سفال خاکستری نوع اوروک در غرب ایران

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشجوی دکتری باستان‌شناسی، گروه باستان‌شناسی دانشکده‌ی ادبیات و علوم‌انسانی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

10.22084/nbsh.2019.19509.1972

چکیده

سفال موسوم به «سفال خاکستری نوع اوروک» ازجمله گونه‌های شاخص سفالین محوطه‌های هزاره‌ی 4 ق.م. شمال بین‌النهرین است. باوجود همجواری مناطق غربی ایران با شمال بین‌النهرین، اطلاعات موثقی در‌باره‌ی این گونه‌ی سفالین در محوطه‌های دوره‌ی مس‌وسنگ جدید مناطق غربی ایران در دسترس نبود. در بررسی‌های جدید صورت گرفته در بعضی مناطق غربی نظیر تپه‌ی قلعه‌نَنِه در مریوان گونه‌ی جدیدی از سفال خاکستری به‌دست آمده که با توجه به فرم و خمیره و نوع شاموت، این گونه مربوط به دوران مفرغ و آهن نبوده و در زمره‌ی سفال موسوم به سفال خاکستری نوع اوروک قرار می‌گیرد. نوشتار حاضر در پی آن است که ضمن معرفی ویژگی‌های کلی سفال خاکستری نوع اوروک و نیز نگاهی به پراکنش محوطه‌های دارای این سفال در منطقه‌ی شمال بین‌النهرین، به بررسی و مطالعه‌ی داده‌های نویافته در غرب ایران بپردازد. با توجه به ناشناخته ماندن این گونه در مطالعات پیش‌ازتاریخ مناطق غربی ایران، هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر بررسی جایگاه و اهیمت سفال‌ خاکستری نوع اوروک در مطالعات هزاره‌ی 4 ق.م. این منطقه است. چگونگی ورود و گسترش این گونه در غرب ایران بنیادی‌ترین پرسش پژوهش حاضر است. روش پژوهش ترکیبی از فعالیت‌های میدانی و نیز مطالعات کتابخانه‌ای است؛ بدین‌گونه که سفال‌های خاکستری به‌دست آمده از کاوش و بررسی‌های باستان‌شناختیِ برخی محوطه‌های غرب ایران با نمونه‌های مناطق همجوار مقایسه و مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. نتیجه‌ی حاصل‌شده نشان می‌دهد که سفال خاکستری نوع اوروک در نیمه‌ی اول هزاره‌ی 4 ق.م. جغرافیای وسیعی از مناطق شمال سوریه و عراق و جنوب‌شرق ترکیه را دربر گرفته که با ارائه‌ی شواهد جدید بعضی از مناطق غرب ایران نیز به این پهنه‌ها اضافه می‌گردد. با توجه به سرعت گرفتن روند برهم‌کنش‌های فرهنگی پهنه‌های فرهنگی مناطق غربی ایران با منطقه‌ی بین‌النهرین در هزاره‌ی 4 ق.م.، پاسخ پرسش این پژوهش در ارتباط با چگونگی وجود این گونه در غرب ایران در ورای این برهم‌کنش‌ها جای دارد. 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Uruk Grey Ware in Western Iran

نویسنده [English]

  • Sirvan Mohammadi Qasrian
Ph.D. Student in Archeology, Department of Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

