B-3-9

P01154

B-4-2

P01157

Very small grits Air voids granulated on the surface No visible Over fired inclusion

A-18

P01060

Very small grits

A-14

P00948

No visible inclusion

A-17

P00994

Scattered small grits

A-17

P01013

B-5-2

Interior Color 10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Exterior Color Same as inside

Core Color

Type

7.5YR/7.3-dull orange

Standard Buff Ware

grayish yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Painting Color

Family I-3

Standard Buff Ware

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Fig. 163: M-N )

II

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Fig. 163: M-N )

II

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: S-T) Bendebal, Level 14 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 82: 4)

III

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

Wet hand inside Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: Q)

III

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3brownish black

Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray inside and in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: Q) Djowi, Level 11 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 31: 14)

III

5Y/8.3-pale yellow 7.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3brownish black Olive brown

?

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: U-W) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: Q-W)

III

P01160

No visible inclusion Very small grits Over fired

B-3-8

P01153

Very small grits Air pockets

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Fig. 163: Q)

III

B-1-1

P01143

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: O-W)

III

A-18

P01057

Grit and white inclusions. Sand granulations are visible on both sides Small grits Air pockets

7.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Same as inside

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Slipped in 10YR/8.3-light yellow orange inside and outside

Parallels Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 163: G) Bendebal, Level 17 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 64: 3) Djowi, Level 9 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 35: 2) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 49: 4)

Air pockets

Blackish brown

Treatment

Slipped outside

Slipped inside and outside

Standard Buff Ware

Black olive brown Slipped in 5Y/7.3-light yellow inside and outside Gritty Buff Blackish brown Slipped inside Ware and outside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.3-dark brown

160

Slipped inside

III

III

Additional Notes The design is comparable. The family includes variety of forms, thus the Abu Chizan example would fit into this family considering the design and the similarity of form.

Form is comparable, design is different. Similar design is found on a different form from Chogha Bonut, Fig. 21: H

This design is visible on a different form in Chogha Mish collection from Early Middle Susiana (Pl. 174: G- Family XVa) and from Djowi, layer 12. The design was hence applied on different forms in later phases of MS.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

161

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.2 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

A-17

P00999

Straw

A-16

P00968

Grit

A-16

P00965

Very small grits

A-17

P00995

No visible inclusion

A-17

P01054

No visible inclusion

Firing-related characteristics Air voids Highly fired

Interior Color 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Exterior Color Same as inside

Core Color Same as inside

Air voids

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 7.5YR/8.6light yellow orange

Same as inside

Some air voids Highly fired

Type

Painting Color

Treatment

StrawTempered Buff ware

Parallels

Family

Chogha Mish, EMS and LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 165: B-C)

VIII-1

Same as inside

Slipped in 5Y/7.6-yellow inside and outside Gritty Buff 7.5YR/3.3- Slipped inside Ware dark brown and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 166: A, C)

IXb

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff ware

2.5Y/4.4olive brown

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 169: A-D) Djowi, Level 9 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 35:1)

X-4a

10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

5Y/4.4dark olive

Slipped in pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3 inside and slipped or wet hand outside in the same color Slipped in 5Y/7.3-light yellow inside and outside

2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

2.5Y/3.3dark olive brown

Wash slipped inside and wash slipped or wet hand outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 169: J-M, P) Djowi, Level 10 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 33:2) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 59: 15

162

X-5a

X-5

Additional Notes

Te linear scallop design on the exterior rim is characteristic of MS period and is visible on the LMS pottery from Chogha Mish (Pl. 176: A, F) and Bendebal (Dollfus, 1983a, Figs. 57:5; 75:6-7)

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

163

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.3 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics Air voids

Interior Color 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Exterior Color Same as inside

Core Color Same as inside

Type

Painting Treatment Color Fine Buff Outside: Slipped in Ware 7.5YR/2.1- 5Y/8.3-pale black yellow inside and in 10Y/8.2Inside: light gray 7.5YR/2.3- outside very dark brown Standard Outside: Slipped in Buff Ware 7.5YR/2.2- 5Y/7.2-light brownish gray inside and black 5Y/7.3-light yellow outside Inside: 10YR/3.4dark brown Gritty Buff 7.5YR/4.4- Slipped inside Ware brown and outside Fine Buff 7.5YR/4.4- Slipped inside Ware brown and outside

A-12

P00722

No visible inclusion

A-17

P00984

Scattered small grits

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-20

P01089

Grit

B-3-2

P01147

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

B-5-4

P01162

Very small grits

The interior 5Y/7.3surface was light covered with yellow bitumen slip

5Y/7.3light yellow

Standard Buff Ware

Slipped in 5Y/7.3-light yellow on the outside

A-17

P00996

Scattered small grits

Air voids

2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Slipped inside and outside

A-15

P00960

No visible inclusion

Air voids

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

Slipped inside

B-5-1

P01159

No visible inclusion

Air voids

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4- Slipped in brown 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and outside

A-13

P00919

A-17

P01023

Very small grits No visible inclusion

2.5Y8.3-pale yellow 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

A-17

P01017

No visible inclusion except for some mica inclusions

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

A-19

P01076

Very small Air voids grits

7.5YR/8.6light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Very small air voids

7.5YR/3.3dark brown 5YR/2.4very dark reddish brown

164

Parallels

Family

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: D-E)

XIII

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 173: A-C) Bendebal, Level 16 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 75:5) Djowi, Level 7 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 37:3) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 51: 6) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: H) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 174: C-D) Djowi, Levels 4 and 10 (Dollfus 1983b, Figs. 33: 7, 36: 6) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 36: S) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 175: C) Bendebal, Levels 21, 16 and 13 (Dollfus 1983a, Figs. 58:5; 66:1; 83:2) Djowi, Level 10 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 34: 2-3) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975 Fig. 47: 1-2,4) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 175: C) Bendebal, Levels 21, 16 and 13 (Dollfus 1983a, Figs. 58:5; 66:1; 83:2) Djowi, Levels 7-8 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 34: 2-3) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 47: 1-2,4) LM3 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 41: C, 72: A) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 175: C) Bendebal, Level 21 (Dollfus 1983a, Figs. 58:5; 66:1; 83:2) Djowi, Levels 7-8 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 34: 2-3) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 47: 1-2,4) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: A-L)

XIVa

Slipped on both sides Wash slipped Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and inside and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: D-E, L) outside

XVIb

Wash slipped in 7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange inside and slipped in 2.5Y8.4-pale yellow outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: N-P)

XVIb

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: N)

XVIb

Additional Notes

XIVa XIVc

XVc

XVc

XVc

XVIa

XVIa

The Abu Chizan example can be generally classified in this family; however it is distinguished by the presence of a handle in the form of an animal head. This piece comes from the Late Susiana context The decorative motif continued into Late Susiana Period as well comparing with Susa but on a different form: Steve et Gasche, 1971, Pl.39: 10

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

165

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.4

AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

A-13

P01170 P00913

A-20

P01098

Very small grits

B-4-1

P01156

A-17

Firing-related characteristics

No visible inclusion

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Core Color

Type

Painting Color

Treatment

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

7.5YR/2.2- Slipped inside brownish and outside black

Air voids

10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Blackish brown

Very small grits

Dense air voids

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

P01015

No visible inclusion

Air voids

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

A-13

P00909

No visible inclusion

Air voids

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-16

P00967

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

A-15

P00962

Very small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-13

P00885

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3dark olive brown

A-12

P00842

No visible inclusion except for some grits No visible inclusion

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4dark brown

Air Voids

Air voids

Slipped in 5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and outside 7.5YR/5.4- Slipped in dull brown 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and outside Wash slipped inside and outside 5YR/2.4Slipped inside very dark reddish brown 7.5YR/3.2brownish black Wash inside and slip outside

166

Slipped inside and wash slipped outside

Parallels

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: S-U)

Family

XVII

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 9: 11 Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 176: T ?)

XVII

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 6: 20-21 Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: A-C)

XXIV

Additional Notes

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: H, K) Bendebal, Level 16 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 71: 17) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: B-H) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 32: K)

XXIV

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: S-T)

XXIV

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: S-T)

XXIV

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: D-E, L-P)

XXIV

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: L-M) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 40: J, M, 48: G)

XXIV

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

XXIV

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

167

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.5 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color 10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Exterior Color Same as inside

Core Color Same as inside

Type Fine Buff Ware

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 7.5YR/7.4dull orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

10YR/2.3brownish black

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/3.4dark reddish brown 7.5YR/3.2brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4- Slipped brown in2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and outside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.3- Slipped inside dark brown

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/3.4dark reddish brown

A-13

P00908

No visible inclusion

A-18

P01055

No visible inclusion

A-17

P00992

No visible inclusion

A-16

P00973

Very small grits

A-12

P00830

No visible inclusion

Air voids

A-20

P01094

No visible inclusion

Air Voids

A-20

P01097

Very small grits

Air voids mostly on the interior surface

A-18

P01059

Small grits Air voids

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

A-13

P00893

No visible inclusion except for some grits

10YR/7.4dull yellow orange

?

No visible inclusion except for some small grits No visible Small air voids inclusion

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Grit

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-13

P00911

A-12

P00699

A-11

P00657

Air voids

Painting Treatment Color 5YR/2.4Slipped inside very dark reddish brown 10YR/3.3dark brown Slipped in 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange inside and 10YR/6.3-dull yellow orange outside Slipped inside and outside

Slipped inside and outside

Slipped in 5YR/8.4-pale orange outside

7.5YR/2.3- Slipped inside very dark brown

7.5YR/2.3- Slipped in very dark 2.5Y/7.3-light brown yellow inside and 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange outside Gritty Buff 10YR/2.3- Slipped inside Ware brownish black

168

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 184: K-M)

XXIV

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 189: H-J, N)

XXIX

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 189: G-M) Djowi, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 26: 5)

XXIX

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 190: C-I)

XXXIa

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 190: G-H)

XXXIa

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 190: K) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 36: Z) Bendebal, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 84: 18) Moussian (Gautier et Lamper 1905, Fig. 166) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 24: F) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 18: 6 Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 191: B-U)

XXXIb

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 191: H)

XXXIII

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context. This motif and form was a long lived one that continued from LMS into LS2/Susiana e

XXXIII

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and XXXIV Kantor 1996, Pl. 192: G-H) Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 25: 210) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 52: 17) Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and XXXIV Kantor 1996, Pls. 191: V, 192: G-H) Jaffarabad, Level 3m-n (Dollfus 1975, Fig. 52: 17)

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

XXXIb

XXXIII

Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 36: 6-8) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 5: 1 Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 191: K-L)

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

This piece comes from the Late Susiana context

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

169

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.6 Description

AreaLayer

Pottery No.

A-21

P01124

Small grits

A-18

P01062

Straw -Granular grits visible on the surface

A-20

P01099

Small grits

A-18

P01056

Grit

A-14

P00952

Very small grits

A-17

P01001

Very small white inclusions

B-3-1

P01146

A-17

P01002

Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Core Color

7.5YR/7.3dull orange

Straw air voids on both sides and some cracks

Type

Painting Color

Treatment

Parallels

Family

RedWashed Red Ware

Slipped on both Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and sides Kantor 1996, Fig. 193: T, W) Bendebal, Level 23 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 55: 9-10)

XXXIX

Plain Red Ware

Slipped in 5YR/4.6reddish brown outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Fig. 193: J-K, Q) Bendebal, Level 16 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 67: 3; 68: 9)

XXXIX

Buff slipped on both sides

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 165: D) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 65: E) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 52: 6

New Family XLI (Red version of Family VIII-2)

Orange

2.5Y/8.6yellow

5YR/4.6reddish brown

5YR/7.6orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Buffslipped Red Ware

2.5YR/6.8orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Redwashed Red Ware

10YR/3.3dark brown

Slipped inside and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 165: D) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 65: E)

New Family XLI (Red version of Family VIII-2)

7.5YR/7.3dull orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Redwashed Red Ware

7.5YR/2.2brownish black/insidesame

Slipped inside and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: D) Bendebal, Level 20 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 59: 5) Djowi, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 26: 8) MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 24: H, 33: Q, 61: M, 62: S)

New Family XLII (Red ware version of family XIII)

Very small air voids

5YR/7.6orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Redwashed Red Ware

wash slipped in 7.5YR/8.3-light yellow orange inside and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: D-G) Bendebal, Level 18 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 62: 3) Djowi, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 26:8)

New Family XLII (Red ware version of family XIII)

Grit. Sand granulations are visible on both sides

Dense air voids

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside Gritty Buff Ware

Blackish brown (over fired color)

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: F)

New Family XLII (red version of Family XIII)

Very small white inclusions

Very small air voids

5YR/7.6orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Redwashed Red Ware

10R/4.8-red

wash slipped in 7.5YR/8.3-light yellow orange inside and outside

Chogha Mish, LMS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 172: D) Djowi, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 26:8)

New Family XLII (Red ware version of family XIII)

Air voids

170

Additional Notes

The design is completely comparable, forms are different

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

171

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.7 Description

AreaLayer

Pottery No.

