مطالعۀ محوطه های حاشیۀ بیابان در عصر مفرغ

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای باستان شناسی، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، سیستان و بلوچستان ایران

2 دانشیار گروه باستان شناسی، پژوهشکدۀ علوم باستان شناسی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، سیستان و بلوچستان، ایران

3 استادیار گروه باستان شناسی، پژوهشکدۀ علوم باستان شناسی، دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان، سیستان و بلوچستان، ایران.

10.22084/nbsh.2020.20127.2015

چکیده

محوطه‌های حاشیۀ بیابان به‌عنوان یک گونه از استقرارهای عصر مفرغ، به‌واسطۀ شرایط زیستی متفاوت و نامساعد، از سایر محوطه‌ها ایجاد شده‌اند. تاکنون یک مطالعۀ مقایسه‌ای راجع‌به چگونگی و علل تشکیل، رشد و افول این نوع از استقرارها انجام نشده است. باوجود این تفاوت‌های محیطی، تحلیل‌ها و تفاسیر راجع‌به تشکیل، پیشرفت و سقوط همۀ محوطه‌های عصر مفرغ با یک معیار و سنجش یکسانی ارزیابی می‌شوند، اما محوطه‌های حاشیۀ بیابانی عمدتاً دارای شرایط سخت زیست‌محیطی و فاقد بسیاری از فاکتورهای پایدار بوم‌شناختی، برای یک اسکان پایدار هستند. حوزۀ بیابانی مورد مطالعه بین درۀ رود سند و ایران قرار گرفته است. اهداف اصلی پژوهش، شامل درک شیوۀ معیشت و گاهنگاری تطبیقی این مناطق بود که در طی آن درک مناسبی از روند شکل‌گیری، پیشرفت و فروپاشی محوطه‌های حاشیه بیابان و الگوهای معیشتی در موقعیت بیابانی میسر گشت. روش پژوهش برمبنای روش تحلیلی-توصیفی صورت گرفته است. پرسش‌های پژوهش عبارتنداز: 1-گاهنگاری تطبیقی ظهور، پیشرفت و فروپاشی محوطه‌‌های عصر مفرغ حاشیۀ بیابان چگونه بوده است؟ 2- شیوه‌‌های معیشتی محوطه‌‌های عصر مفرغ حاشیۀ بیابان چگونه بوده است؟ و چه عواملی در شکل‌گیری و پیشرفت محوطه‌های عصر مفرغ حاشیه بیابان مؤثر بوده‌اند؟ شواهد به‌دست‌آمده، نشان می‌دهد که ظهور محوطه‌های عصر مفرغ در این مناطق در اواخر هزارۀ چهارم پیش‌ازمیلاد، توسعۀ آن‌ها در اواسط هزارۀ سوم پیش‌ازمیلاد و افول آن‌ها در اواخر هزارۀ سوم و اوایل هزارۀ دوم پیش‌ازمیلاد بوده است. علاوه‌بر آن، شیوۀ معیشتی این محوطه‌ها در ابتدا مبتنی‌بر منابع کشاورزی و دامداری و سپس در مرحلۀ توسعه، عمدتاً برمبنای دسترسی به منابع معدنی، راه‌های تجاری و فعالیت‌های صنعتی بوده است. نتایج گویای ساختار متفاوت معیشتی و اقتصادی جوامع حاشیۀ بیابان به نسبت سایر محوطه‌های عصر مفرغ است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Desert Edge Sites in the Bronze Age

نویسندگان [English]

