An Archaeological Analysis of the Existing Shell Vessels (Libation Shell) in the Archaeological Contexts of the Iranian Plateau in the Third to the First Millennium B.C.

Naseri, Parisa; Motarjem, Abbas; S. Reese, David

doi:10.22059/jarcs.2023.342641.143113

فهرست نشریات

فهرست نشریات دارای اعتبار وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فناوری

فهرست مجلات علمی- پژوهشی دانشگاه تهران

نحوه ارسال مقاله برای مجله- ثبت نام در سامانه- فراموش کردن رمز عبور

تعداد نشریات	158
تعداد شماره‌ها	6,240
تعداد مقالات	67,871
تعداد مشاهده مقاله	115,431,616
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله	90,200,382

	An Archaeological Analysis of the Existing Shell Vessels (Libation Shell) in the Archaeological Contexts of the Iranian Plateau in the Third to the First Millennium B.C.
مطالعات باستان شناسی
مقاله 10، دوره 15، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 33، آذر 1402، صفحه 167-183 اصل مقاله (1.09 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jarcs.2023.342641.143113
نویسندگان
Parisa Naseri¹؛ Abbas Motarjem^* ²؛ David S. Reese³
¹Ph.D. Candidate in Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
²Associate Professor in Department of Archaeology, Bu-ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran.
³rofessor of US paleontologist, Yale University, Peabody Museum of Natural History, New Haven, United States.
چکیده
Sea shells are natural-biological objects. They are embedded in geological layers in the form of fossils, but also, to find in archaeological deposits as a result of human activities. Archaeologists can use the provenance of shells in the functional analysis of ancient sites in terms of social archeology and prehistoric trading activities. Aarcheological excavations in several sites of the Iranian Plateau have shown that from the 3^rd third millennium B.C. onwards, finds of of sea shells (e.g. Lambis, Dentalium, etc.) rapidely increased. Such shells were for instance discovered from ritual cemetery contexts such as Shahdad, Tepe Hesar, Kale Nisar cemeteries or Bani Surma. These objects are mainly used as natural or polished shells. In some cases, they served as a raw material for making all kinds of beads, buttons, and other ornamental objects.. The main question is to understand the relationship between the use of seashells and archaeological context, and also, their role in Bronze Age ritual life. In this article, the descriptive, analytical method has been used in the biological recognition of all types of shells. This method is also used based on similar studies on this issue in Mesopotamia's archeology of the Sumerian-Akkadian period. The distribution of recognizable species shows that these objects are concentrated in the settlements from south to southeast of Iran in the coastal strip of the Persian Gulf, and from the Oman Sea to the Zagros intermountain valleys, as well as in the northwest and northeast of Iran. The biological origin can be placed in the northern shores of the Oman Sea to the Gulf of Kutch on the northern coast of the Indian Ocean. It seems that with the growth and development of urbanization in Southwest Asia and especially the development of sea trade, oysters have been traded as valuable goods and other prestige goods. The importance of the shell findings is more than the value of the shells themselves because they were used as sacred goods in religious affairs. Analysis of the fields where the shells were discovered is more related to cemeteries and temples as sacred spaces. Also, the significant presence of Lambis shells for the production of specific ritual bowls, placed together with bronze axes in graves, can be seen as the reflection of a patriarchic tradition in the social-political organisiation of the third and second millennia B.C. Despite many excavations and the discovery of many samples of these types of shells, no furthergoing investigation on these specific objects was undertaken so far. This desideratum reveals more valuable findings in the archeology of the Iranian plateau. Therefore, one of this article's final goals is to focus more on analyzing the context of the discovery of seashells in future Excavation