B-3-3

P01148

No visible inclusion

Small air voids on the exterior surface

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-21

P01127

Grit

Very small air voids

5YR/7.6orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Gritty Buff Ware

A-20

P01091

No visible inclusion except for some very small black sands

Air voids

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

B-5-7

P01165

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

B-5-8

P01166

Very small grits

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

B-7-1

P01167

Very small grits

Very small air voids visible mostly in the interior body

5Y/7.3-light yellow

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

A-16

P00974

No visible inclusion

Very small air voids

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same

B-5-3

P01161

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

A-17

P00983

Grit

Air voids including some straw air voids visible on the whole body

A-17

P00998

No visible inclusion

A-20

P01096

Very small grits

B-1-2

P01144

No visible inclusion

B-4-3

P01158

No visible inclusion

A-16

P00976

Very small grots

Air voids visible on the exterior surface

A-20

P01087

No visible inclusion

Air voids visible on the inside

Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Core Color

Type

Painting Color 7.5YR/4.4brown

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes LS. The form is comparable, although the Abu Chizan example is smaller in size. Slightly similar designs can also be seen on Tall-e Nokhodi buff wares; for example fig. 14: 3. This form had not been so far recognized in Susiana collections.

Slipped inside and outside

Tall-e Nokhodi, Level IVb (Goff 1963, Fig. 14: 1)

New Family XLIII (Bakun Type IVB)

Slipped in 5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and outside

Bendebal, Level 19 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 58: 8)

New Family XLIV

Djowi, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983b, Fig. 29: 4)

New Family XLV

5YR/4.6-reddish Slipped inside brown and outside

Wash slipped inside and outside

New Family XLV

Olive brown

Slipped inside and outside

Unassigned

Standard Buff Ware

Dark brown

Slipped in 5Y/7.3-light yellow on the interior and 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow on the outside

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 21: 20-21

Same

Fine Buff Ware

Dark brown

Slipped same color as in and out

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 1: 4

7.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Olive brown

Slipped in 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and outside

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Gritty Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Slipped in 5Y/7.2-light gray inside and in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside

Some air voids

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow inside and in 10YR/7.3-dull yellow orange outside

Air voids and straw air voids

10YR/7.4dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/5.4-dull brown

Slipped in 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and outside

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4brown

Slipped inside and outside

Unassigned

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Blackish brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow on the exterior and in7.5YR/5.4dull brown on the interior

Unassigned

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish Slipped in brown 2.5Y/8.6yellow inside and outside

Unassigned

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Blackish brown

Unassigned

172

Slipped inside and outside

Unassigned

Unassigned

Bendebal, Level 14 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 82: 3)

Unassigned

Unassigned

Similar to: Langsdorff& McCown 1942,PL.68, Potts and Roustaei 2006, fig.3.82.TNP1257

Unassigned

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

173

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.8 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics Small grits Air voids

Interior Color 2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow

Exterior Color Same as inside

Core Color

Type

5YR/7.6orange

Standard Buff Ware

5Y/7.3light yellow 10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

Standard Buff Ware

Painting Color 5YR/5.6bright reddish brown 7.5YR/4.4brown

Treatment

A-19

P01075

A-14

P00955

Very small grits

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

A-20

P01090

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

B-7-3

P01169

A-18

P01061

A-15

P00959

Small Small air voids grits, white inclusions and mica flakes Very small grits Very small Air voids grits Grit

A-21

P01126

Very small grits

5Y/8.4-pale yellow 5Y/7.4- light yellow 2.5Y/8.6yellow 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

A-21

P01129

Air voids

10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

7.5YR/7.4- Same as dull orange inside

A-15

P00964

Grit and white and very small black inclusions No visible inclusion

Air voids

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

7.5YR/3.3dark brown

A-15

P00963

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

A-14

P00949

No visible inclusion

2.5Y8.3-pale Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff ware

7.5YR/2.3- Wash inside very dark brown 7.5YR/2.3very dark brown

A-14

P00945

No visible inclusion

10 YR/7.3Dull yellow orange

same

Fine Buff Ware

Air voids

same

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Parallels

Slipped inside and outside

Unassigned

Slipped inside and outside

Unassigned

5YR/4.6reddish brown

Slipped in 10YR/8.3-light yellow orange inside and outside Standard Dark Slipped inside Buff Ware brown and outside Standard Blackish Slipped inside Buff Ware brown and outside Gritty Buff 7.5YR/4.4- Wash inside and Ware brown slipped outside Standard 5YR/4.6Slipped in Buff Ware reddish 2.5Y/8.4-pale brown yellow inside and outside Gritty Buff 7.5YR/4.4- Slipped in Ware brown 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow on the outside

brown

174

Family

Unassigned

Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned

Unassigned

Musiyan (Gautier et Lamper 1905, Figs. 239-240)

Slipped

Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned

Dittmann 1984, Figs. 6: 14, 52:1, 60: 8

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

175

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.9 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues Very small air voids Over fired

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Core Color

Description Type

A-12

P00664

Very small grits

C

P01280

No visible inclusion

C

P01230

No visible inclusion

A-8

P00348

Fine sand

A-6

P00221

No visible inclusion

C

P01357

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

C

P01330

Very small grits

C

P01339

No visible inclusion

C

P01372

No visible inclusion

A-6

P00224

A-11

P00629

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

C

P01373

No visible inclusion

Small air voids

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-11

P00614

Very small grits

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

Family

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10Y/2.1-black

Slipped in 5Y/8.3-yellow inside and in 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

5Y/8.2light gray Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Dense air voids and over fired

5Y/7.3light yellow

5Y/7.3light yellow

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 5Y/6.3-olive yellow on the inside and in 5Y/7.3-light yellow on the outside

I

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 2.5Y/6.2-grayish yellow on the inside and in 2.5Y/6.4-dull yellow on the outside 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Wash slipped inside and slipped outside

I

7.5YR/2.2-brownish black

Wash slipped on both sides

II

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/5.6-bright reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

II

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Wash slipped on both sides

II

Air void

2.5Y/8.5-pale yellow

2.5Y/7.3light yellow Air voids 10YR/7.4-dull Same as yellow orange inside

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

2.5Y/6.22.5Y/6.4Same as grayish yellow dull yellow inside

176

Notes

I LS(Alizadeh 1992, Fig. I 62: A) I I

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and in 10YR/8.3-light yellow orange outside Slipped on both sides

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: B)

I

Slipped on both sides

Langsdorff & McCown I 1932:Pl.22.2

I

II

Design is different.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

177

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.10 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

A-12

P00663

A-10

P00454

C

P01265

A-12

P00868

A-12

Temper Very small grits Very small grits

Firingrelated issues fine

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown 7.5Y/2.1-black

Wash slipped on both sides

No visible inclusion except for some white inclusions and small sands granulated on the interior surface Very small grits

5Y/7.4- light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/3.4-dark reddish Slipped on both sides brown

P00805

Grit

High fired

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

10YR/4.3-dull yellowish brown

Wash slipped on both sides

II

C

P01273

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss II 1976, Fig. 20: 111

A-12

P00844

No visible inclusion

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped inside

A-7

P00249

Very small grits

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow inside and wash slipped outside

Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss II 1976, Fig. 16: 60) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 17: 2 Probably II

A-3

P00026

No visible inclusion (except for some white inclusions)

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard to fine Buff Ware

Probably Red

A-3

P00028

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-3

P00037

Grit

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5Y/3.2-olive black

A-5

P00080

Fine Sand

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.2-brownish black

178

Contenau & Ghirshman 1935,PL.48:11 Jaffarabad, Level 2 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 13: 5) Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 39: 12-13)

Family

II II

II

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: G)

II

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: E)

III

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: F) Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: I); Pottier 1922,PL.2:13 Pottier 1922,PL.2:13;Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: I)

III Possibly IV

Possibly IV

Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

179

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.11 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

A-10

P00506

Fine sand

A-10

P004 66

Very small grits

A-5

P00143

No visible inclusion

C

P01347

A-12

P00804

Very small grits and white inclusions Very small grits

A-12

P00849

Grit

A-12

P00806

A-12

P00847

A-11

P00613

A-8

P00314

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion No visible inclusion Fine sand

Air voids 7.5YR/7.4-dull orange Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange

A-10

P00402

Fine sand

Air void

A-11

P00638

No visible inclusion

A-11

P00656

Very small grits

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

5Y/7.3-light yellow 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Same as inside

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Paintings Color

Treatment Slipped on both sides

5Y/4.3-dark olive

Slipped on both sides

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Wash slipped inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.6-olive brown Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Dense

2.5YR/4.6-reddish brown 10YR/3.3-dark brown 5Y/2.2-olive black

Slipped inside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/8.2-light 10YR/7.3- Same as gray dull yellow outside orange

Parallels

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 26: P) Susa, Necropole (de Mecquenem 1912, Pls. 3: 1-2, 9: 1, 5); Weiss 1976, fig.22:133-134 Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: J-K)

Family

V V

Possibly VIb More likely VIIb

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: P) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 60: 19 Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: P) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 60: 19

VIIb VIIb Possibly VIIb IX

Slipped on both sides

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: X)

Wash slipped on both sides

Probably IX Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz IX and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159:V-X) LS2(Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 39: J, 51: J, 57:C)

The design itself is different.

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz IX and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159:V-X) LS2(Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 39: J, 51: J, 57:C)

The design is different. Comparable to No. P00314

10YR/3.4-dark brown

brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5YR/3.6-dark reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 38: 8

IX

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5YR/3.6-dark reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 22: 143)

Possibly IX

180

Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

181

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.12 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

A-10

P00484

A-3

P00033

C

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Very small grits Very small grits

2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

7.5 YR/ 3.1 brownish Slipped on both sides black 7.5YR/3.3-dark Slipped inside and brown wash slipped outside

P01239

No visible inclusion

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Slipped on both sides

A-11

P00626

Very small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown

Slipped inside and wash slipped outside

Possibly X

A-8

P00320

Fine sand

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Light slip outside

Possibly X

A-7

P00269

Fine sand

10YR/6.4dull yellow orange Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Outside: 5YR/3.6dark reddish brown

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

C

P01299

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

A-12

P00665

Very small fine sand visible in the section

A-12

P00678

A-13

P00870

A-10

P00564

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Some black inclusions

Air voids 7.5Y/8.2-light Same as gray inside

Same as inside

Dense

Outside: 10YR/2.2brownish black

Somewhat gritty Fine sand

7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Same as inside Same as inside

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow on both sides

Slipped in 5Y/6.2grayish olive inside and in 5Y/8.2-light Inside: 10Y/3.2-olive gray outside black 10YR/3.4-dark Wash slipped inside brown Outside: 10YR/2.1- Slipped in 2.5Y-8.2black light gray outside Inside: 5Y/2.2-olive black

182

IX Tall-e Nokhodi, Level Probably II (Goff 1963, Fig. 11: IX 15); Egami & Sono 1962,pl.XXVI-46;Pttier 1922,pl.7-8. LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. X 24: M, 39: J)

Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss X 1976, Fig. 23: 160)

Inside: 2.5Y/4.4olive brown 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Notes

Chogha Mish, LS X (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 160: C) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 39: H) Jaffarabad, Level 1 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 9: 8, 11) MS3-LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, X Figs. 42: B, 45: I)

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 160: C)

X

MS3-LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, X Figs. 42: B, 45: I) Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss X 1976, Fig. 23: 149) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 27:1, 4

Form wise it belongs to family X, Decoration of characteristic of LMS-LS1 phases

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

183

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.13 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

C

P01349

No visible inclusion

10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

A-7

P00242 P00838

A-12

P00866

7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

C

P01232

Very small grits Very small grits Very small grits and some small sand granulates No visible inclusion

5Y/2.2-olive black

A-12

5Y/7.4- light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01278

No visible inclusion

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-5

P00078

Fine Sand

2.5Y/6.4-dull yellow

Same as inside

C

P01224

No visible inclusion

A-11

P00647

No visible inclusion

Small air voids

Small air voids

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 5Y/3.2-olive black

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Slipped on both sides

MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, XI Fig. 36: S) Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 231: 129) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 60: 11 Slipped in 5Y/8.3 pale Possibly XI yellow on both sides Slipped inside XI Slipped on both sides

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 28:12 Possibly XI

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

Dittmann 1984, Figs. 28: 15, 21; 44: 17

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss Possibly XI 1976, Fig. 17: 70)

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown

2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

XI

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5Y/3.2-olive black

Slipped on both sides

Possibly XI

Same as inside

184

LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 39: M) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 56:5, 8-9

XI

Possibly XI

Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

185

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.14 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-11

P00611

Very small grits

A-7

P00244

A-10

P00489

C

P01238

C

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5YR/3.4-dark reddish brown

No visible inclusion Very small grits No visible inclusion

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow Air voids 5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

5Y/2.2-olive black

P01222

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/6.3-dull yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-11

P00640

Grit and mica inclusions

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

A-13

P00932

No visible inclusion

some Air voids

7.5/8.3-light Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-10

P00550

Fine sand

Air void

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

5Y/5.1gray

Standard Buff Ware

Acropole, Level 26 (DAFI XII 1, 1971, Fig. 36: 2)

A-7

P00261

No visible inclusion except for some mica flakes

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

XII

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

5Y/6.2grayish olive Same as inside

Slipped in 7.5YR/7.3dull orange inside and wash slipped outside Slipped on both sides

XI

2.5 Y/4.4 olive brown 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

XI

Slipped on both sides

XI

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 33:B)

5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. XI 26: A) Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 20: 111) XII

186

Possibly XI

XI

Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

187

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.15 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-6

P00212

No visible inclusion

A-13

P00904

A-7

P00267

No visible inclusion Fine sand

A-6

P00181

Grit

C

Firingrelated issues Air voids

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

10YR/7.4dull yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

SU-05-21 No visible inclusion

2.5Y/6.3dull yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

C

P01366

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/6.3Same as dull yellow inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

C

P01295

No visible inclusion

Air voids

10YR/7.4dull yellow orange 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides in 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

C

P01774

No visible inclusion

Air voids

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

C

P01204

Very small grits

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-12

P00684

No visible inclusion

10YR/7.3dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

A-8

P00317

Fine sand

Air void

A-13

P00942

Some scattered grits

Air voids gray core and high fired

2.5Y/7.4light yellow 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Air voids

Parallels

Slipped in 10YR/7.3dull yellow orange on both sides Wash slipped on both sides

Slipped in 2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow on the inside and in 7.5YR/7.3dull orange on the outside Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow on both sides Slipped in 2.5Y-grayish yellow inside and in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside Lighter slip on both sides Wash slipped inside and wash slipped in 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange outside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

188

Family

Notes

XII XII Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: A)

XIII

Design is different.