  • mojtaba kharazmi 1
  • mehdi mortazavi 2
  • fariba Mosapour Negari 3
1 Ph.D. Student in Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Sistan and Baluchestan Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Archeology, Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Archeology, Research Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Sistan and Baluchestan University, Sistan and Baluchestan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The Desert edge Sites as a species of settlements of the Bronze Age are composed of other Sites due to different and unfavorable living conditions. So far, a general comparison of how and why the formation, growth, and decline of all these settlements have not been done. Despite these environmental differences, analyzes and interpretations of the formation, progress, and decline of all Bronze Age sites are evaluated with the same criteria. But the marginal areas of desert are largely ecologically poor and lack many sustainable ecological factors for sustainable settlement. The study area of the desert is located between the Indus Valley and Iran and the evidence suggests that these regions appeared in the late fourth millennium, growth has been in the mid-third millennium and decline in the late third millennium and early second millennium BC and the livelihoods were initially based on agricultural and livestock resources and then at the apex of their expansion, largely on the basis of production, access to mineral and industrial, commercial and non-agricultural resources. The main questions included the livelihoods and chronology of this area and some of the goals were to identify and study the process of desert margins formation and the patterns of livelihoods in the desert, distance from the desert, It was further studied and understand the variables that represent the different livelihood, economic and productive structure of desert marginal communities from other Bronze Age sites are examined. The research method is based on historical-analytical method; The results indicate the peak of flourishing these areas in the middle of the third millennium and according to statistical comparisons, nature of many of the desert margin sites, depended on the intermediary role of these areas in economic transactions as an element and the driving force and industrial production and export of raw materials have been crucial to the development of these sites.
Keywords: Desert Edge Sites, Bronze Age, Exchange, Trade, Industry, Mines.
Introduction
Desert as a natural phenomenon, has an important role in the structure of the adjacent areas. This role had an undeniable impact on the development of these areas in both negative dimension (environmental resource limitations) and positive (the formation of Sites on its margin and the conversion of sites as trade intermediaries). The studied Bronze Age sites includes Thar and Cholistan deserts on the margin of the Indus River, Dasht-e Kavir and Dasht-e Lout in Iran, Registan Desert  in southern Afghanistan and South Karakum Desert in Turkmenistan. Most of the area’s topography is rough and harsh that it mainly consists of large deserts, high mountains, large valleys, wide plains and occasionally river deltas. Thus where there is no permanent water and vast land for agriculture, Regions cannot accommodate a large population as a result, the desire to connect with other areas to compensate for shortages and also the development of exchanges is a great way, not only to get out of isolation, rather, it is persistence over time. Study of the formation of the desert margin areas and its relationship to contemporary fertile areas, as well as the general revision of widespread intervention in these areas, it can provide an overview of the livelihoods and communications of the desert margins. One of the reasons for dealing with the margins sites in the Bronze Age is the development of these areas and patterns of livelihoods during this period; that’s why chronology of this region is necessary  In order to Behavioral patterns of living.  In the present study, It has been attempted by using statistical comparisons of these areas, environmental, cultural interactions, comparative chronology, regional communication, livelihood review each of the areas mentioned by the remains of sites be investigated and compare the rise and fall of these areas in the Bronze Age. In order to achieve these goals, it has been attempted to investigate environmental and acquisition factors (trades, communication routs, etc.).
Questions Discussed in This Article: 1. Does the comparative chronology of the Bronze Age margin sites overlap? 2. What were the livelihoods of wilderness areas in each study area?
Existing evidence suggests that these regions differ in their occurrence, but overlap to some extent in most areas. Depending on the margin desert sites in what areas are located; their livelihoods are different. The Research Methodology used is historical-analytical. Then using library studies and Statistical population, areas of study are discussed.
 