کلیدواژه‌ها
pottery؛ petrographic؛ XRF؛ ICP؛ TL Dating؛ Jahangir
عنوان مقاله [English]
An Archaeological Analysis of the Existing Shell Vessels (Libation Shell) in the Archaeological Contexts of the Iranian Plateau in the Third to the First Millennium B.C.
نویسندگان [English]
Parisa Naseri¹؛ Abbas Motarjem²؛ David S. Reese³
¹Ph.D. Candidate in Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
²Associate Professor in Department of Archaeology, Bu-ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran.
³rofessor of US paleontologist, Yale University, Peabody Museum of Natural History, New Haven, United States.
چکیده [English]
Sea shells are natural-biological objects. They are embedded in geological layers in the form of fossils, but also, to find in archaeological deposits as a result of human activities. Archaeologists can use the provenance of shells in the functional analysis of ancient sites in terms of social archeology and prehistoric trading activities. Aarcheological excavations in several sites of the Iranian Plateau have shown that from the 3^rd third millennium B.C. onwards, finds of of sea shells (e.g. Lambis, Dentalium, etc.) rapidely increased. Such shells were for instance discovered from ritual cemetery contexts such as Shahdad, Tepe Hesar, Kale Nisar cemeteries or Bani Surma. These objects are mainly used as natural or polished shells. In some cases, they served as a raw material for making all kinds of beads, buttons, and other ornamental objects.. The main question is to understand the relationship between the use of seashells and archaeological context, and also, their role in Bronze Age ritual life. In this article, the descriptive, analytical method has been used in the biological recognition of all types of shells. This method is also used based on similar studies on this issue in Mesopotamia's archeology of the Sumerian-Akkadian period. The distribution of recognizable species shows that these objects are concentrated in the settlements from south to southeast of Iran in the coastal strip of the Persian Gulf, and from the Oman Sea to the Zagros intermountain valleys, as well as in the northwest and northeast of Iran. The biological origin can be placed in the northern shores of the Oman Sea to the Gulf of Kutch on the northern coast of the Indian Ocean. It seems that with the growth and development of urbanization in Southwest Asia and especially the development of sea trade, oysters have been traded as valuable goods and other prestige goods. The importance of the shell findings is more than the value of the shells themselves because they were used as sacred goods in religious affairs. Analysis of the fields where the shells were discovered is more related to cemeteries and temples as sacred spaces. Also, the significant presence of Lambis shells for the production of specific ritual bowls, placed together with bronze axes in graves, can be seen as the reflection of a patriarchic tradition in the social-political organisiation of the third and second millennia B.C. Despite many excavations and the discovery of many samples of these types of shells, no furthergoing investigation on these specific objects was undertaken so far. This desideratum reveals more valuable findings in the archeology of the Iranian plateau. Therefore, one of this article's final goals is to focus more on analyzing the context of the discovery of seashells in future Excavation
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
pottery, petrographic, XRF, ICP, TL Dating, Jahangir