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: D)

XIV

Design is not exactly the same.

Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 36: 1-2) Jaffarabad, Level 3 (Dollfus 1971, Figs. 17: 7, 18:1) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 29: 12

XIV

Possibly XIV Possibly XIV

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 29: 12

Possibly XIV

LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 51: C)

Possibly XIV XVI

XVI XVI

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

189

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.16 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Description Core Color

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues small Air 2.5Y/8.4-pale Same as void yellow inside

Type

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Air voids 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Paintings Color

A-10

P00554

A little sand

A-13

P00871

Very small scattered grits

A-12

P00858

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-4

P00062

10YR/7.4/dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-4

P00067

Fine sand with some black inclusions Fine Sand

2.5Y/6.3-dull yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.1brownish black

A-7

P00259

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

A-12

P00688

Air voids 10YR/7.3-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

No visible inclusion except for some mica flakes No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Treatment

Parallels

Slipped in 10YR/8.4light yellow orange inside and in 7.5YR/8.4-light yellow orange)outside Slipped in 7.5Y/8.2light gray on both sides Slipped on both sides

Slipped on both sides

Additional Notes

XVI

XVI

Jaffarabad, Level 3 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 10: 11)

XVI

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: G-H)

XVI

Qabr-e Sheykheyn Weiss 1976,figs.12:1,3&20:107; Dollfus 1983,Fig.71:11. Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: J)

Possibly XVII

Slipped in 10YR/8.3- Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz light yellow orange on and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: both sides J-L) LS1 (Alizadeh, 1992 Fig. 40:G)

190

Family

XIX

Form comparable, design different.

XIX

Form comparable, design different. This design is characteristic of LMS-LS1 (cf. Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 31: E).

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

191

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.17 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues Air voids 10 YR/8.3 Same as light yellow inside orange

A-10

P00474

No visible inclusion

A-8

P00342

No visible inclusion

A-12

P00726

Same as inside

C

P01269

No visible Air voids 5Y/7.3-light inclusion yellow except for some very small orange inclusions No visible Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale inclusion yellow

A-12

P00851

Grit

A-11

P00636

C

P01304

C

Description Core Color Type

Parallels

Family

Slipped on both sides

LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: J-L)

7.5YR/2.3-brownish black

Slipped on both side

Standard to fine Buff Ware (Dense)

5Y/4.4-dark olive

Wet hand slipped on both sides

Bendebal, Level 10 XIX (Dollfus 1983a, Fig: 88: 12) LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. XIX 51: E, 58: D, 63: G)

10YR/6.4- 10YR/6.4dull yellow dull yellow orange orange

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. XIX 51: E, 58: D, 63: G)

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

Slipped in 10YR/6.4dull yellow orange outside and in 5Y/8.3pale yellow inside Wash slipped on both sides

No visible inclusion Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/7.4-light yellow Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

A-11

P00621

Grit

Air voids 10YR/8.3light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Slipped on the both sides in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow Slipped on both sides

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 63: G)

Small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-11

P00643 P00658

Very small grits Very small grits

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

10YR/3.4-dark brown 5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Slipped inside

A-11

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown

P01270

Same as inside 7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange Same as inside

Wash slipped on both sides

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. More likely 24: E, 58: D, 63: G) XIX

A-5

P00162

Grit

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Wash slipped on both sides

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: K, N)

XIX

A-5

P00161

No visible inclusion

10YR/7.4-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10R/3.4-dark red

Wet hand slipped on both sides

XIX

A-13

P00916

Very small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 161: K, N) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 33: I)

A-12

P00810

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5Y/2.2-olive black

Wash slipped inside

5Y/8.4-pale yellow 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 10YR/8.3light yellow orange

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Fine Buff Ware

Treatment

2.5 YR/4.3 dull reddish brown

Air voids 10YR/8.6Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Paintings Color

Same as inside Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown 7.5YR/4.4-brown

XIX

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. More likely 24: E, 58: D, 63: G) XIX XIX XIX

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. XIX 51: E, 58: D, 63: G) LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. More likely 24: E, 58: D, 63: G) XIX

192

XIX

Possibly XIX

Chogha Mish, LS More likely (Delougaz and Kantor XIX 1996, Pl. 56: QQ) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 33: J, 53: B, 68: K) Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 36: 5)

Additional Notes

Form comparable, design different

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

193

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.18 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-10

P00447

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00476

Grit

A-13

P00938

Only some mica flakes were visible

A-3

P00030

No visible inclusion

A-12

P00767

A-5

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color 2.5Y/4.1yellowish gray 2.5 Y/8.3 pale yellow

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Slipped on both sides

smoky core 10YR/7.4-dull 5YR/5.6and Air yellow orange bright voids reddish brown 2.5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Wet hand slipped outside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Slipped on both sides

XXI

Some scattered small grits

Air voids

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Slipped inside. Slipped in 2.Y/7.3-light yellow outside

XXI

P00084

Fine Sand No visible inclusion except for some small sands

Same as inside Gray

Standard Buff Ware Standard to fine Buff Ware

XXI

P00027

Same as inside Same as inside

Slipped on both sides

A-3

2.5Y/7.4-light yellow gray 10YR/8.4core(highly light yellow fired) orange

A-5

P00094

Fine Sand

10YR/6.4-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

A-13

P00884

Very small grits

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

A-12

P00855

Grit

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

5YR/4.4-dull reddish brown

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Jaffarabad, Level 2 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 15: 1)

Family

Wet hand inside and slipped in 5YR/6.4dull orange on the outside

194

Wash slipped inside and slipped in 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange outside

XXI

Additional Notes

Abu Chizan example is smaller in size.

Acropole Level 25 (DAFI XXI 1, 1971, Fig. 39: 1 Jaffarabad, Level 2 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 15: 2) XXI

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: C)

XXII

Jaffarabad, Level 2 More likely Terminal Susa A (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 18: 2); XXIIIa Johnson 1973:Pl.IX:d More likely XXIIIa XXIIIa or b

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

195

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.19 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

A-3

P00034

Very small grits

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

C

P01221

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/5.6-bright reddish brown

C

P01317

Very small grits

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

C

P01385

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-10

P00547

2.5Y/8.2light gray

Same as inside

A-5

P00145

Fine sand with black inclusion No visible inclusion

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange 5Y/8.2-light gray

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

A-3

P00025

Grit

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

A-12

P00797

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00481

Very small grits

C

P01211

Very small grits

C

P01200

Very small grits

Parallels

Family

Wash slipped inside the design is possible and slipped in example of : Egami & Sono 7.5YR/8.4-light yellow Pl.XXXVIIB-3 orange outside Slipped on both sides

XXIIIb

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

MS3-LS1(Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 68: P)

XXIIIb

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

Dittmann 1984, Figs. 25: 3-4; XXIIIa or b 35:8; 53: 11

XXIIIb

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz XXIIIb and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: H)

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Slipped inside

Le Brun 1971,fig 37:9 (Susa XXIIIa or b Acropole I sounding, Level 25);Le Breton 1947,fig.15:910 (Jaffarabad ,surface t 2.0 m);Dollfus 1971,fig 18:4-7(Jaffarabad, Level 2);Delougaz and Kantor 1996,PL.162:G;Dittmann 1984, Fig. 25: 3-4; 53: 11 Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz XXIIIa and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: G);Le Brun 1971,fig37:9 9 Susa Acropole I Sounding, level 25); Le Breton 1947, fig.15:9-10 (Jaffarabad, surface to 2.0 m);Dollfus 1971,fig18:4,(Jaffarabad, level 2).In the case of design is close to Bakun Pl.30:9 and Pl,31:4; Dittman 1984. fig.5:14,fig.55:14;Alizadeh 1992. fig.51:A,fig.63:D,fig.73:K.

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

2.5 Y/ 8.2 light gray

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5 Y/5.3 yellowish brown

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Slipped inside. Slipped MS3-LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, XXIIIa or b in 2.5Y/8.3-pale Fig. 33: S, 36: AA) yellow outside Slipped outside Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz XXIIIa and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: G) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 31: J, 59: A, 63: D, 71: D) Jaffarabad, Level 2 (Dollfus 1971, Fig. 18: 4, 7) Slipped on both sides XXIIIa or b

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow

Small air voids

Treatment

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

196

Slipped on both sides

XXIIIb

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

197

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.20 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-11

P00642

Grit

A-10

P00568

Small grits

A-7

P00266

Sand and vegetal

A-10

P00483

Grit

A-10

P00403

No visible inclusion

A-7

P00240

No visible inclusion

Firingrelated issues

Air void

Interior Color 5Y/8.2-light gray 5Y/7.2-light gray 10YR/5.3-dull yellowish brown 7.5 YR/7.4 dull orange

Exterior Color

Description Core Color

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside

Same as inside

Wet hand on both sides

XXVIII

10YR/6.2dull yellow orange Same as inside

Slipped in 7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange outside Wash slipped inside and wet hand slipped outside

XXVIII

Air voids 7.5YR/6.4-dull Same as black orange inside core Air voids 5YR/8.3-pale Same as orange inside

Additional Notes

XXVI Dense

Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow on both sides

XXVI XXVIII

198

XXVIII

In Chogha Mish examples, the mouth has either a blunt or a separately made globular or triangular rim. Abu Chizan example’s mouth is plain.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

199

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.21 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

C

P01356

No visible inclusion

A-13

P00902

No visible inclusion

C

P01210

No visible inclusion

A-3

P00036

C

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

7.5YR/5.25YR/5.6grayish brown bright reddish brown Air voids 5YR/5.6Same as bright reddish inside brown 5Y/8.4-pale Same as yellow inside

10R/6.8reddish orange

Dense

Same as inside

Dense

No visible inclusion

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

P01341

No visible inclusion

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange

2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01307

Very small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

A-12

P00859

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

A-4

P00066

Fine Sand

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.6-olive brown

A-12

P00689

No visible inclusion

10Y/7.2-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

10YR/3.3-dark brown

Air voids 10YR/8.3light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Treatment

Slipped in 10YR/8.4light yellow orange on both sides Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/7.3- Fine Buff light Ware yellow 7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

7.5YR/4.4-brown

200

Slipped in 7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange on the inside and in 2.5Y/7.2-grayish yellow on the outside Slipped on both sides Slipped inside

Slipped in 5Y/8.2light gray inside and in 5Y/8.2-light gray outside

Parallels

Family

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: V-Y)

XXIX

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: U-X) Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: AA) If red ware Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 162: W-Y)

XXIX

Additional Notes

XXX

New family XXXI New family XXXIII New family XXXIII New Family XXXII

LS1(Alizadeh 1992, Figs. 36:A, 40: D) Bandebal, Level 12 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 87: 4) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 24: 9 New family XXXIV New family XXXIV

Abu Chizan example is buff ware.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

201

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.22 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Interior Color

C

P01376

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00434

Fine sand

Air void

5Y/7.3-light yellow

A-12

P00786

Grit

A-10

P00602

No visible Air voids 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as inclusion, yellow inside probably fine sand

Same as inside

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

Exterior Color

Description Core Color

Firingrelated issues Over fired

Same as inside

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

7.5/7.2-light Fine Buff gray Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides in

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.4-dark brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard to fine Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/2.1-black

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2light gray inside and

Outside: 2.5Y/4.4olive brown

Slipped in 7.5YR/6.3dull brown inside and in 2.5Y/8.2-light gray outside

A-12

P00869

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Inside: 10YR/2.3-brownish black 10YR/3.3-dark brown

A-12

P00846

No visible inclusion

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Wash slipped on both sides

C

P01382

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

A-10

P00364

10YR/7.3-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

A-5

P00093

Fine sand with black inclusion Fine Sand

10YR/7.4-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Outside: 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown Inside: ?