Article Text
In the Indus River Basin, four types of settlements have been identified which Includes Harappa-type settlements, early Harappa settlements or Kot Diji phase, or middle Harappa settlements, and later Harappa settlements. In the desert margin sites of Lout, The emergence and decline of the sites was simultaneous with late Chalcolithic and late Bronze Age. But the situation is somewhat different in the sites of Dasht-e Kavir margin. The formation of the Tepe Hisar in the Chalcolithic Age and its decline in the Iron Age and Gholvi Darwish is simultaneous with Protoliterate and period A is related to the Iron Age. On the margin of the southern desert of Turkmenistan, Geoksur basin sites emerge from the Middle Chalcolithic Age and disappear in the early Bronze Age. In intermundane sites, from the early Chalcolithic, the desert margin sites are beginning to emerge in these areas and in the late Bronze Age, The sites become smaller and by the end of this period they will all be abandoned. There are two different types of livelihoods in Turkmenistan’s desert margin sites in the Geoksur and Northern Kopet Dag basins: In the settlements north of the Kopet Dag, It seems that extensive farming is common in sites such as Altyndepe and Namazgah. The industrial dimension is more clearly seen in the sites, In Iran’s sites, especially in Shahr-e Sokhteh, Shahdad, Hisar and Arisman, The economy and livelihoods were largely based on trade, the production of semi-finished goods, the manufacture of precious and semi-precious stones. Although the number of Indus margin sites is not comparable to other sites, but there is an egregious difference in the extent and time sequence of each settlement in these areas, and even though have a relatively large range, but in terms of stratigraphic sequence, they cover a short time span, so that no area can be found that has a regular and consistent stratigraphy sequence.
 
Conclusion
AS for the variety of sites on the desert margin, progress and cultural sequence and livelihoods have varied in each of these areas; these areas were mainly were located in the affected areas that they could fill the vacuum caused by long routes on the safe margins that the desert created and organized trades communications and by controlling the security, supply, and processing of certain industries such as semi-precious and precious stones, metals. In the desert margin sites of Iran and Turkmenistan, apart from their different environments, the economic structure was generally based on trade with other regions, but in the desert margin sites of the eastern part of Indus, The structures were formed semi-nomadic and camp site. In most of the desert margin sites, there was a large site that other sites were exchanged with this site and this structure would concentrate power and wealth in these areas so that was the result of communication with other major civilization centers. Thus, the result was a connection with other important centers of civilization. The Sites went into decline in late Bronze Age, this was due to a number of reasons, including the redirection of trade’s routes and communication was totally cut off and endangered the nature of these sites.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Desert Edge Sites
  • Bronze Age
  • Exchange
  • Trade
  • Industry
  • mines
- توزی، مائوریتزیو، 1385، «پیشرفت، تداوم و تحولات فرهنگی شهرسوخته براساس لایه‌نگاری». مجموعه مقالات پیش‌ازتاریخ سیستان، به‌کوشش: مائوریتزیو توزی، ترجمۀ رضا مهر آفرین، مشهد: انتشارات پاژ، صص: 312-442.
- حاکمی، علی، 1385، «گزارش هشت فصل بررسی و کاوش در شهداد (دشت لوت)». پژوهشگاه سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی، صنایع‌دستی و گردشگری (منتشر نشده).
- روستایی، کوروش، 1385، «تپه حصار». ویژه‌نامه فرهنگ هفت هزار ساله حصار، پژوهشکدۀ باستان‌شناسی، صص: 7-34.
- سرلک، سیامک؛ ملکزاده، مهرداد، 1384، «آجرهای منقوش عصر آهن پایانی ماد شرقی سکوی خشتی قلی‌درویش جمکران و سازه بزرگ سیلک کاشان». مجلۀ پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی و میان‌رشته‌ای، بهار و تابستان، شمارۀ 1، صص: 52-66.
- سیدسجادی، سید منصور، 1389، باستان‌شناسی شبه قاره هند. تهران:  انتشارات سمت.
- سیدسجادی، سیدمنصور، 1394، «شهرسوخته و سرزمین های متأثر و مؤثر در آن». مجلۀ جامعۀ باستان‌شناسی ایران، سال 1، شمارۀ 1، بهمن، صص: 1-30.
- کردوانی، پرویز، 1356، بیابان، مطالعاتی درباره: اثرهای انسان و عوامل طبیعی در پیشروی بیابان لوت. تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
- محمودی، فرج‌الله، 1381، پراکندگی جغرافیایی ریگ‌زارهای مهم ایران. تهران: مؤسسۀ تحقیقاتی جنگل‌ها و مراتع.
- ماسون، 1374، مجموعۀ مقالات تاریخ تمدن‌های آسیای مرکزی. بخش اول، جلد اول، ترجمۀ صادق ملک‌شهمیرزادی، صص: 11-27، انتشارات وزارت امور خارجه.
- هلوینگ، باربارا، 1396، فرهنگ‌های کهن بین آب و بیابان. ترجمۀ فرانک بحرالعلومی شاپورآبادی، تهران: انتشارات سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی و گردشگری.  
 