مراجع
Alden, J. 1982. Trade and Politics in Proto-Elamite Iran. Current Anthropology 23/6: 613-640. Allen, M.J. and B. Payne. 2017. Mollusks in archaeology: an introduction. In M.J. Allen, ed., Mollusks in Archaeology: Methods, Approaches, and Applications. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 1-5. Aynard, J.M. 1966. Coquillages Mésopotamiens. Syria XLIII/1-2: 21-37. Bar-Yosef Mayer, D.E. 2005. The Exploitation of Shells as Beads in the Palaeolithic and Neolithic of the Levant. Paléorient 31/1: 176–185. _____ 2011. Nawamis, Shells, and Early Bronze Age Pastoralism. In M.S. Chesson, ed., Daily Life, Materiality, and Complexity in Early Urban Communities of the Southern Levant. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 185-195. Chakrabarti, D.K. 1990. The external trade of the Indus Civilization. New Delhi: Charpentier, V., J.-F. Berger, and F. Borgi. 2016. Les premier’s chasseurs-collecteurs Maritimes d’Arabie (IXe-IVe millénairesavant Notre ere). ou paiement par courrier: formulaire papier à nous retourner à l’adresse de gestion et de correspondance de la SPF:BSPF, Maison de l’archéologie et de l’ethnologie Pôle éditorial, boîte 41, 21 allée de l’Université, 92023 Nanterre. Charpentier.v , J.-F. Berger, R. Crassard, F. Borgi and Ph. Béarez. 2016. Les premiers chasseurs collecteurs maritimes d’Arabie.(IXe-IVe millénaires avant notre ère, (Responsables des réunions scientifiques de la SPF :Jacques Jaubert, José Gomez de Soto, Jean-Pierre Fagnart et Cyril Montoya Directeur de la publication: Jean-Marc Pétillon Secrétariat de rédaction, maquette et mise en page : Martin Sauvage et Frank Barbery (CNRS, USR 3225, Nanterre) Correction et vérification: Karolin Mazurié de Keroualin (www.linarkeo.com) Mise en ligne: Ludovic Meve). Charpentier V., S. Méry, E. Fortini, É Pellé. 2009. “Un chef est un requin qui voyage par terre”: fonctions et statuts des armatures de projectile en dents de Carcharhinus leucas et aiguillon caudal de raie dans l’Arabie des VIe-IIIe millénaires av. notre ère. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 20/1: 9-17. Claassen, C. 1991. Normative thinking in shell-bearing sites. In M.B. Schiﬀer, ed., Archaeological Method and Theory. New York: Springer, 249-258. _____ 1998. Shells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Clark, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. Conchiglie 1981. Conchiglie, Il commercio e la lavorazione delle conchiglie marine nel medio oriente dal IV al II millennio a.C. Roma Palazzo Brancaccio, 14 maggio-19 luglio 1981. Rome: De Luca Editore. Darck, K.R. 2003. Theoretical archaeology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Delougaz, P. and S. Lloyd. 1942. Pre-Sargonid Temples in the Diyala Region. Oriental Institute Publication 58. Chicago: The Oriental Institute, University of Chicago. Delougaz, P., C. Hill and S. Lloyd. 1967. Private Houses and Graves in the Diyala Region. Oriental Institute Publication 88. Chicago: University of Chicago. Durante, S. 1975. The utilization of Xancus pyrum (L.) at Shahr-i-Sokhta. In _. von Lohuizen and J.E. de Leeuw, eds., South Asian Archaeology 1975. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 27-42. _____ 1977. The use of imported sea-shells at Shahr-i Sokhta; trading between inland Iran and the Indian Ocean coastal regions. In M. Basaglia et al., La Città Bruciata del Deserto Salto. Venezia-Mestre: Erizzo Editrice, 215-223 (Italian), 223-228 (English). _____ 1979. Marine Shells from Balakot, Shahr-i Sokhta, and Tepe Yahya: Their Significance for Trade and Technology in Ancient Indo-Iran. In M. Taddei, ed., South Asian Archaeology 1977. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 317-344. Eickoff. T. 1993. Grab und Beigabe. Bestattungssitten der Nekropole von Tall Ahmad al-Hattu und anderer früdynastischer Begräbnisstätten im südlichen Mesopotamien und in Luristan. Münchener UniversitätsSchriften Philosophische Fakultät 12 (= Münchener vorderasiatische Studien XIV). München-Wien. Eliade, M. 1991. Images and Symbols: Studies in Religious Symbolism. Princeton: Princeton University Press (translated from the French by P. Mairet. First published in 1952). Gensheimer, T.R. 1984. The Role of Shell in Mesopotamia: Evidence for Trade Exchange with Oman and the Indus Valley. Paléorient 10/1: 65-73. Haernick, E. and B. Overlaet. 