202

Slipped on both sides

Parallels

Family

New family XXXIV New family XXXIV Dittmann 1984, Fig. 1: 4

New family XXXIV New family XXXIV

New family XXXIV New family XXXIV New family XXXIV New family XXXIV New family XXXIV

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

203

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.23 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

A-12

P00831

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish

A-5

P00131

Very small grits

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

A-5

P00141

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-10

P00523

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01279

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01277

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-10

P00561

No visible inclusion

Air voids 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-12

P00714

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.2-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

A-10

P00516

No visible inclusion

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01223

No visible inclusion

Dense air 2.5Y/6.3-dull voids yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-12

P00861

Grit

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

C

P01276

Small grits

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Air voids 10YR/8.3(mostly light yellow on the orange interior surface)

Treatment Slipped inside

Parallels

Family

New family XXXV New family XXXV

Delougaz & Kantor 1996,PL.169:O, Dollfus 1983,,Fig 37: 6 Jowi ,Period II,level 7-4, 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive Wash slipped on both Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss New brown sides 1976, Fig. 21: 128) family XXXV 7.5YR/2.3-very dark Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light New brown gray inside and in family 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow XXXV outside 7.5YR/3.4-dark Slipped on both sides New brown family XXXV 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides New family XXXV 3 5YR/2.4-very dark Wash slipped in New reddish brown 2.5Y/8.2 -light gray family inside XXXV 5Y/2.2-olive black Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2Qabr-e Sheykheyn New light gray on both sides (Weiss,1976, Fig. 17: 80) family Dittmann 1984, Fig. XXXV 3 22: 1-3 10YR/2.1-black Wash slipped New inside and lipped in family 10YR/8.1-light gray XXXV outside 5YR/5.6-bright Slipped on both sides New reddish brown family XXXV 5Y/3.2-olive black Slipped inside New family XXXV 5YR/5.6-bright Slipped on both sides New reddish brown family XXXV

204

Additional Notes

Forms are slightly different.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

205

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.24 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

A-10

P00444

Very small grits

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

A-12

P00798

A-7

P00232

Very small grits Fine sand

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/7.3-light yellow

A-5

P00121

Grit

A-3

P00057

Fine Sand

A-7

P00275

No visible inclusion

A-7

P00253

A-10

P00453

A-10

P00375

Very small grits Very small grits Fine sand

A-10

P00604

No visible inclusion

A-3

P00050

Fine sand with some black inclusions

A-7

P00251

A-8

P00282

No visible inclusion Fine sand

A-6

P00168

Fine sand

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Same as inside

Same as inside

Same as inside 5Y/7.4light yellow 7.5YR/7.4-dull Same as orange inside 2.5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside 10YR/8.4Same as light yellow inside orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside 2.5Y/8.4-pale Same as yellow inside 10YR/7.4-dull Same as yellow orange inside 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside Same as inside

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

Paintings Color

Treatment

2.5Y3.3-dark olive brown 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 10YR/2.2-brownish black

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

10YR/3.4-dark brown 10YR/2.2-brownish black

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y3.3-dark olive brown 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 7.5YR/2.1-black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y3.3-dark olive brown

Same as inside Same as inside 10YR/6.4dull yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown 7.5YR/3.1-brownish black 10YR/3.3-dark brown

206

Family

Acropole, Level 27 (DAFI New family 1, 1971, Fig. 36: 3) XXXVI Slipped inside Slipped in 0YR/7.4dull yellow orange inside and slipped out

7.5YR/2.1-black

10YR/2.1-black

Parallels

Slipped on both sides

Additional Notes

Designs are different.

New family XXXVI MS3-LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, New family Fig. 36: B) XXXVII MS3-LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, New family Fig. 36: B) XXXVII New family XXXVII Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow on both sides

Unassigned Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig. 23: XVIII 161: K-N)

Wash slipped on both sides Slipped in 7.5Y/6.6orange on both sides

IV XVIII XIX

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

IV or XVIII

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig., 23: XVIII 161: K-N)

IV XVIII XIX

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

207

Later Figure A1.25 AreaLayer

A-5

Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Pottery No.

P00134

Temper

Firingrelated issues

No visible inclusion

A-8

P00354

Fine sand

A-11

P00655

A-5

P00160

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion except for some granulates of sand Fine sand with some black inclusions

Air void

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

7.5YR/7.3-dull Same as orange inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive Slipped inside brown 5YR/4.4-dull reddish Wet hand slipped brown inside

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.8-reddish brown

Slipped outside

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Slipped inside

A-5

P00079

A-12

P00816

No visible inclusion

A-5

P00108

No visible inclusion

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Slipped inside

P00105

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5Y/2.2-olive black

Slipped on both sides

A-12

P00808

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-briwnish black

Slipped inside

A-7

P00274

Grit

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.2-brownish black

A-5

P00109

Very small grits

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5Y/2.2-olive black

A-7

P00278

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5 YR/3.3 dark brown

P00493

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5 YR/ 8.3 pale yellow

A-4

P00065

Fine Sand

2.5Y/7.4-light 10YR/8.4yellow light yellow orange

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

A-5

P00103

No visible inclusion

10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

A-5

P00159

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

A-10

P00605

No visible inclusion

5Y/7.1-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

10YR/2.3-brownish black

A-3

P00029

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

A-7

P00277 P00091

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

5Y/3.2-olive black

A-5

Very small grit Fine Sand

Same Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Slipped inside

208

Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 40: 10) LS2(Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 47:A)

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig. 23: XVIII 161: K-N) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 69: A) Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 40: 10); Pottier 1922,PL.3:12,19 LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 33: C)

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig. 23: XVIII 161: K-N) Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig., 23: XVIII 161: K-N)

IV XVIII XIX

IV XVIII XIX

IV XVIII XIX

Additional Notes

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height are unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families. Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

IV XVIII XIX XX

IV XVIII XIX

IV XVIII XIX

Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

Slipped on both sides

10YR/3.2-brownish black

10YR/3.4-dark brown

Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, Fig. 23: XVIII 161: K-N) LS2 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 69: A)

Family

Pottier 1922,pl.2:32;Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and IV Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, XVIII Fig. 23: XVIII XIX 161: K-N, )

A-5

A-10

Parallels

Slipped inside

de Morgan 1900,pl.20; Pottier 1922,pls.1-2;de Mecquenem 1943,pl.4:35;Steve&Gasche 1971,pl.36:3-5;Delougaz and Kantor 1996,pl.161:N. Also, close to Contenau et R. Ghirshman 1933,pl. IX:I Chogha Mish, LS (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 159: H-I, IV Fig. 23: XVIII XVIII 161: K-N) XIX Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 40: 10)

MS3-LS (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 57: F)

Slipped in 5Y/7.2-light gray inside and in 5Y/7.3-light yellow outside

IV XVIII XIX

The rim band above the birds’ row is faded. Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families LS2 Because the rim diameter and the vessel’s height is unknown it can be assigned to either of these families.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

A-5

P00102

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

A-12

P00672

No visible inclusion except for some white inclusions

Air voids 10YR/7.3-dull Same as yellow orange inside

Same as inside

Standard to fine Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Slipped in 5Y/8.1-light gray on both sides

C

P01228

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/5.6-bright reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

C

P01274

Small grits

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange Air voids 7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

209

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.26 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

C

P01258

C

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color Exterior Color

Core Color

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

Very small grits

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Slipped on both sides

P01300

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

A-7

P00237

Fine sand

A-12

P00712

No visible inclusion

10R/6.8reddish orange Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

A-10

P00565

Small grits

Air void

5Y/7.2-light gray

Same as inside

C

P01281

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow

A-11

P00651

A-12

P00811

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

A-12

P00828

A-10

P00456

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides 10R/3.6-dark red

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray on both sides

Same as inside

Dense

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray inside and in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside Slipped on both sides

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown 2.5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/3.2-brownish black

Wash slipped inside

No visible inclusion

Air voids 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow inside

Slipped inside

210

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

211

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.27 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Description Core Type Color

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues Air voids 5 Y/8.2 light Same as gray inside

Same as inside

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 10YR/7.3-dull yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

Grit

Paintings Color

Treatment

A-10

P00477

C

P00653 P01312

A-12

P00814

A-12

P00753

A-11

P00645

Very small grits

high fired 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-13

P00917 P00208

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow Air voids 10YR/8.3light yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Slipped on both sides

A-6

Very small grits Very small scattered grits

A-10

P00470 P00262 P00345

Same as inside Same as inside Same as outside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

A-8

Air voids 2.5 YR/ 8.3 pale yellow Air voids 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow Dense air 2.5Y/7.3-light voids yellow

Slipped on both sides

A-7

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion Vegetal

A-10

P00420

Grit

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

Slipped inside

Same as inside Same as inside 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange Air voids 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

10 YR/4.1 brownish gray

Slipped on both sides

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

10YR/4.3-dull yellowish brown 10YR/2.1-black

Wash slipped inside Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and in 10YR/6.3-dull yellow orange outside Wash slipped on both sides

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow on both sides

Slipped inside

212

Parallels

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 2: 15

Family

Additional Notes

Only designs are comparable.

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

213

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.28 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Color

Type

A-12

P00764

Grit

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-13

P00918

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-10

P00500

5Y/7.2light gray

Same as outside

Standard Buff Ware

A-10

P00531

Fine sand with black inclusion Straw

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

10YR/5.1brownish gray

A-10

P00440

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-7

P00246 P00865

Same as inside Black

Fine Buff Ware

A-12

2.5Y/7.3light yellow Same as inside Same as inside

Fine sand with black inclusion No visible inclusion Straw

Air void

gray core 2.5Y/5.3yellowish brown 5Y/7.3-light yellow Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow black 7.5YR/7.6core orange

Paintings Color

Treatment Slipped in 10Y/7.2light gray)inside and wash slipped in 2.5Y/7.3-light yellow outside Slipped on both sides Slipped inside Wet hand slipped in 10YR/5.4-dull yellowish brown inside and in 10YR/6.3-dull yellow orange outside Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow inside

Wash slipped on both sides

214

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

215

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.29 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-13

P00934

Straw

A-13

P00915

Straw

A-13

P00872

Very small grits

A-12

P00809

A-11

P00644

Small grits and small straws No visible inclusion

A-11

P00641

No visible inclusion

A-6

P00171

No visible inclusion

Firing- Interior Color related issues Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow 5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

? Buff Ware (Dense)

Same as inside

Same as inside

Air 10YR/7.4-dull Same as voids no yellow orange inside enough firing Air voids 7.5YR/8.4Same as light yellow inside orange 5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Wash slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Slipped inside. Slipped in 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange outside

2.5Y/6.3-dull yellow

Wash slipped on both sides Wash slipped on both sides

Standard Buff Ware

Wash slipped inside

216

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

217

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.30 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

A-13

P00886

Grit

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

A-10

P00591

A-12

P00789

A-12

P00782

A-13

P00900

A-5

P00081

No visible some Air inclusion void (small straw Air voids are visible) Air voids 7.5YR/7.3-dull orange No visible 7.5YR/4.4inclusion brown No visible 2.5Y/8.3-pale inclusion yellow Fine Sand 5Y/7.3-light yellow

C

P01368

Very small grits

C

P01262

C

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Treatment

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/3.4-brown

Wash slipped outside

5Y/4.4-dark olive

Slipped in 10Y/8.2light gray on both sides

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Dense

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/4.4-brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

No visible inclusion

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 5Y/7.4- light yellow

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

P01322

No visible inclusion

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

P01296

No visible inclusion

Over fired

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

5Y/6.3olive yellow Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

5Y/6.3olive yellow Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

C

P01345

No visible inclusion

Over fired

2.5Y/7.2Same as grayish yellow inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

A-10

P00471

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5 YR/ 8.3 pale yellow

Same as inside

10Y/7.2light gray Same as inside

2.5 YR/4.3 olive brown

A-13

P00941

Grit

Air voids 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Parallels

Slipped inside. Slipped in Slipped on both sides

Dense

Wash slipped on both sides

2.5Y3.5-brownish black

possible parallel to Pottier 1922,PL.2-14;Dittman 1984,Fig.14:8 Bendebal, Level 10 (Dollfus 1983a, Fig. 88: 21) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 56: 6

Slipped on both sides in 2.5Y/7.2-grayish yellow Slipped on both sides Inside surface is eroded.

