نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار گروه باستانشناسی پیشازتاریخ، پژوهشکدۀ باستانشناسی، پژوهشگاه میراثفرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Abstract
Undoubtedly, Chogha Mish is the most recognized prehistoric settlement, which has multiple cultural sequences of prehistoric Susiana, but our current knowledge assumes that from the end of the Late Middle Susiana to the first stage of the Late Susiana phase it had been deserted or became a marginal settlement. The evaluation of the available evidence, both those obtained from Chogha Mish and those from various areas and sites during recent decades, show that the idea of the decline of Chogha Mish in this period cannot be completely correct. Here we will first discuss one of the well-known pieces of evidence the “Burnt Building”, which has been accidentally or unexpectedly identified in the margins of High Mound’s during the ninth season of excavations at Chogha Mish. The most common analysis presented implies that the Building, which is not classified as an ordinary building in terms of dimensions and quality, is targeted and set on fire in hostile contact with the developing highland mobile pastoralist population. Therefore, this evidence attracted the attention of researchers as a turning point in the history of the Chogha Mish settlement development. Since someone has considered the beginning of this decline as the great fire in the building belonging to the Late Middle Susiana phase, it is reasonable to know that, what kind of characteristics the building has and if the presented evidence is indicative or not? Based on evidence from the deposits of the building can it be considered a Monumental Building? Given the existing archaeological evidence, we assume that the “inference” of the scholars has led to such a notion. Otherwise, we think the assumed decline of Chogha Mish may have various reasons. The new settlement configurations in the region which are fashioned by new economic and especially ritual practices may have led Chogha Mish to not be prosperous as before and left behind its counterparts.
Keywords: Late Middle Susiana, Greater Susiana, Chogha Mish, The Burnt Building.
Introduction
Following the ninth excavations season in the year 1974, 1975, H. Kantor for the first time, based on the evidence called the “Burnt Building”, started reporting that the “expressive fire led to settlement abandonment in the late fifth millennium B.C.E” (Kantor, 1976: 28). She reported that they pursued the remains of a proto-literate building in the southern part of the Acropole (High Mound) of Chogha Mish (Kantor, 1976: 23), on the eastern side of the site, where almost the Acropole adjoining the Terrace, despite they expected remains of the proto- literate architecture, they came up with a very important discovery.
Only half of the “Burnt Building” was excavated. Especially the western and northern parts of it unexcavated. Nevertheless, the building is larger than the ordinary-buildings as Alizadeh called Formal Building (Alizadeh, 2008: 42). According to the available evidence, the main size of the building should be 20 by 20 meters using mudbrick with 20 by 10 by 8 cm. Relatively good preservation and especially the thickness of the walls as well as lack of proto-literate pottery indication led excavators at first to assume that the building must belong to a later historical period. But, more accurate excavations in the northwest section showed that the newly found building is right beneath the proto-literate period building layers, and even the proto-literate Period pits have split the surface of the new building.
From Kantor’s short report, three notable issues can be inferred: 1) In the previous seasons, the lack of structures belonging to the Late Middle Susiana phase had partially disapproved the explorers, so they concluded that the Late Middle Susiana building and features may have been destroyed by the expansion of the full populated city of Late Susiana period and subsequently the proto literate one; 2) The “Burnt Building” which has been identified in the ninth season was an extraordinary discovery for excavators and the findings preserved in the building indicate that it was an economic and industrial center. Of course, Kantor emphasizes that the separate rooms do not have a large size, so it is not a monumental building, but it seems that a workshop or even a normal private house; 3) Such a finding, as its excavators have noted, is valuable evidence to reconstruct the characteristics of Late Middle Susiana settlement in Chogha Mish and especially it is a key to understand why such a prosperous settlement was abandoned?
Discussion
Between the Late Middle Susiana to Late Susiana phase, Chogha Do Sar and Susa are among the largest settlements in the Upper Khuzestan plain. Similarly, Chogha Ahowan in the Mehran plain, Musian and Farrokhabad in Deh Luran plain, Abu Chizan and Chogha Chanbar in the Eastern Corridor, Tol-e Geser in Ram Hormoz plain, Tappe Suhz in Behbahan plain and Chega Sofla in Zohreh plain all show a larger size than the existing settlements (Johnson, 1973; Wright and Johnson, 1975; Weiss and Young, 1975; Wright et.al., 1975; Nissen, 1976; Wright, 1981; 1984; Pollock, 1983; 1989; Hole, 1983; 1984; 1990; Wright and Carter, 2003; Alizadeh, 2008:10).
The material evidence obtained from a significant portion of the Susiana d sites indicates a relatively similar ritual behavior that encompasses a significant geographical range. Evidence that can be useful to explain this convergence is the emergence of exaggerated symbolism, and the emergence of monumental buildings and cemeteries.
The cemeteries of the Hakalan and the Dom Gar Parchineh are located in the Posht Kouh of Lorestan. From the chronological point of view, both cemeteries coincide with the Late Middle Susiana to Late Susiana in Khuzestan, Bakun A Fars, Middle Chalcolithic Zagros, and Ubaid 3 to Terminal Ubaid in Mesopotamia, about 4800 to 3600 B. C. E (Haerinck and Overlaet, 1996).
During the 2016 excavation season, about 10 graves belonging to 4200 to 3800 BCE were identified in Chega Sofla (Moghaddam 2018). A major differentiation between burial practices at Tol-e Chega Sofla and other contemporary burial traditions is the striking use of brick architecture in some graves. The arrangement of stone slabs in the stone graves is also very systematic and precise. The graves showed diversity and abundance of high purity copper, small quantities of gold ornaments, a silver bracelet, and a variety of marble vessels.
Conclusion
If we accept the current “assumption” as an inescapable fact about the settlement history of Chogha Mish that believes: a flourishing phase in Late Middle Susiana and then a decline phase during the Susiana d, then we suppose it may lay in a new social order shaped by ritual and economic interactions between society in the Greater Susiana and beyond. As mentioned above, the relevant proper at Choga Mish was not excavated rightfully. We have addressed here and tried to define the “pivotal stage” in Greater Susiana by presenting several pieces of evidence. Given the existing archaeological evidence, we consider, that those convergent ritual behaviors shared in many settlements belonging to the Susiana d phase (such as cemeteries, monumental buildings, etc.) are the result of complex competitive interactions that may be one of the signs of the destruction and fire in the large building called “Burnt Building” at Chogha Mish. Those competitive interactions were not necessarily limited to the simple equivalent of the confrontation of nomad groups and villagers, and there have been a variety of players. We are hoping that a precise reconsideration project at Chogha Mish, along with careful research in many simultaneous sites, could help to understand this “pivotal period”.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)