2006. Bani Surmeh: An Early Bronze Age grave in Pusht–I Kuh, Luristan. Luristan Excavation Document Vol. VI (Acta Iranica 43). Leuven: Peeters. _____ 2008. The Kalle Nisar Bronze Age Graveyard in Pusht–I Kuh, Luristan. Vol. VII (Acta Iranica 46). Leuven: Peeters. Hakemi, A. 1997. Shahdad: Archaeological Excavations of a Bronze Age Center in Iran. Rome: IsIAO. Spell out IsIAO Hall, H.R. and C.L. Woolley. 1927. Ur Excavations I Al-‘Ubaid. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Horne, L. 1998. Ur and Its Treasures: The Royal Tombs. Expedition 40/2: 4-11. Hornell, J. 1941. Sea Trade in Early Times. Antiquity 15: 233-256. Kenoyer, J.M. 1983. Shell Working Industries of the Indus Civilization: An Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. _____ 1984. Shell Working Industries of the Indus Civilization: A Summary. Paléorient 10/1: 49-63. _____ 1989. Socio-economic structures of the Indus Civilization as reflected in specialized crafts and the question of ritual segregation. In J.M. Kenoyer, ed., Old Problems, and New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South Asia. Wisconsin Archaeology 2. Madison, WI: Department of Archaeology, 183-192. _____ 1991. Urban process in the Indus tradition: a preliminary model from Harappa. In R.H. Meadow, ed., Hapappa Excavations 1986-1990. Madison, WI: Prehistory Press, 29-60. _____ 2008. Indus and Mesopotamian Trade Networks: New Insights from Shell and Carnelian Artifacts. In E. Olijdam and R.H. Spoo, eds., Intercultural Relations between South and Southwest Asia. Studies I Commemoration of E.C.L. During Caspers (1934-1996). BAR International Series 1826. Oxford: ______, 19-28. Kenoyer, J.M. and R.H. Meadow. 1999. Harappa: New Discoveries on its origins and growth. Lahore Museum Bulletin XII: 1-12. Kenoyer, J.M. and M. Vidale. 1992. A new look at stone drills of the Indus Valley Tradition. In P. Vandiver, J.R. Druzick, G.S. Wheeler and I. Freestone, eds., Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III. Pittsburgh: Materials Research Society, 495-518. Kenoyer, J.M., M. Vidale, and K.K. Bhan. 1991. Contemporary stone beadmaking in Khambhat, India: patterns of craft specialization and organization of production as reflected in the archaeological record. World Archaeology 23/1: 44-63, Kohl, P.L. 2001. Comment on Shereen Ratnagar (2001). The Bronze Age: Unique Instance of a Pre-Industrial World System? Current Anthropology 42: 367-368. Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. 1975. Third Millennium Modes of Exchange and Modes of Production. In J. Sabloff and C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, eds., Ancient Civilization and Trade. Albuquerque: ______, 341-368. Larsson Å.M. 2015. Opening Ancient Death Ways. In K. von Hackwitz and R. Peyroteo-Stjerna, eds., Caring for the Dead. Ancient Death Ways. Proceedings of the workshop on archaeology and mortuary practices. Occasional Papers in Archaeology, ?city, ?publisher, ?pages. Mackay, E.J.H. 1925. Report on the Excavation of the "A" cemetery at Kish, Mesopotamia, Part I. Anthropology Memoirs 1/1. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History. _____ 1929. A Sumerian Palace and the "A" cemetery at Kish, Mesopotamia. Anthropology Memoirs 1/2. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History. _____ 1931. Report on the Excavations at Jemdet Nasr, Iraq. Field Museum of Natural History, Anthropology Memoirs 1/3. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History. _____ 1943. Chanhu-Daro Excavations 1935-36. American Oriental Series 20. New Haven: American Oriental Society. Mallowan, M. 1966. Nimrud and its Remains I + II. London: Marshall, J. 1931. Mohenjho-daro and the Indus Civilization. 3 volumes. London: A. Probsthain. Martin, H.P. 1982. The Early Dynastic Cemetery at Al Ubaid, a Re-Evaluation. Iraq 44: 145-185. _____ 1985. Metalwork. In J.N. Postgate, ed., Abu Salabikh Excavations 2: Graves 1-99. London: British School of Archaeology in Iraq, _____ 1988. Fara, a Reconstruction of the Ancient Mesopotamian City of Shuruppak. Birmingham, UK: Chris Martin. Moorey, P.R.S. 1966. A Reconsideration of the Excavations at Tell Ingharra (East Kish), 1923-1933. Iraq XXVIII: 18-51. _____ 1970. Cemetery A at Kish: Grave Groups and Chronology. Iraq XXXII: 88-128. _____ 1978. Kish Excavations, 1922-33, with a microfiche catalogue of the Objects in Oxford excavated by the Oxford-Field Museum, Chicago Expedition to Kish in Iraq, 1923-1933. Oxford: Clarendon Press. _____ 1982. Ur of the Chaldees. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. _____ 1994. Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence. Oxford: Oppenheim, A.L. 1963. Mesopotamian Conchology. Orientalia ns. XXXII: 407-412. Parpola, S. A. 1994. Deciphering the Indus Script. Cambridge. Parpola, S., A. Parpola, and R.H. Brunswig. 1977. The Meluhha village: evidence of acculturation of Harappan traders in late third millennium Mesopotamia? Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient XX/2: 129-165. Potts, D.T. 1997. Mesopotamian Civilization: The Material Foundations. London or Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Postgate, J.N. 1980. Early Dynastic Burial Customs at Abu Salabikh. Sumer XXXVI: 65-82. Postgate, J.N. and J.A. Moon. 1982. Excavations at Abu Salabikh 1981. Iraq 44: 103-136. Quenet, Ph. 2018. Luxe et transgression dans les cités-états sud-mésopotamiennes (3100-2350 av. J.-C.) d’après quelques séries d’objets en coquille. Ktèma, Civilisations d l’Orient, de la Grèce et de Rome Antiques 43: 5-34. Ratnagar, S. 1981. Encounters: The Westerly Trade of the Harappa Civilization. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Ridout-Sharpe, J. 2019. Shell ornaments, icons, and other artifacts from the eastern Mediterranean and Levant. In M.J. Allen, ed., Mollusks in Archaeology: Methods, Approaches, and Applications. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 290-307. Schmandt-Berserat, D. and S.M. Alexander. 1975. The First Civilization: The Legacy of Sumer. Austin: The University of Texas at Austin. Schmidt, E.F. 1937. Excavations at Tepe Hissar, Damghan. Philadelphia: University Museum. 73-Sharifi, M, 2019.The Middle Bronze Age in the Little Zab Basin in the Light of the Excavations at Barde Zard Tepe, Northwest Iran . Iranian Journal of Archaeological Studies Vol, 9. No, 1, Pp 39-56 Starr, R.F.S. 1939. Nuzi. Report on the Excavations at Yorghan Tepe Near Kirkuk, Iraq Conducted by Harvard University in conjunction with the American Schools of Oriental Research and the University Museum of Philadelphia, 1927-1931. Text. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vanden Berghe, L. 1968a. Belgische opgravingen en navorsingen in de Pusht-i Kuh, Luristan; 39 campagne: oktober 1967 - januari 1968. Phoenix, Bulletin uitgegeven door het Vooraziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux 14:1, 109-127. _____ 1968b. La nécropole de Bani Surmah. Aurore d’une civilisation du Bronze. Archéologia 24: 52-63. _____ 1972. Researches archelogiques dans le Luristun. Cinquiemen campange 1969. Prospections dans le pusht-I kuh centeral (rapport preliminaire). Iranica Antiqua 9: 1-49. Watelin, L.C. 1934. Excavations at Kish, Vol. 4, 1925-1930. Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Winter, I.J. 1999. Reading Ritual in the Archaeological Record: Deposition Pattern and Function of two Artifact Types from the Royal Cemetery at Ur. In H. Kühne, R. Bernbeck, and K. Bartl, eds., Fluchtpunkt Uruk: Archäologische Einheit aus methodischer Vielfalt. Schriften für Hans Jörg Nissen. Rahden/Westf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, 229-256. Woolley, C.L. 1934a. Ur Excavations II. The Royal Cemetery. London and Philadelphia: British Museum and the University of Pennsylvania. _____ 1934b. The Excavations at Ur (1933-4). The Antiquaries Journal XIV/4: 355-378. _____ 1955. Excavations at Ur. London: Ernest Benn Ltd. Zettler, R.L. and L. Horne, eds. 1998. Treasures from The Royal Tombs of Ur. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 87 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 97

سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب

پیوندهای مفید

پیوندهای مفید

اخبار و اعلانات

آمار

An Archaeological Analysis of the Existing Shell Vessels (Libation Shell) in the Archaeological Contexts of the Iranian Plateau in the Third to the First Millennium B.C.