218

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 5:1

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 60: 8

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

219

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.31 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Color

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

Parallels

C

P01327

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

A-12

P00745

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/7.2-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

7.5YR/4.4-brown

A-11

P00609

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

5Y/4.2-grayish olive

P00473

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5 YR/ 8.2 light gray

Fine Buff Ware

A-10

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

Slipped inside. Slipped LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, in 5Y/8.2-light gray 42: F) outside Wash slipped inside Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 14: 21, 27) Slipped on both sides

A-13

P00912

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-10

P00369

Fine sand

A-4

P00063

Same as inside Same as inside

7.5YR/6.4dull orange Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

A-8

P00357

Fine sand with some black inclusions Fine sand

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 10YR/7.3-dull yellow orange 2.5Y/7.4-light yellow Air void

A-10

P00446

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

No visible inclusion

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow 2.5Y/7.4-light yellow

color has been faded and only its trace has remained

Slipped inside 10YR/2.2-brownish black 10YR/3.4-dark brown

220

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

221

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.32 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-10

P00526

A-8

P00334

Fine sand with black inclusion

A-12

P00740

A-12

P00698

No visible inclusion except for some black inclusion No visible inclusion

A-7

P00276

A-10

Firing- Interior Color related issues Air voids 5Y/8.2-light gray 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Exterior Color

Description Core Type Color

Same as inside 2.5Y/7.3light yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Dense

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

P00372

Fine sand

Air void

A-10

P00416

Scattered grits

A-10

P00492

No visible inclusion

A-7

P00247

Some grit granulates

A-7

P00265

A-11

P00634

A-5

P00096

A-10

P00478

Fine sand with some black inclusions No visible inclusion Fine sand with yellow inclusions No visible inclusion

A-10

P00596

Small grits

A-11

P00646

A-8

P00321

Very small grits Fine sand

Paintings Color

Treatment

10YR/2.3-brownish black 2.5Y/5.4-yellowish brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2light gray outside Light slip inside

Standard to fine Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray inside and in 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow outside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/3.2-brownish black

Wash slipped in 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow inside and slipped in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

5Y/8.2-light gray Air voids 2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow

5Y/8.3pale yellow Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Air voids 10 YR/ 7.4 dull yellow orange Air voids 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

2.5 YR/ 8.3 pale yellow Same as inside

Same as outside

2.5Y/7.4-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Same as inside

Dense

7.5 R/4.4 dusky red

Same as outside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/7.4-light yellow

Same as inside 5Y/6.3olive yellow Air voids 5Y/8.4 pale 10Yr/8.3 orange light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale 2.5Y/7.3yellow light yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside Air void 10YR/7.4-dull 10YR/6.4yellow orange dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown Standard Buff Ware (Dense) ? Buff Ware (Dense)

Slipped in 2.5Y/7.3light yellow inside 5 Y/3.2 olive black

Slipped outside

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown 2.5Y/2.1-black

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow inside

Wet hand inside and slipped in 10YR/8.3light yellow orange outside Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2light gray outside

5YR/3.2-dark reddish Slipped outside brown 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

222

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

223

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.33 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper No visible inclusion except for some mica flakes Fine sand with black inclusion No visible inclusion Straw and grits

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues Air voids 5YR/7.6Same as orange inside

A-7

P00263

A-10

P00391

A-12

P00852

A-10

P00479

A-11

P00660

Grit

A-5

P00133

Grit

A-7

P00264

Straw

A-8

P00311

Fine sand

A-3

P00040

Very small grits

A-5

P00106

Grit

A-10

P00582

Sand

some Air void

A-12

P00769

A-13

P00933

Description Core Type Color Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

5YR/6.6orange 7.5 YR/ 4.2 grayish brown 5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside 2.5Y/8.4-pale Same as yellow inside 7.5YR/5.2Same as grayish brown inside 5YR/4.65YR/3.4reddish brown dark reddish brown 5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Dense

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside 5YR/5.6bright reddish brown Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 5Y/7.2-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Same as inside

5Y/5.1gray

Dense

Some straw air voids Some mica flakes

Air voids 7.5YR/5.4-dull Same as brown inside

Same as inside

Dense

Some scattered grits and yellow inclusions

Air voids 2.5Y/8.6yellow

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

5YR/4.6reddish brown 7.5YR/7.4 dull orange

Air void

10YR/8.6yellow orange

Paintings Color

Treatment Wash slipped inside

10YR/1.7.1-black

Slipped on both sides

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray inside and in 2.5Y/7.3-light yellow outside Slipped in 7.5YR/7.4dull orange inside and in 7.5YR/6.3-dull brow outside Wet hand slipped inside and wash slipped outside

224

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

225

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.34 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow Air voids 5Y/7.4- light yellow

Exterior Color

Description Core Color

A-12

P00867

Grit

A-5

P00132

Very small grits

A-10

P00480

Grit

C

P01236

C

P01303

Very small grits are visible No visible inclusion

A-5

P00122

Grit

C

P01371

No visible inclusion

C

P01362

Very small grits

A-12

P00759

A-10

P00543

Some scattered small grits, some straw Fine sand

A-10

P00530

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00486

very small grits

C

P01343

Very small grits and black inclusions

Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

C

P01386

Very small grits

Same as inside

C

P01310

Very small grits

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

A-4

P00068

A-3

P00031

Fine sand with some black inclusions No visible inclusion

A-12

P00803

Very small grits

A-2

P00018

Fine Sand

C

P01352

No visible inclusion

C

P01335

No visible inclusion

A-11

P00633

No visible inclusion except for some mica flakes

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 2.5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Same as inside Same

Same as inside same

2.5 Y / 3.3 dark olive Slipped outside brown 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive Slipped on both sides/ brown same

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown

Same

Same

Fine Buff Ware

2.5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown

Slipped/same

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Slipped in 5Y/7.4light yellow on the inside and in 5Y/8.4pale yellow on the outside Slipped in 2.5Y/7.2grayish yellow inside and in 10YR/7.3-dull yellow orange outside

Some very small air voids Dense air 5Y/7.4- light voids yellow

5Y/8.42.5Y/6.4pale yellow dull yellow

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped inside

Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/6.2Same as grayish yellow inside

Air void

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.4-olive brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware (Dense)

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2light gray on both sides

2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5 YR/4.4. brown

Slipped on both sides

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 10YR/8.3light yellow orange Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides in 10YR/8.4-light yellow orange Slipped on the both sides in 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5Y/4.2-grayish olive

Wash slipped inside

10YR/8.4light yellow orange 5Y/7.4- light yellow 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow on both sides

Same as inside Same as inside

5.Y/6.1-gray Standard Buff Ware Same as Fine Buff inside Ware

5Y/4.4-dark olive 7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

2.5Y/7.4-light Same as yellow inside Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale some yellow spot high fired

7.5YR/4.4-brown

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 58: C)

MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 33: P)

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 24: C; 65: A) Qabr-e Sheykheyn (Weiss 1976, Fig. 20: 111) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 25: 8 Dittmann 1984, Fig. 6: 20

2.5Y/4.6-olive brown

Slipped on both sides

226

Family

LS (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 68: R)

Straw air voids

10YR/8.3light yellow orange Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Parallels

Pottier 1922,pl.11:14,7;Weiss 1976. fig.13:13;Steve & Gasche 1990.pl.6:3-4;Alizadeh 1992,fig33:C and fig73:J. Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Pl. 40: 3-4)

Large Bowl/ beaker?

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

227

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

Figure A1.35 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-6

P00211

No visible inclusion

A-6

P00166

Fine sand

A-12

P00848

Very small grits

A-13

P00894

Vegetal

A-12

P00841

A-13

P00888

No visible inclusion (Except for some white inclusions) No visible inclusion

A-2

P00012

Sand

A-2

P00014

Sand

A-3

P00032

Very small grits

A-3

P00042

No visible inclusion

A-5

P00113

Very small grits

A-5

P00083

Fine Sand

A-3

P00035

A-5

P00119

A-5

P00100

A-5

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues Some Air 5Y/8.3-pale Same as voids yellow inside

Description Core Type Color

Paintings Color

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/2.3-brownish black and 5Y/4.4dark olive

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) (Dense)

10YR/4.3-dull yellowish brown 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Treatment

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

straw air 2.5Y/8.3-pale voids yellow Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

high fired 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/5.3-dull yellowish brown

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/4.2-grayish yellow brown 10YR/2.2-brownish black

7.5YR/7.4- Same as dull orange inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside 7.5YR/7.4dull orange

Same as inside Same as outside

Standard Buff Ware Dense

10YR/4.4-brown

Very small grits

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 10YR/8.3light yellow orange 10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange high fired 7.5YR/4.1brownish gray

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

10YR/7.4-dull yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

5YR/2.4-very dark reddish brown 7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

P00099

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Wash slipped inside

A-5

P00114

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

Wet hand slipped and finger prints inside

P00077

Same as inside 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow

5Y/2.2-olive black

A-5

Very small grits Fine sand with some black inclusions

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 5Y/7.3-light yellow 2.5Y/7.4-light yellow

A-3

P00041

A-5

P00069

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/7.4-light yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown 10YR/2.3-brownish black

A-5

P00144

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5YR/3.6-dark reddish brown

A-5

P00082

Very small grits Fine sand with some black inclusions No visible inclusion. Some mica flakes are visible Fine Sand

A-7

P00226

Fine sand

A-5

P00148

Grit

2.5Y/6.3-dull yellow Air voids 2.5Y/7.3-light yellow 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside 2.5Y/8.4pale yellow Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

10YR/2.3-brownish black 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown 2.5Y/5.3-yellowish brown

A-3

P00049

Fine Sand

A-5

P00123

No visible inclusion

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

A-7

P00243

Very small grits

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/2.3-dark brown

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 7.5YR/4.6-brown

Family

Additional Notes

Slipped in 2.5Y/7.3light yellow on both sides

5Y/8.4-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Standard to fine Buff Ware (Dense)

Parallels

Wash slipped inside

Wash slipped inside and slipped outside

Wash slipped inside and slipped in 7.5YR/7.4 dull orange outside

similar to: Neely and Wright 1994,fig.IV:O,P;in the case of the line dots is a possible parallel to Pottier 1922,PL.3:34,35,38. Dittmann 1984, Figs. 22: 1-3, 40: 1 Dittmann 1984, Fig.22: 1-3

Egami & Sono 1962,pl,XXXIXB:2-3. Also,this design presents on the some exteriors:Dolfus 1983,fig.87:4;Weiss 1976,fig.13:12. Also, in the case of design is similar to Delougaz and Kantor 1996. pl.183:Z or AA.

Some very small black dots are visible on the inside surface. Wash slipped outside Wash slipped inside Stein 1936,PL.XXIII-7,Tall-iand creamy slip Siah; Langsdorff& McCown outside 1942,PL.33.11 LS (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 35: B-C) Dittmann 1984, Fig. 28: 21

?

Susa A1 (Steve et Gasche 1971, Fig. 17: 11) Inside surface is eroded. Slipped outside ?

Wash slipped inside

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Le Breton 1947,Fig.48:7,25;Egami&Sono 1962,PL.XXXIXA-8;Stien 1936,PL.XXII:38,45&PL. XXVII:49;Dittmann 1984, Figs. 28: 18, 56: 8-9;29:12

Terminal Susa A

Slipped outside

Wash slipped outside

10YR/3.4-dark brown) 10YR/2.3-brownish black

228

Pottier 1922,PL.2:8

Wash slipped inside

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

A-7

P00273

No visible inclusion

A-7

P00252

Very small grits

A-8

P00285

Fine sand

A-5

P00135

No visible inclusion

A-6

P00172

Very small scattered grits

A-7

P00272

A-7

P00260

No visible inclusion except for some mica flakes Grit

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

10YR/2.3-brownish black

2.5Y/7.4-light yellow 10YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/2.3-brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.2-brownish black

2.5Y/7.4-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

10YR/2.3-brownish black 7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

229

Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow on the side and in 5Y/7.3-light yellow on the outside Slipped inside

XXIIIb

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.36 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

A-10

P00417

Small grits

A-8

P00352

Fine sand

A-10

P00461

Vegetal

A-10

P00465

Grit

A-10

P00469

A-10

P00472

A-10

P00401

A-8

P00330

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion Fine sand with black inclusion Fine sand

A-10

P00385

Fine sand

A-10

P00467

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00449

Grit

A-10

P00411

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00409

No visible inclusion

A-8

P00331

Fine sand

A-8

P00332

Fine sand

A-10

P00429

A-10

P00389

Fine sand with black inclusion Fine sand

A-11

P00612

Scattered grits

A-10

P00571

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00529

A-10

P00607

A-10

Firing- Interior Color Exterior related Color issues Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside 2.5Y/7.3-light yellow Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/8.2-light gray Air voids 2.5 YR/ 8.3 pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Paintings Color

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown 5YR/2.3-very dark reddish brown

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Dense

2.5Y/8.3pale yellow 5Y/5.2grayish olive Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

(10YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5YR/2.1-reddish black

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5Y/8.2-light gray

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Same as inside

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 10YR/8.4light yellow orange

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.4-olive brown

Same as outside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/3.3-dark brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

5Y/3.2-olive black

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside 5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside

2.5Y/7.4-light 2.5Y/7.3yellow light yellow Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale Same as yellow inside 5Y/7.2-light gray

Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware

7.5YR/2.2-brownish black 5 YR/5.3 grayish olive 5YR/ 4.3/dull reddish brown

2.5/4.6-reddish brown

Same as inside

Air voids 7.5YR.7.4-dull Same as orange inside

Same as inside

Dense

10R/3.6-dark red

Sand

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale interior yellow and exterior

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/3.4-dark brown

P00603

Sand

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/3.4-dark brown

A-10

P00587

No visible inclusion

some Air void

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

A-10

P00548

2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

10YR/2.3-brownish black

A-11

P00610

Fine sand with black inclusion No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.6-brown

A-10

P00496

2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

10YR/3.1-brownish black

P00491

A-10

P00487

2.5Y/8.4pale yellow Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-10

Fine sand with black inclusion No visible inclusion No visible inclusion

Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

7.5 YR/3.3 dark brown 7.5 YR/ 3.3 dark brown

Air voids 10YR/8.4 light yellow orange Air voids 10YR/8.4 light yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside

Parallels

Wash slipped inside and slipped outside Wash slipped inside and slipped outside Slipped on both sides Slipped inside

Slipped on both sides

Wash slipped inside

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Same as inside

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Treatment Slipped in 2.5Y/7.1light gray inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/8.2-light gray

Air void

Same as inside

Description Core Type Color

10YR/4.3-dull yellowish brown

230

Slipped in 2.5Y/7.3light yellow inside and in 10YR/8.3-light yellow orange outside Slipped inside. Slipped in 10YR/8.3light yellow orange outside Wash slipped in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and slipped in 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow outside Wash slipped in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow inside and in 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow outside Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow inside and in 2.5Y/8.2-light gray outside Slipped outside Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2light gray inside and cream slip outside Slipped on both sides Slipped on both sides Slipped on both sides

Stein 1936, PL.XXV:15

MS3 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 26: H)

LS1 (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. 25: R, 62: N)

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

231

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.37 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

A-10

P00488

Grit

A-10

P00475

A-12

P00827

No visible inclusion Except for some yellowish inclusions No visible inclusion

A-12

P00733

No visible inclusion

A-10

P00485

A-10

P00482

Very small grits Grit

A-12

P00691

A-12

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color Exterior Color

Core Color

Type

Paintings Color

Treatment Slipped on both sides

5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow Air voids 5 Y/8.3 pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

2.5 Y/4.3 olive brown 10 YR/3.1 brownish black

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.2-brownish black

Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown

No visible inclusion

Air voids 2.5Y/5.1high fired yellowish gray Air voids 2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow 2.5 Y/ 8.3 pale yellow 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware

10 YR/3.3 dark brown 2.5 Y/5.3 yellowish brown 10Y/3.1-olive black

P00682

Some very small sand

Air voids 2.5Y/7.3-light Same as yellow inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

A-12

P00783

Grit

Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware

A-12

P00716

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-12

P00775

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-12

P00723

No visible inclusion

Air voids 10YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

A-11

P00622

A-10

P00499

Very small grits Fine sand

Air void

A-11

P00627

A-13

P00940

A-13

P00920

Same as inside 2.5Y/8.3pale yellow Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware ? Buff Ware (Dense)

A-11

P00618

Very small grits

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.4-pale yellow very 5Y/8.3-pale small Air yellow voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

5YR/3.4-dark reddish Slipped on both sides brown

A-11

P00637

A-11

P00620

A-13

P00939

Very small grits Very small grits Grit

5Y/8.3-pale yellow 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

A-12

P00820

Grit

Same as inside

Same as inside

P00639

A-12

P00802

C

P01205

No visible inclusion No visible inclusion Very small grits

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

A-12

P00807

C

P01364

No visible inclusion Very small grits

high fired 7.5Y/7.2-light gray Air voids 2.5Y/6.2grayish yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware Fine Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Dense

10YR/3.4-dark brown

A-11

10YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

A-10

P00384

Fine sand with black inclusion

7.5YR/8.3lght yellow orange

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides in 2.5Y/6.2-grayish yellow 7.5YR/3.1-brownish black

A-12

P00829

Grit

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

Wash slipped on both sides

Very small grits No visible inclusion

Same as inside 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange 7.5YR/8.4- Same as light inside yellow orange Same as Same as inside inside

Parallels

Slipped outside

Slipped in 5Y/6.3olive yellow on both sides Slipped on both sides Slipped inside

Slipped in 10Y/8.1light gray inside and in 10Y/8.2-light gray outside 10YR/2.3-brownish Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2black light gray inside and in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside 10YR/2.1-black Slipped in 2.5Y/7.4light yellow on both sides 2.5Y/3.3-dark olive Slipped in 2.5Y/8.2brown light gray inside and in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside 10YR/2.3-brownish Slipped in 2.5Y/8.3black pale yellow on both sides 5Y/2.2-olive black Slipped inside. Slipped in 7Y/7.2-light gray outside 2.5Y/4.4-olive brown Slipped inside 2.5Y/4.4-olive brown Slipped inside 5Y/2.2-olive black

Slipped on both sides

7.5YR/4.6-brown

Wash slipped on both sides Wash slipped inside

7.5/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown 7.5YR/4.3-brown

5Y/3.2-olive black 7.5YR/2.3-very dark brown 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped inside Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray inside and in 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow outside Slipped inside and LS (Alizadeh 1992, Fig. wash slipped outside 50: F) Wash slipped inside and slipped outside Slipped in 5Y/8.2-light gray on both sides Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow on both sides

5Y/4.3-dark olive

232

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 1: 5

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

233

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.38 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Description Temper

A-10

P00545

Fine sand

A-10

P00580

Sand

A-11

P00628

very small grits

A-12

P00837

No visible inclusion

C

P01260

C

Firingrelated issues Air void

Interior Color Exterior Color

Core Color

Type

Paintings Color

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 10YR/7.3-dull yellow orange

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

2.5Y/3.3-dark olive brown

Air voids 2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

P01253

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

C

P01234

Very small grits

Dense air 5Y/7.3-light voids yellow

Same as inside

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 10YR/8.3light yellow orange Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

C

P01240

No visible inclusion

5Y/7.3-light yellow

Same as inside

C

P01268

No visible inclusion

5Y/7.3-light yellow

C

P01286

No visible inclusion

C

P01291

C

some Air voids

Treatment

Slipped inside. Slipped in 10YR/7.4dull yellow orange outside Slipped on both sides

2.5YR/3.3-dark reddish brown

Slipped inside and wash slipped outside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

Standard Buff Ware (Dense)

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

10YR/2.2-brownish black

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

P01292

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

C

P01267

Grit

Dense air 5Y/8.4-pale voids yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

A-13

P00928

Very small grits

Air voids 7.5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

5Y/5.4-olive

Wash slipped inside

C

P01285

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

C

P01261

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

A-12

P00839

C

P01201

Very small grits Very small grits

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside

C

P01233

No visible inclusion

Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

C

P01288

Very small grits

Same as inside

5Y/8.2light gray

Dense

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

C

P01289

No visible inclusion

Over fires 2.5Y/4.1yellowish gray 5Y/8.3-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

C

P01306

No visible inclusion

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

5Y/8.3Same as pale yellow inside

Fine Buff Ware

C

P01301

No visible inclusion

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

2.5Y/7.3light yellow

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 5Y/6.3olive yellow on the inside and in 5Y/8.3pale yellow on the outside 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 5Y/6.3olive yellow inside and in 2.5Y/7.3-light yellow on the outside

2.5Y/8.3-pale yellow 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

2.5Y-4.3-olive brown 7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Dittmann 1984, Fig. 24: 4a, 8 Slipped in 5Y/8.3-pale yellow on both sides

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

234

Parallels

Slipped on both sides in 2.5Y/4.1-yellowish gray Slipped on both sides

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

235

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.39 AreaLayer

Pottery No.

Temper

C

P01367

Very small grits

C

P01361

Very small grits

C

P01359

C

Firingrelated issues

Interior Color

Exterior Color

Description Core Color Type

Paintings Color

Treatment

Same as inside

Same as inside

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

No visible inclusion

7.5YR/8.3light yellow orange 7.5YR/8.4light yellow orange Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

P01309

Very small grits

Dense air 2.5Y/6.4-dull voids yellow

5Y/8.47.5YR/6.4- Standard pale yellow dull orange Buff Ware (Dense)

7.5YR/4.4-brown

C

P01765

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/6.4dull yellow on the inside and in 7.5YR/6.4-dull orange on the outside Slipped on both sides

C

P01773

Very small grits

Air voids 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

C

P01766

No visible inclusion

C

P01319

No visible inclusion

C

P01768

No visible inclusion

C

P01767

No visible inclusion

C

P01311

Very small grits

C

P01771

No visible inclusion

C

P01358

Very small grits

Air voids 2.5Y/6.2Same as grayish yellow inside

Same as inside

C

P01360

No visible inclusion

Same as inside

C

P01346

No visible inclusion

10YR/8.3light yellow orange 5Y/8.4-pale yellow

C

P01381

No visible inclusion

5Y/8.3-pale yellow

5Y/6.3-olive yellow

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

2.5Y/6.32.5Y/6.3Dense dull yellow dull yellow

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped in 5Y/8.4-pale yellow on the inside and in 2.5Y/6.3-dull yellow on the outside 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

Dense air 5Y/8.4-pale voids yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/3.4-dark brown

Slipped on both sides

2.5Y/6.2Same as grayish yellow inside

5Y/8.2light gray

Fine Buff Ware

5Y/8.4-pale yellow

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware (Dense)

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides in 2.5Y/6.2-grayish yellow 2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

Air void And over fired Dense air voids

Same as inside

2.5Y/7.4-light 5Y/8.4Same as yellow pale yellow inside

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped in 2.5Y/7.4light yellow on the inside and in 5Y/8.4pale yellow on the outside Slipped on both sides

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Same as inside

Standard Buff Ware (Dense) Fine Buff Ware

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

5YR/4.6-reddish brown

Slipped on both sides

Same as inside

Same as inside

Fine Buff Ware

7.5YR/4.4-brown

Slipped on both sides5Y/6.3-olive yellow

2.5Y/4.3-olive brown Slipped on both sides

236

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection

237

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.40 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

1833

D

Very small sand

Light orange

1822

D

Vegetal and sand

Pale yellow

1808

D

Vegetal and sand

1809

D

Vegetal and sand

1810

D

Vegetal and sand

1823

D

Vegetal and sand

Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Same as inside

Dense

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 81: L-M V

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 81: Q

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-V XXI/XXII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-V XXI/XXII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-V XXI/XXII

Orange

?

238

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XIII

XXI

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection Figure A1.41 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description

1827

D

1828

D

1829

D

1831

D

1830

D

Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand

1838

Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Over fired and cracked Straw air voids Over fired Dense straw air voids Straw air voids

Interior Color Exterior Color Light yellow Same as orange inside Greenish Same as yellow inside Greenish Same as yellow inside Pale yellow Same as inside Light orange Same as inside Light yellow Same as orange inside

Parallels

Family

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Core Color

Type

Same as inside

Same as inside

Treatment Wash slipped ?

Dense

239

Additional Notes

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.42 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

1840

D

1844

D

1845

D

1846

D

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and Straw air voids sand. Some white inclusions Vegetal and Cracked sand

Interior Color Light red Light orange Red Light yellow orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 83: F-S

XXI

240

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection Figure A1.43 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

1813

D

Small sand

1850

D

1805

D

1835

D

Vegetal. Some very small red and white inclusions granulated on both sides Some very small sans Very small sand

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color Light yellow orange Red

Light yellow orange ?

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside Red

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Core Color

Type

Same as inside

Dense

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 87: I

LII

Same as inside

Dense

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 89: V

LXXIII

Same as inside

Dense

Dull orange

Dense

Wright 1979, Fig. 32: 01106 Possibly Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 91: E-L LXXIX Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 91: K LXXIX Wright 1979, Fig. 32: 02201, 01107

1841

D

Very small sand

Red

1851

D

Vegetal and sand

Pale yellow

Same as inside Same as inside

Same as inside

Dense

Same as inside

Dense

241

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 91: H Slipped

Additional Notes

Early-Middle Uruk

Early and Middle Uruk LXXIX

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 91: I, K LXXIX

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.44 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

1821

D

Sand

Light yellow

1826

D D

1843

D

1861

D

1863

D

1862

D

1847

D

1856

D

1852

D

1860

D

Grit and white inclusions Vegetal and sand Small black sand Small white sand Small white sand Small white sand Very small white inclusions Very small white inclusions Very small white inclusions Very small white inclusions

Light yellow

1834

Light yellow Light orange Light orange Light orange Light orange Red Dull orange red Light yellow orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Dull orange

Treatment

Dense

Parallels

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: F

Family

LXXXIII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Same as inside

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Orange

Slipped

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Same as inside

Slipped

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 93: C, F LXXXIII

Dull orange

Dense

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 94: D

LXXXIV

Same as inside

Dense

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 94: D

LXXXIV

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 94: D

LXXXIV

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 94: D

LXXXIV

Same as inside Same as inside

Dense

242

slipped

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection Figure A1.45 Pottery No.