So called Uruk grey ware is one of the most important fourth millennium B.C pottery type of upper Mesopotamia. This typical pottery type dating back to the middle phases of Late chalcolithic period (LC3-4) of northern Mesopotamia. This ware is a handmade and chaff tempered/chaff-faced pottery. Uruk grey ware reported from many chalcolithic period sites in upper Mesopotamia extended from north of Syria and Iraq to the south-east of Turkey. Even upper Mesopotamia and western Iran are neighboring regions and have a firm cultural interaction during prehistory, but there is not clear information regarding Uruk grey ware in west of Iran. recent archaeological investigation carried out in some regions in western Iran archaeological sites like Tepe Qaleh Naneh in Marivan county, identified some handmade chaff tempered pottery seems to be Uruk grey pottery. Noted that Tepe Qaleh Naneh was first reported by Bu Alisina expedition in 2003. The site was revisited in 2015 resulted unmourns Godin VI (Late Uruk) pottery. Regarding the value of this pottery in late chalcolithic pottery studies, Present paper would try to investigate and evaluate the new founded martials from Marivan region. On the subject of non-local provenance of Uruk grey war which is located in upper Mesopotamia, the main question concerning this typical pottery type in western Iran is about the way of its intrusion and development in this area. In order to find the answer our question, we compared and analyzed Uruk grey pottery unearthed from archaeological sites like Tepe Qale Nane and some other chalcolithic period sites in western Iran like Tepe Kalnan. The result of our studies concerning this pottery showing that Uruk grey ware is not confined in Upper Mesopotamian horizon and some parts of western Iran is also influenced from this ware. Regarding firm archaeological interaction between western Iran and Upper Mesopotamia in fourth millennium B.C, so called Uruk grey war was introduced in western Iran also.
Keywords: Grey Ware, Marivan, Upper Mesopotamia,  Late Chalcolithic (LC).
Introduction
Obviously Upper Mesopotamia the same as southern Mesopotamia has an important role regarding the study of first cities in the world. After long time using local chronological table related to the late chalcolithic period studies in northern Mesopotamia, from 2000 onward, a new table which is based on changes occurred in martial cultures and particularly pottery was used. This new table divided the entire chalcolithic period (4500-3100 BC) to 5 phase: LC (Late Chalcolithic) 1: 4500-4200 BC is a transitional phase (Post-Ubaid) between Ubaid 4 and Early Uruk and characterized by typical Black On Buff (BOB) painted ware but with more limited painting compare to Ubaid 4. LC2: 4200-3850 is overlap somewhat with Early Uruk of southern Mesopotamia but without any southern influences. This phase is characterized by disappear of painted pottery and apparent of plain chaff tempered wares. LC3: 3850-3700 BC is characterized by new worldwide type (Chaff-Face) ware with its 4 typical variant: grey-black ware, Casserole, Hammerhead and potter mark. LC4/5:3600-3100 is overlap with middle and late Uruk period of southern Mesopotamia (Rothman, 2001: 370-72). After long time absence of southern influences, in the middle of 4th millennium BC, we see that southern Mesopotamia influences like Beveled rime pottery. One of the typical pottery style of Upper Mesopotamian late chalcolithic period is so called Uruk grey ware that is one of the chaff face variant. This type is really less known in western Iran, but recently in our survey carried out in Marivan area in western Iran, we succeed in discovering a few chaff face grey ware the same as Upper Mesopotamian Uruk grey ware. Discovering this new grey ware, showing the key position of this area from western Iran regarding to late chalcolithic period studies. Hoping future studies tell more about this unknown pottery style.
 
Discussion
As mentioned Uruk grey ware is not western Iranian pottery type. This ware seems to be originated outside western Iran and its provenance is located in northern Mesopotamia (Gut, 2002: 20; Brustolon and Rova, 2007: 15-16). Regarding this issue, the main question about this pottery in western Iran is how and why this pottery is identified in this area? The most common and principal hypothesis may lay in immigration of people more transparency communities, but our studies show something different. in order to find the answer of proposed question, we analyses Uruk grey ware of some key sites in western Iran like Tepe Qlaeh Naneh in Marivan region. Qlaeh Naneh is a multi-period archaeological mound located in Marivan region in western Iran (Mohammadifar & Motarjem, 2003). This sites are dominated by prehistoric deposits and particular late chalcolithic period remains (Saedmoucheshi et al. 2015). Our evaluation and comparisons of this ware with similar ones from neighboring regions and specially northern Mesopotamia demonstrated that this pottery was introduced and developed in western Iran as a result of archaeological interaction between Western Iran and upper Mesopotamia in fourth millennium B.C. even western Iran and Upper Mesopotamia are in contact and have an archaeological interaction some times before late chalcolithic period in 4th millennium B.C, but with begging of  urbanization process in Mesopotamia in fourth millennium B.C this cultural interaction have raised and a firm interaction was formed. As a result of this cultural interaction both regions influenced from each other. One of the main sign of this relation and interaction is introducing of so called Uruk grey ware in western Iran.
 