- Azizi, G.; Alavi Panah, S. K.; Goodarzi, N. & Kazemi, M., 2007, “An estimation of the temperature of Lut desert using MODIS sensor data”.  BIABAN, No. 12, Pp: 7-15.
- Berberian, M.; Shahmirzādi, S. M. & Djamali, M., 2012, “Archeoseismicity and environmental crises at the Sialk mounds, central Iranian plateau, since the Early Neolithic”. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 39 (9), Pp: 2845-2858.
- Biagi, P. & Starnini, E., 2008, The Bronze Age Indus Quarries of the Rohri Hills and Ongar in Sindh (Pakistan). Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy, Proceedings of the International Conference.
- Bonora, G. L.; Vidale, M.; Mariottini, M. & Guida, G., 2014, “On the use of tokens and seals along the Kopet Dagh piedmont, Turkmenistan (ca 6000-3000 BCE)”. Paléorient, Pp: 55-71.
- Dupree, L., 1963, Deh Morasi Ghondai: A Chalcolithic site in South-Central Afghanistan. Anthropological papers of the American Museum of natural history New york, Volume 50: Part 2.
- Dupree, L.,1958, “Shamshir Ghar-Historic Cave Site in Kandahar Province, Afganistan, 2”. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, Vol. 46, No. 2, Pp: 137-314.
- Dyson, R. H., & Susan, M. H., eds.,1989, Tappeh Hesār: Reports of the Restudy Project, 1976. Vol. 2. Casa editrice le lettere.
- Fairservis, W. A.,1961, The Harappan civilization: new evidence and more theory. American Museum novitates, No. 2055
- Frumkin, G., 1970, Archaeology in Soviet Central Asia. Brill Archive.
- Harrison, J. P., 2016, Essentials of strategic planning in healthcare. Health Administration Press, Vol. 1, Chicago
- Helwing, B., 2006, “The rise and fall of Bronze Age centers around the Central Iranian Desert–a comparison of Tappe Hesar II and Arisman”. Archaologische Mittellungen aus Iran und Turan, No. 38, Pp: 35-48
- Hiebert, F. T., 2002, “The Kopet Dag sequence of early villages in Central Asia”. Paléorient, Pp: 25-41.
- Hiebert, F.; Kakamurad, K. & Hubert, S., 2003, A Central Asian village at the dawn of civilization: excavations at Anau, Turkmenistan. Vol. 116. UPenn Museum of Archaeology.
- Hiebert, F. T., & Clifford C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, 1992, “Central Asia and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands”. Iran, No. 30, Pp: 1-15.
- Joglekar, P. P., 2006, “Sub sistence Patterns in Protohistoric Afghanistan and its Adjoining Regions: A brifef Review”. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pp: 223-239.
- Kenoyer, J. M., 2008, “Indus Civilization”, Encyclopedia of Archaeology, editor: Deborah M. Pearsall, Pp: 715-733.
- Kenoyer, J. M., & Meadow, R. H., 1999, “Harappa: New Discoveries on its origins and growth”. Lahore Museum Bulletin, No.12.1, Pp: 1-12.
- Kenoyer, J. M., 2000, “Wealth and socioeconomic hierarchies of the Indus Valley civilization”. Order, legitimacy and wealth in early states. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Pp: 90-112.
- Kohl, L. P., 1984, Central Asia Paleolithic beginnings to the Iron Age. Editions Recherche sur les Civilizations Paris.
- Louise Viollet, P., 2014, A short  history of ancient canals for agriculture and  industry Congress on industrial and agricultural canals. Lleida, September 2-5.
- Mallah, Q. H., 2002, “Spatial analysis of campsites from Thar desert of Sindh Pakistan”. Journal of Asian Civilizations, No. 35.2, Pp: 52-68.
- Mallah, Q. H., 2000, “Archaeology and Ethno archaeology of the Thar Desert”. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