1855

AreaLayer

D

1837

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

Vegetal and small sands

Light yellow

Pale yellow

1812

D

Very small black inclusions No visible inclusion Sand

1811

D

Very small sand

Red

Very small white inclusions Very small sand Over fired

red

No visible inclusion

Light yellow orange

1820

1848 1832 1819

D

Red Dull red

Dull red

Exterior Color Same as inside

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Treatment

Same as inside

Parallels

Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Pl. 122 Neely and Wright 1994, Fig III. 7: e

Same as inside

Family

CXXVIII

Additional Notes

Abu Chizan example does not have the handle that is more likely due to the small size of the piece. Middle Uruk

dense

Black Same as inside Light orange

Dense

Dull orange

Dense

Black

Dense

Same as inside

Dense

243

Neely and Wright 1994, Fig. IV. 45: i

?

Early Uruk

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.46 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

1816

D

Very small sand

Red

1864

D

Grit and small sand

Light orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Grey

Treatment

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

Slipped in red

Same as inside

244

Wright 1979, Fig. 29: 01407-8

Early and Middle Uruk

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection Figure A1.47 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

1838

D

Grit

Pale yellow

1853

D

Vegetal and small sand Grit

Red

Vegetal and small sand Vegetal and grit

Light yellow

1825 1817

D

1857

D

1859

D

1858 1849 1881

D

1806

D

1865

D

Grit and white inclusions Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Grit

Light orange

Light yellow

Air voids

Red Light yellow

Air voids Air voids

Vegetal and fine Air voids sand Vegetal and Air voids sand

Dull yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Treatment

Same as inside

Slipped

Grey

Slipped in light yellow orange

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

Orange Orange

Wright 1979, Fig. 31: 02402, 02603

Same as inside

Neely and Wright 1994, Fig. IV. 56: O Wright 1979, Fig. 25: g

Light orange

Wright 1979, Fig. 25: i

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Light yellow orange

Slipped in red on the outside Dense

245

Early-Middle Uruk Early Uruk Early and Middle Uruk Early and Middle Uruk

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Figure A1.48 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

1815

D

1867

D

1868

D

Vegetal and fine sand Vegetal and sand Grit Air voids

1869

D

Small sand

1870

D

Grit

1871

D

Very small sand

1872

D

Grit

1818

D

Grit

1873

D

Very small sand

Light orange

1874

D

Small sand

Red

1875

D

Very small sand Dense small air voids

Light yellow orange

Air voids

Dense ir voids

Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light yellow orange Light orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Same as inside

Dense

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

246

Treatment slipped

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 1. Excavation Pottery Collection Figure A1.49 Pottery No.

AreaLayer

1807

D

1877

D

1878

D

1879

D

1880

D

Description Temper

Firing-related characteristics

Interior Color

No visible inclusion Very small sand

Light yellow orange Light yellow orange

Vegetal and sand Vegetal and sand Vegetal and small sand

Red Straw air voids

Light yellow orange Light yellow orange

Exterior Color Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

Core Color

Type

Same as inside

Dense

Same as inside

Dense

Same as inside Same as inside Same as inside

247

Treatment Slipped in red on outside Probably bitumen residue on the interior surface

Parallels

Family

Additional Notes

APPENDIX 2 Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan by

Margareta Tengberg Introduction Sampling for bioarchaeological remains (animal bones, charcoal, seeds and fruits), initiated in 2005, and continued during the excavation season of 2006. A first aim of the archaeobotanical analysis is to understand various aspects of the exploitation and use of plant resources during the Late Middle Susiana and the Late Susiana periods (50003900 B.C.), with special attention given to the presence of cultivated plants and agricultural practices. A second objective of the study is to reconstruct the past vegetation cover around the site and to detect possible changes in the natural formations as a consequence of human activities. This research concerns both the cultivated plants, resulting from agricultural activities, and wild species, gathered in the surroundings for food, fuel or raw materials. The first excavation season at Tall-e Abu Chizan in winter 2005 resulted in the recovery of a little more than 800 seed and fruit remains as well as numerous charcoal fragments. The analysis of these has allowed a first reconstruction of the plant economy, summarized in a preliminary report (non-published report, Tengberg 2005). Several cultivated species - hulled wheats, barley, lentil and perhaps flax - were identified together with sixteen wild taxa that might have been incorporated into the archaeobotanical assemblages either as a result of the processing of crops or the use of dung as fuel. The results from the study of plant remains from 2006 season are, not surprisingly, very similar to those of last year. Moreover, the data is to a large extent coherent with that obtained at other more or less contemporary sites in the region, for example Bendebal, Jaffarabad and Dar Khazineh. Results from Bendebal, Jaffarabad and Dar Khazineh show that cereals were cultivated in the area during the late 5th and early 4th millennia BC (Miller 1983; Miller 2003b). While barley was present at all of these sites, hulled wheats were identified at Bendebal and Jaffarabad only. The last site also produced a considerable quantity of lentils. The composition of the samples from Bendebal seems to suggest that dung was, at least in part, used as fuel at the site (Miller 1983: 278). At Jaffarabad, the charred material seems, on the contrary, to result from the burning of waste from crop processing or food preparation activities (Miller 1983: 279) Present-day Vegetation around the Site From a phytogeographical point of view the hot plains of eastern Khuzestan belong to the subtropical Nubo-Sindian

vegetational unit that characterizes the coasts along the Persian Gulf as well as south-eastern Iran and southwestern Pakistan. A few taxa belonging to this vegetation type, such as Ziziphus nummularia and Lycium shawii, can be found in the surroundings of the site. However, the local flora is mainly characterized by numerous annual plants that colonize the unstable alluvial soils after the winter rains. They are ephemerals in the true sense of the word, i.e. they complete their life cycle during a very brief period, before the onset of the spring heat. A dense cover of plants belonging to various families (Poacaeae, Fabaceae, Plantaginaceae, Malvaceae, Apiaceae, Asteraceae, Primulaceae…) then occupy any flat area left between the down-cutting wadis. Vast stretches covered by Malva parviflora (locally called tula) are particularly appreciated by grazing herds. The plain around Tall-e Abu Chizan is virtually treeless except for a few shrub species growing in crevices and wadis caused by ephemeral streams. The spiny mesquite (Prosopis farcta) thrives on the unstable, loamy soils where it draws water from the subsoil through long tap roots. Tamarisk (Tamarix tetragyna) grows along the larger wadis and seems to be the main speiceis exploited for feul. Remains of steppe forest formations, belonging to a temperate Irano-Turanian flora, are within reach from Tall-e Abu Chizan in the foothills of the Zagros Mountains, situated at a few kilometers distance to the east of the site. As in most regions of the Middle East, we might suppose that the vegetation cover was richer in the past. Indeed, the joint action of climate, erosion and human activities such as wood-cutting and herding has certainly had a considerable impact on the natural formations. At present, mixed herds of sheep and goat that graze in the area during the winter are particularly harmful to the regeneration of perennial species. Material and Method Seventeen soil samples for archaeobotanical analysis were collected from various features and layers in the areas A, B and C during the excavation. Their total volume amounted to 603 liters, with the size of individual samples varying between 2 and 235 liters (see Tables A3.1 and A3.2). Charred plant remains were separated from the surrounding soil matrix by manual flotation. The archaeological sediment was slowly poured into a barrel filled with water (Fig. A3.1:1). The heavy fraction (animal bones, potsherds, small stones…) was recovered in a sieve with a mesh size 248

APPENDIX 2. Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan of 1 mm held just under the surface of the water (Fig. A3.1:2). Light charred plant remains that floated on the surface were caught in a smaller sieve with a mesh of 0.5 mm (Fig. A3.1:3). The light fraction was dried in a piece of cloth and then sorted under a binocular microscope. The density of seed remains varies between 0.25 and 24 seeds/fruits per liter. A few small samples turned out to be particularly rich (Tables A3.1 and A3.2). In general, the layer 10 of Area A produced the most numerous plant remains. Six samples on a total of 31 from Area A did not contain any seeds or charcoal fragments at all. All the rest of the samples except for three (samples 2 and 4 in Area B and sample 12 in area C) contained identifiable remains even when sampling was quite limited. In general, ashy layers at Tall-e Abu Chizan are rich in carbonized plant material. Most plant remains were carbonized but a few seeds, notably from the Boraginaceae family, were also found in a mineralized state. The charred seeds and fruits were mostly not very well preserved. Charcoal pieces were present, although not in abundance, and usually of small size. The analysis of 1692 seed and fruit remains has allowed the identification of more than 20 botanical taxa. Most of these belong to wild plants but a few cultivated species are also attested (Tables A3.1 and A3.2). Crop plants Among the cultivated plants, cereals are by far the most frequently encountered. Indeed, they are present in all samples except one (Area A-layer 7, feature 6, Table A3.1). Many of these remains were fragmented and could not be identified to the genus or species level. However, both barley and wheat are attested. Barley (Hordeum vulgare) is present throughout the sequence, in the form of grains and rachis segments (Fig. A3.2: 1-2). When the former are sufficiently well preserved they present a longitudinal scar on their sides, indicating that we deal with hulled barley. Further, a few grains are characteristically twisted, showing that at least part of the assemblage belong to sixrow hulled barley (subsp. hexastichum). One single and much fragmented rachis segment of barley was noted in sample 1 (Area A-layer 20). No grains belonging to the naked variety of six-row barley have so far been met with at Tall-e Abu Chizan. The most numerous cereal remains (notably from sample 1) consist of chaff (spikelet forks and glume bases) from hulled wheats. Both einkorn (T. monococcum) and emmer (Triticum dicoccum) are present (Fig. A3.2: 3-4). Chaff remains from hulled wheat, either emmer or einkorn (T. monococcum) are also present in several samples. The chaff from hulled wheats result from their dehusking - a necessary step in order to liberate the edible grains from their surrounding envelope. This treatment, usually considered as a piecemeal and day-to-day household

activity, is normally carried out with the help of a pestle and mortar. The dehusking by-products - glumes, rachis segments and spikelet forks - can be used to light the fire or as a complementary fodder. While the rather massive spikelet forks and glume bases are frequently preserved by charring, the thin and fragile glumes usually disappear. It is thus not surprising that no glumes were found in our samples. One seed from sample no. 1 of Area A-Layer 20 was identified as flax (cf Linum) but its mediocre state of preservation did not allow us to attribute it with certitude to the cultivated species, Linum usitatissimum. Two fragmented seeds from the Area A-layer 5 (Late Susiana) were also tentatively identified as flax (Linum usitatissimum) (Table A3.1). One single lentil (Lens culinaris) was found in Area A-layer 17, dated to the Late Susiana (Fig. A3.2: 11). Medick, Milk vetch were also recognized from Area A-layers 20. 18, 13, 12, 10, 7, Area B- samples 9 and 10, and Area C- samples 14 and15 (Tables A3.1 and A3.2; Fig. A3.2: 5-6) Wild species The identified wild species belong to nine different botanical families: Fabaceae (Astragalus, Medicago, Prosopis cf farcta), Poaceae (Aegilops, Lolium, Phalaris), Aizooaceae (Aizoon), Boraginaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Rubiaceae (Galium), Malvaceae (Malva), Plantaginaceae (Plantago) and Thymeleaceae (Thymelaea) (Tables A3.1 and A3.2) (Fig. A3.2: 7-10). The presence of these wild, mostly small-seeded, plants in the archaeobotanical assemblages can be explained in different ways. Either they result from the use of dung as fuel or they represent field weeds cleaned out from the crops. Indeed, taxa such as Aegilops, Lolium, Phalaris and Malva are frequently found in cereal fields in the Middle East. After having been cleaned out from the crops they would have been discarded into the fire and thus charred. As long as the precise context of the samples (oven, floor, pit?) is not known, the interpretation cannot be brought much further. There is also the possibility that these taxa, at least in part, represent wild plants growing spontaneously in the surroundings. At present the unstable soils around Tall-e Abu Chizan host many annual species of which some belong to the above-mentioned genera. Seeds and fruits from wild plants could have been included into the archeobotanical assemblages through the use of dung as fuel, a well-known practice in regions poor in ligneous resources. The wild taxa identified at the site would then rather reflect the local flora, pastured by livestock, than agro-ecological conditions in the fields. The use of dung is moreover suggested by sample 15 that contains several dung-like conglomerates of organic material, where plant elements (straw, leaves…) are clearly visible (Fig. A3.3).