Conclusion
What have been known as grey pottery in western Iran archaeological studies is confined to the bronze and Iron Age. But our new founded martials from some regions in western Iran like Tepe Qlaeh Naneh in Marivan showing that there is also some chaff-faced pottery in late chalcolithic period also called Uruk grey ware. Our methodology in this paper is based on comparative studies: Investigation the Similarities of Upper Mesopotamian Late Chalcolithic Period Potteries and particularly so called Uruk Grey ware with similar one that recently discovered in Marivan area in west of Iran. our studies show, as Upper Mesopotamian LC period and Qafghaz area that has some typical black and grey style ware in the first half to mid of fourth millennium BC, in western Iran there is the same grey style pottery that are totally different from bronze and Iron age grey ware. The most important characterization of this pottery is about their surface treatment: the outer surface of this ware is chaff-faced. This issue is a main sign for distinguishing this pottery from bronze and Iron age grey ware. Our discovery has an important role in Late Chalcolithic period studies of Western Iran and particularly border area like Marivan. Our findings are some grey ware including plain vegetated bowl. The bowl is fairly made with some burnished residue on the surface. This new ware has the same parallel in Upper Mesopotamian counterpart like: Arbil and Sharizor plain (Peyronel and Vacca, 2015) in Iraqi Kurdistan, Grai Rash (Kepinski et al. 2011), Tepe Gwara (Gawra VIII), (Rothman, 2002: 52), Tel Zeidan (Stein, 2009; 2010; 2011), Tel Brak (Mattwes, 2003). So we belief that our recent findings in Marivan belong to wider horizon of Uruk Grey ware of Upper Mesopotamia which extended to the western Iran and embracing the Marivan area also. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • grey ware
  • Marivan
  • Upper Mesopotamia
  • Late Chalcolithic (LC)
زمانی‌دادنه، مرتضی، 1397، «گزارش برنامه‌ی بررسی و شناسایی باستان‌شناسی دشت مریوان». اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی، صنایع‌دستی و گردشگری استان کردستان (منتشر نشده).

- ساعد موچشی، امیر؛ زمانی‌دادنه، مرتضی؛ قاسمی، محسن؛ و کریمی، زاهد، 1396، «لایه‌نگاری تپه نمه‌شیر بانه: محوطه‌ایی در غرب ایران». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی ایران، دوره‌ی 7، شماره‌ی 12، صص: 43-62.

- ساعدموچشی، امیر؛ نیکنامی، کمال‌الدین؛ مشکور، مرجان؛ فاضلی‌نشلی، حسن؛ و فیروزمندی، بهمن، 1390، «گاهنگاری نسبی و مطلق تپه کلنان بیجار: محوطه‌ای متعلق به دوره‌ی مس‌وسنگ میانه در غرب ایران». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی ایران، شماره‌ی 1، دوره‌ی 1، صص: 31-56.

- محمدی‌فر، یعقوب؛ و مترجم، عباس، 1381، «بررسی باستان‌شناسی شهرستان مریوان». مرکز اسناد اداره کل میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری استان کردستان (منتشر نشده).

- محمدی‌فر، یعقوب، 1382، «طرح بررسی و شناسایی و مستندسازی آثار باستانی شهرستان صحنه». آرشیو میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری بیستون (منتشر نشده).

 

- Abedi, A, 2017, “Iranian Azerbaijan pathway from the Zagros to the Caucasus, Anatolia and northern Mesopotamia: Dava Goz, A new Neolithic and chalcolithic site in NW Iran”. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 17, No. 1, Pp. 69-78.