- McIntosh, J., 2008, The ancient Indus Valley: new perspectives. Abc-Clio.
- Meadow, R., & Kenoyer, J. M., 1992, “Harappa Archaeological Project, Harvard University and University of Wisconsin-Madison”. Unpublished manuscript.
- Mughal, M. R.,1982, “Recent archaeological research in the Cholistan Desert”. Harappan Civilization, Pp: 85-95.
- Mugal. M., R., 1990, “The Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Cholistan Desert, South Asian Archaeology 1987”. Rome: Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Pp: 143-156. 
- Mugal, M., R., 1992, The Geographical Extent of the Indus Civilization during the Early, Mature and Late Harappan Times, South Asian Archaeology Studies. New Delhi: Oxford IBH, publishing Co. Ltd: 123-143.
- Nesbitt, M., & Sarah O. H., 2000, “Irrigation agriculture in Central Asia: a long-term perspective from Turkmenistan”. BARKER G., GILBERTSON D., The Archeology of Drylands. Living at the marging, London-New-York, Routledge, Pp: 103-122.
- Payenkova, L., 1994, “Central Asian in the Bronze Age:sedentary and nomadic cultures”. Antiquity, Vol. 68, No: 259, Pp: 355-372
- Potts, D. T., ed, 2012, A Companion to the archaeology of the ancient Near Easte. John Wiely & Sons.
- P'yankova, L., 1994, “Central Asia in the Bronze Age: sedentary and nomadic cultures”. Antiquity, Vol. 68, No. 259, Pp: 355-372.
- Roy, D.; Priyadarsi, S. K. & Ashok, Y., 2016, “Cilmate vatiation in Thar Desert since the last Glacial Maximum and evaluation of the Indian Monsoon”. TIP Revista Especializada en Ciencias Químico-Biológicas, No. 19(1), Pp: 32-44.
- Rehren, T.; Boscher, L. & Pernicka, E., 2012, “Large scale smelting of speiss and arsenical copper at Early Bronze Age Arisman, Iran”. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 39, Pp: 1717-1727.
- Salvatore, S. & Vidale, M., 1982, “A Brief Surface Survey of the Protohistoric Site of Shahdad (Kerman, Iran).” Rivista di archeologia, No. 6, Pp: 5-10.
- Salvatori, S., & Maurizio, T., 2008, “The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in the Margiana Lowlands”. Facts and Methodological Proposals for a Redefinition of the Research Strategies, No. 2.
- Salvatori, S., & Maurizio, T., 2012, “Shahr-i Sokhta revised sequence”. South Asian Archaeology, No. 1, Pp: 281-292.
- Shaffer, J. G., 1978, “The Later Prehistory of Afghanistan”. In: The Archaeology of Afghanistan.
- Saikh, N.; Mallah, H. Q., 2001, Role of Rohri Hills and Thar desert in the development of Civilization in Indus valley. 1-20, Indus valley Sivilization, collection of papers presented in the COLLQQUIUM, Islam Abad.
- Sial, N. & Arshad, M., 2003, “Biodiversity in the Surface Dewelling Fauna from Cholistan Desert, Pakistan”. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, No. 6(13), Pp: 1195-1198.
- Thornton, C. P., & Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., 2004, “A new look at the prehistoric metallurgy of Southeastern Iran”. Iran, 42, No. 1, Pp: 47-59.
- Tosi, M., 1974, The problem of turquoise in protohistoric trade on the Iranian plateau. Na.
- Tosi, M., 1984, “The notion of craft specialization and its representation in the archaeological record of early states in the Turanian Basin”. Marxist perspectives in archaeology, Pp: 22-52.
- Wariss, H. M.; Mukhtar, M.; Anjum, S.; Bhatti, G. R.; Pirzada, S. A. & Alam, K., 2013, “Floristic Composition of the Plants of the Cholistan Desert, Pakistan”. American Journal of Plant Sciences, No. 4, Pp: 58-65.