249

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

250

APPENDIX 2. Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan Late Susiana 4600-3900 BC 13

12

10

8

pit 0001

19

vessel

16

17

11

12

13

14

3

1.5

500

1

21

5 11

17

2

3 3

2

2 2

46

1 12

2

Total

2

5

4 3

5

3

1 2

6

1

3

1

Total

7

5 15

1

4

1

1

56 5

3

1

1

6

3 1 1

2

1 1

1

10

1 2

1

4

1

1

6 2

6

21 572

3

6

12

63

39

156

7

115

132

1

4

24

4.7

5.2

5.1

0.6

11

7.3

1 26

6

1.8

32

37

0.4

3.1

8

Archaeobotanical Remains from Area A Table A2.1. Archaeobotanical Remains from Area A

251

69 3.1

1 4

18 12

3

9

6

218

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin

252

APPENDIX 2. Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan

160-170

Late Middle Susiana

Late Susiana

B

C

170-180

190-200

230-240

240-270

7

8

9

10

11

3

3

3

5

4

vessel

1

2

8

10

13

14

15

16

17

-

31

23

58

41

Total

5 1 1 1 3 1 2

2

6

3

4

1

8

9

7

1

1 11

36

5

1

1

10

1

2

2

1

1

1

3

5

1

4

9

9

10

1

1

1

2

4

2

9

2

2 1

1

5

3

2

1

10

4

2

9

23

13

9

33

5

6

25

209

16

2

1

13

8

1

1

0.67

3

1.6

1.5

63

19

36

105

282

86

-

1.16

4.52

4.86

2.1

obotanical Remains from Areas B and C Table A2.2. Archaeobotanical Remains from Areas B and C

253

1

17 56 261 23 1 13

1

1 6

36

1

1

8

59

1

1

9

1

3

13

2

24

1

1

1

3

13

8

3 1

5

3

1 1

Total

528

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin Area A: Charcoal analysis

Discussion

Almost twenty charcoal fragments from Area A-levels 5, 6, 7 have been identified in a preliminary analysis. They all turned out to belong to the tamarisk tree (Tamarix sp.), easily identifiable by its large and heterogenous wooden rays that furthermore present a characteristic storied structure.

Even though rather limited, the first results from the archaeobotanical analysis at Tall-e Abu Chizan show the potential for this type of study in the chronological and ecological context of the site. Adequate sampling methods, applied here since the very first excavation season, have allowed the recovery of different categories of plant remains, even the minute seeds of wild grass and leguminous species. The continuation of sampling efforts during coming seasons will complete the archaeobotanical record. Extensive excavation of well identified structures will further allow more precise interpretations in terms of past environments, fuel economy, post-harvest processing etc.

The presence of this species in the samples at Tall-e Abu Chizan shows that woody species grew in the surroundings of the site. The tamarisk is typically growing along permanent or intermittent watercourses. Another shrub species present in the samples Prosopis cf farcta. It is attested by its seeds (see above) that could have arrived at the site through the grazing of livestock (dung fuel) or by the use of Prosopis wood as fuel. Further analysis of charcoal might confirm the second hypothesis.

In general, both crops and wild plants present at Tall-e Abu Chizan during the Prehistoric period. It is too early to detect possible changes in the plant assemblages through time but further systematic sampling will certainly allow a more precise analysis of the assemblages for each period.

Figure A2.1: Stages of water floatation employed to extract archaeobotanical remains at Tall-e Abu Chizan

254

an

APPENDIX 2. Archaeobotanical Analysis at Tall-e Abu Chiz

Figure A2.2: Example of Crops and Wild Species identified at Tall-e Abu Chizan. From 1:Barley, 2:Barley Rachis, 3:Wheat Rachis, 4: Emmer Wheat, 5: Medick, 6: Milk Vetch, 7: Canary Grass, 8: Plantain 9: Mesquite, 10: Grasses and 11: Lentil

top left:

Figure A2.3: Dung-like conglomerates of charred organic material (Area C, Layer 1, Feature 2), maximum diameter 4 mm.

255

APPENDIX 3 Observations on the Faunal Remains of Tall-e Abu Chizan

Part One: 2005 Season By: Marhjane Mashkour and Azadeh Mohaseb Introduction Almost all the layers of the stratigraphic trench - Area A- at Tall-e Abu Chizan yielded animal bones, however in low quantities (118 fragments) (Fig. A3.1). The bone preservation in this trench is not very good. More that 53% of the remains with an average weight for the unidentified bones is 1g, could not be identified. This indicated a relatively important fragmentation. The non identified bones have been divided to two groups of large and small mammals and small ruminants, in order to allow a finer view of the type of exploited animals, when the data are so scarce. The small mammal and small ruminants are the dominant group compared to the large mammals (60 to 3) all over the excavated sequence. The identified bones (55 fragments) belong for the majority to herbivores animals. The remains were divided into 3 chronological groups belonging to Late Susiana (LS2), Late Susiana 1 (LS1) and Late Middle Susiana (LMS). Taphonomic Results The rodent remains, which can bring information on the local environment, are all in the LS2 levels (from top to 1 m). The general patina of the bones does not suggest a modern fossorial animal which would have been died in its hole. However the presence of the rodents in this higher levels might be an indicator of fossorial activity in premodern periods which would have nevertheless given the same patina to the bones as the archaeological bone. The size of the skeletal fragment found in layers 4, 6 and 7 are comparable with those of gerbil type large rodents (Tatera/ Allectaga for example). A sieving program, specifically for the recovery of the micro-vertebrate, is necessary to help a comprehensive collection of this data in deeper levels and specially the recovery of the cranial elements or teeth, which are used for taxonomic identification. Once the specific identifications are done, it will be possible to know the exact ecology and behavior of the present animals and thus interpret the data in a more secure way. The most important issue with the rodent studies for the context of this site is to evidence the presence of commensial species indicator of sedentarisation and urbanization (Ervynk 2002). The poor bone preservation is visible in the fragmentation rate as noted above, and also it could be verified in contact

of the bones. Some had lost totally the organic material and could turn to powder on handling. The Faunal Spectra Tall-e Abu Chizan faunal remains despite the poor preservation of this first assemblage is very promising because of its relatively important taxonomic diversity. The 55 identified bone fragments could be allocated to Sheep (Ovis), Goat (Goat) (Fig. A3.2 no 2), Cattle (Bos) (Fig. A3.2 no 1), Pig/Boar (Sus) (Fig. A3.2 no .3), Gazelle (Gazella) (Fig. A3.2 no 4), Fox (Vulpes) and another unidentified carnivore. The animals seem to have been culled on the site. Even though all the anatomic parts of each taxon are not represented here, however all animal are represented by both cranial and post-cranial elements. There is an exception however for the fox, which is only represented by the metapodials and this could suggest the use of the fur, were generally the extremities of limb bones are left in the skin. The major issue with the study of the faunal remains of Tall-e Abu Chizan is to evidence the wild or domestic status of sheep especially during the LMS. Its presence is evidenced with a second phalanx but this single specimen does not allow any further allocation. Similarly, the status of cattle falls under the same interrogations, particularly enhanced by the fact that it is absent until the layer 13 (LS1). As for the environmental issues, it is interesting to note that the gazelle is only present in the LMS (layers 18 and 17) and that boar/pig (Sus) is found from layer 16 on. Also the absence of Equid remains could be noticed in this assemblage. Finally, several human bones (metapodials) have been also found in the remains of layer 17, which might indicate the presence of an inhumation belonging probably to the superior levels. Preliminary Conclusions Tall-e Abu Chizan faunal remains is very promising for documenting several questions in Southwest Iran: What are the processes of the domestication of major domesticates sheep, cattle, and boar in this area. Could the presence / absence of gazelle and boar in the deepest levels be an indication of local environmental changes, between dryer to wetter, or it is mirroring variations in hunting strategies. These questions could be posed by this preliminary study,

256

an

APPENDIX 3. Observations on the Faunal Remains of Tall-e Abu Chiz

an

Figure A3.1: Bone Collection from the 1st season of Excavation at Tall-e Abu Chiz

Figure A3.2: Identified Bone Fragments form the 1st Season of Excavation at Tall-e Abu Chizan. 1-Cattle (Bos), 2-Goat (Goat), 3- Pig/Boar (Sus) and 4-Gazelle (Gazella) 257

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin which is how ever biased by the very low quantity of the data. This assemblage shows promising potential also for the metric analyses and for documenting kill off pattern. Part Two: 2006 Season By: Karyn Wesselingh Phil Cullah Introduction The animal bones from Tall-e Abu Chizan were recovered in the course of excavation during January and February 2005 and 2006. The results of the 2005 excavations have been reported on elsewhere (Mashkour and Mohaseb 2005; part one in this appendix). I was asked to examine the faunal remains of the 2006 season, presented below. Materials and Methodology The animal bones reported on here were collected in January and February 2006 from four areas: Area A, a deep sounding; Area B, a pit (Late Middle Susiana); Area C, an area with architecture and kilns (Late Susiana) and Area D, a kiln (Early Uruk) (chronology after Moghaddam 2005b). All animal bones were recovered through sieving using 5mm mesh. The samples were floated to wash and in some cases rubbed, with a soft brush, then bagged on site. Finally they were transported to Australia for analysis but will be returned to Iran at the completion of the project. The bones were initially sorted to remove skull fragments, vertebra and ribs which cannot be identified to genus/species. Fragments of long bone and other small fragments were also separated where they were considered unidentifiable. Small mammal bones were retained separately while the remainder of the material was labelled and grouped according to body part and taxa. The body parts removed for recording are as follows: horn core, mandible (premolar and molar tooth row only), scapula (articular area and neck), proximal and distal halves of humerus, radius, femur, tibia, metacarpal, metatarsal, proximal ulna, pelvis (acetabular region), phalanx 1, 2 and 3. Phalanges from the fore and hind leg were not distinguished. The long bone shaft fragments that could be identified as proximal or distal were also included. Identification of taxon and body parts was based on a small reference collection at the University of Sydney and the authors own material. The distinction between sheep and goat follows Boessneck (Boessneck 1969). Given the small amount of diagnostic material and lack of reference bones it was impossible to separate gazelle from sheep/ goat. For the same reason it was impossible to identify the post cranial fragments of the small mammals to species level. Those bones which could not be identified to species level but could be assigned on the basis of size have been classified as small, medium or large mammal. Some small

mammal bones can be reliably classified as rodents but no further and hence have been assigned to rodent. For each individual bone or bone fragment, variables other than context, taxon and anatomical part were recorded where appropriate. These were as follows: side of body, presence or absence of proximal or distal units; state of epiphyseal fusion; fragmentation; traces of gnawing and burning; erosion, butchery marks; evidence of bone working and metrical data where possible. Each variable was recorded as an individual number, using the numerical coding scheme of Halstead (Halstead unpublished), thereby producing a string of numbers of each individual bone or bone fragment. The species and body part representation data and both dental and postcranial fusion ageing data have been recorded as minimum number of anatomical units (MinAU), as described by Halstead (Halstead 1992). Long bones are treated as comprising both a proximal and distal unit. Left and right-sided units are counted separately. To control for differences between taxa in the numbers of foot bones, these are reduced to minimum numbers of feet. Data on gnawing/cut marks are presented in terms of maximum numbers of anatomical units (MaxAU). Quantification of the fragments is based on Binford’s (Binford 1984: 50-51) description of minimum numbers of elements with refinements based on Halstead’s (in press) and Halstead’s (Halstead 1992) minimum numbers of anatomical units (MinAU) and maximum numbers of anatomical units (MaxAU). The use of MaxAU for basic method of quantification may lead to overrepresentation of body parts, taxa and age/sex categories due to the fact that even small fragments of selected anatomical units are retained for study. To minimise this effect MinAU (Halstead 1985) has been used as the basic unit of quantification to estimate relative abundances of different body parts or taxa. MaxAU is used in the analysis of fragmentation, gnawing, burning and butchery on the grounds that MinAU tends to discount poorly preserved or heavily fragmented specimens and so is likely to underestimate the frequency of specimens subject to these variables (Halstead in press). “MinAU was estimated as follows. Where two or more fragments might be derived from the same anatomical unit (e.g. a single left proximal tibia) of the same individual animal, only the most complete example contributes to the minimum number of anatomical units. Similarly, to simplify comparison between species with different numbers of foot bones, quantification of fragments of metapodial bones and phalanges has been standardised in terms of minimum numbers of feet: thus if two specimens of phalanx 2, of for example, sheep (or sheep/goat) could be derived from the same foot, only one contributes to the MinAU. Assessment of the MinAU was based on visual comparison of specimens and involved strewing of anatomical/taxonomic groups (e.g pig humeri) into subgroups (left/right, proximal/distal, medial/lateral, fused/ unfused etc)” (Halstead in press). 258

APPENDIX 3. Observations on the Faunal Remains of Tall-e Abu Chizan The data collected was entered, sorted and the output tabulated in the statistical package SPSS 13.0 (2004). The statistical significance of any differences observed has been assessed using the Pearson’s chi-squared test (χ2). Values of p52000

Yrs BP

60

2200

1σ error

Conventional Radiocarbon age

Note: 1-The δ (¹³ C) values quoted above relate solely to the graphic derived from the fraction that was used for the radiocarbon measurement. It is sometimes the case that the δ (¹³ C) of this fraction is not the same as that of the bulk material. 2- The ages quoted are radiocarbon ages, not calendar ages. 3-The ages have been rounded according to M. Stuiver and A. Polach (1977). The definition of percent Modern Carbon and conventional Radiocarbon age can also be found in this publication.

 

Later Village Period Settlement Development in the Karun River Basin