- Abu Jayyab, K., 2012, “A ceramic chronology from Tell Hamoukar's southern extension”. In: C. Marro (ed.), After the Ubaid. Interpreting change from the Caucasus to Mesopotamia at the dawn of urban civilization (4500-3500 BC), Papers from The Post-Ubaid Horizon in the Fertile Crescent and Beyond, International Workshop held at Fosseuse, 29th June-1st July 2009, Istanbul: Institut Français d'ةtudes Anatoliennes-Georges Dumézil, Varia Anatolica XXVII, Pp 87-127. 

- Akkermans, P.,  1988, “An update chronology for the northern Ubaid and Late Chalcolithic periods in Syria: new evidence from Tell Hammam et – Turkman”. Iraq, Vol. 50, Pp. 109-145.

- Brustolon, A & Rova, E. A., 2007, “The late chalcolithic period in the Tell Leilan region: a report on ceramic material of the 1995 survey”. Kaskal, No. 4, Pp. 1-42.

- Gut, R. V., 2002, “The significance of the Uruk sequence at Nineveh”. In, Postgate (ed.), Pp. 17-48

- Fazeli Nashli, H.; Valipour, H. R. & Azizi Kharanaghi, M. H., 2013, “The late chalcolithic and early bronze age in the Qazvin and Tehran plains: a chronological perspective”. In: ANCINT IRAN AND ITS NEIGHBORS, local developments and long-range interaction in the fourth millennium BC, C, Petrie(ed), The British Institute of Persian Studies, OXBOW BOOKS, Oxford, UK  .

- Helwing, B., 2012, “Late Chalcolithic craft tradition at the North- Eastern periphery of Mesopotamia: Potters vs. Smith in the Southern Caucasus”. ORIGINI, No. 24, Pp. 11-24.

- Kepinski, C.; Dessene, F & Herveuxl, L., 2011, “New evidence from Grai Resh, Northern Iraq, the 2001 and 2002 seasons. A pre-Uruk expansion site from the Late Chalcolithic period”. Zeitschrift für Orient-Archنologie, No. 4, Pp. 26-81.

- Kigurzade, T., & Sagona, A., 2003. On the origin of the Kura-Araxes cultural complex, in Caucasia and beyond(monograph, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA,47). edited by A.Smith and K. Rubinson, pp. 38-94. Los Angles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California.

- Majidzadeh, Y., 1978, “Correction of the internal chronology for the Sialk III period on the basis of the pottery sequence at Tepe Ghabristan”. Iran, No. 16, Pp. 93-101

- Mattwes, R., (ed) 2003, Excavation at Tell Brack, Vol. 4. Expedition an Upper Mesopotamian Regional Centre, 1994-1996, Cambridge.

- Nieuwenhuyse, O. P.; Odaka, T.; Kaneda, A.; Mühl, S.; Rasheed, K. & Altaweel M. R., 2016, “Revisiting Tell Begum. A prehistoric site in the Shahizor Valley, Iraqi Kurdistan”. Iraq, No. 76, Pp. 103-135.

- Oates, J.; McMahon, A.; Karsgaard, P.; Al Quntar, S. & Ur, J., 2007, “Early Mesopotamian urbanism: A new view from the north”. Antiquity, No. 81, Pp. 585-600.

- Peyronel, L. & Vacca, A., 2015, “Northern Ubaid and Late Chalcolithic 1-3 periods in the Erbil Plain. New Insights from Recent Researches at Helawa, Iraqi Kurdistan”. ORIGINI. No. XXVII, Pp. 89-127.

- Pearce, J., 2000. “The Late Chalcolithic Sequence at Hajinebi Tepe, Turkey”. In” M Arro-Hauptmann (eds), Pp. 115-144.

- Reichel, C., 2006, “Hamoukar, Oriental Institute Annual Report 2005-2006”. Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chigcago, Pp. 65-77.

- Reichel, C., 2007, “Hamoukar, Oriental Institute Annual Report 2006-2007”. Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chigcago, Pp. 59-68.

- Rothman, M. (ed)., 2001, Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors: cross- cultural interaction and their consequences in the era of State Formation. Santa Fe, school of American Research.

- Rothman, M. S., 2002, Tepe Gawra. The evolution of a small prehistoric center in Northern Iraq. Philadelphia: University Museum Monograph 112, University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.

- Rothman, M. & Badler, V. G., 2011, “Contact and development in Godin period VI”. In: H. Gopnik and M. Rothman (eds), On the High Road: The History of Godin Tepe, Iran. Pp. 67-137, Toronto, Mazda Press/Royal Ontario Museum.

- Sagona, A., 2017, The Archaeology Of The Caucasus, From Earliest Settlement to the Iron Age. Cambridge University Press.

- Skuldbّl, T. B. B. & Colantoni, C., 2016, “Early urbanism on the margins of Upper Mesopotamia - Complex settlement patterns and urban transformations on the Rania Plain in northeastern Iraq”. In: Iamoni, M. (ed.). Trajectories of Complexity. Socio-economic Dynamics in Upper Mesopotamia in the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods. Studia Chaburensia Vol. 6, No. 1-26. Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag.

- Skuldbّl, T. B. B. & Colantoni, C., 2018, “The path to urbanism. Exploring the anatomy and development of early urbanism in northern Mesopotamia. Five years of investigations by the Danish Archaeological Expedition to Iraq”. Ash-sharq. Bulletin of the Ancient Near East: Archaeological, Historical and Societal Studies.  Archaeopress Journals, Vol. 2, No. 1, Pp. 1-12.

- Stein, G. J., 2001, “Indigenous social complexity at Hacınebi (Turkey) and the organization of Uruk colonial contact”. In: M. Rothman (ed.). Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors: Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation. Santa Fe, SAR Press, Pp. 27-83.

- Stein, G. J., 2011, “Tell Zeidan (2010)”. Oriental Institute Annual Report 2010-2011. Chicago, Oriental Institute of Chicago, Pp. 121-138.

- Stein, G. J., 2012, “The development of indigenous social complexity in the late chalcolithic Upper Mesopotamia in the 5th-4th Millennia BC - an initial assessment”. ORIGINI, No. XXXIV, Pp. 125-151.

- Stein, G. J., 2018, Excavations at Surezha. Erbil Plain, Kurdistan Region, Iraq. Oriental Institute Annual Report 2017-2018: 29-43. Chicago, University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications.

- Stein, G. J. & Alizadeh A., 2014, “Surezha, Kurdistan”. Oriental Institute 2013-2014 Annual Report, Pp. 133-146. Chicago, Oriental Institute Publications.

- Stein, G., 2001, “Indigenous social complexity at Hacinebi(Turkey) and the organization of Uruk colonial contact”. In: Uruk Mesopotamia and its Neighbors: cross- cultural interaction in the era of state formation, M.Rothman ed., SAR press., Santa Fe, Pp. 27-83.

- Stein, G., 2009, “Tell Zeidan(2008)”. Oriental Institute Annual Report 2008-2009, Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Pp. 126-137.

- Stein, G., 2010b, “Tell Zeidan(2009)”. Oriental Institute Annual Report 2009-2010, Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Pp. 105-118.

- Stein, G., 2011, “Tell Zeidan(2010)”. Oriental Institute Annual Report 2010-2011, Oriental Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Pp. 121-138.

- Stein, G., 2012, “The development of  indigenous social complexity in the late chalcolithic Upper Mesopotamia in the 5th- 4th Millennia BC- an initial assessment”. ORIGIN, NO. XXXIV, Pp. 125-151. 

- Wilkinson, T. J. & Tucker, D. J., 1995, Settlement Development in the North Jazira. Iraq, Warminster.