جایگاه نظریات مارکسیسم در تحلیل آغازشهرنشینی ایران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری باستان شناسی، گروه باستان شناسی، دانشگاه سیستان وبلوچستان، زاهدان، ایران.

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

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

چکیده

تأثیر مارکسیسم بر روند تحولات تئوریک باستان‌شناسی دور از ‌‌‌ذهن نیست. این‌گونه تأثیرات گاهی در پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی اجتماعی ایران نیز قابل‌پیگیری است؛ هرچند چندان موردمطالعه قرار نگرفته‌اند. از این‌رو پرسش اصلی پژوهش چنین مطرح گردید؛ کم‌وکیف و تأثیر تفکرات باستان‌شناسی مارکسیستی بر مطالعات جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران چگونه است؟ و هدف آن نیز درک ارتباط تفکرات باستان‌شناسی مارکسیستی با دیدگاه کارکردگرا در جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران است. اما جهت رهنمون یافتن به هدف، از ماهیت و روش توصیفی-تاریخی همراه با رویکردی تحلیلی استفاده شد؛ از این‌رو، برخی از تحقیقات محوطه‌های آغازشهرنشینی ایران، ازجمله محوطه‌های شوش و چغامیش در جنوب‌غرب، تپه سفالین پیشوا در فلات‌مرکزی، تمدن جیرفت و شهرسوخته در جنوب‌شرق و محوطۀ چغاآهوان دشت مهران در غرب ایران مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. نتایج گویای این بود که گرچه گاهی تفکرات مارکسیسم در تحلیل جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران به‌دلایلی، ازجمله پیچیدگی‌های اجتماعی قابلیت استنباط و پیگیری دارد؛ اما تاکنون باتوجه‌به محبوبیت گرایشات تاریخی-فرهنگی در جامعۀ باستان‌شناسی ایران نمود نیافته است و به‌تبع آن نیروهای درون‌زای تحولات اجتماعی جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران کمتر موردتوجه محققین باستان‌شناس قرار گرفته است. در این‌باره بدیهی است نوع دیدگاه و برخورد با تحلیل داده‌ها، در کم‌وکیف حصول نتیجه تأثیر داشته باشد؛ به این‌معنی که نتایج منتج از تحلیل داده‌های جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران به چگونگی رویکرد و رهیافت پژوهشگر، اعم‌از: کارکردگرا، مارکسیسم و یا رهیافت و تفکر دیگر بستگی دارد. درنهایت رهیافت باستان‌شناسی مارکسیستی باتوجه‌ به ماهیت سیاسی خویش، تحول جوامع آغازشهرنشینی ایران را می‌تواند در مدیریت تولید کار پیگیری نماید و رهیافت کارکردگرا نیز شواهد آغازشهرنشینی را از دیدگاه ضرورت و نیاز جامعه مدنظر خواهد داشت.   

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Position of Marxist Theories in the Examination of the Beginnings of Urbanization in Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Goudarz Haddadinasab 1
  • Mehdi Mortazavi 2
  • Fariba Mosapour Negari 3
1 PhD Candidate in Archaeology, Department of Archaeology,University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Archaeology Department and Archaeological Sciences Research Center, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Archaeology Department and Archaeological Sciences Research Center, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Abstract
The influence of Marxism on the process of theoretical developments in archaeology is not far from the mind. Such effects can sometimes be traced in Iranian social archaeological research, although they have not been studied much. Hence the main question of the research was posed as follows; How is the impact of Marxist archaeological ideas on the study of societies at the beginning of Iran’s urbanization? And its purpose was to understand the relationship between Marxist archaeological thought and functionalist views in the societies of the beginning of urbanization in Iran. However, in order to guide the goal, the descriptive-historical nature and method were used along with an analytical approach. Therefore, some researches of the beginning of urbanization of Iran such as Shush and Chaghamish areas in the southwest, Bakun Fars, Pishva pottery hill in the central plateau, Jiroft and Shahr-e Sokhteh civilization in the southeast and Choghahavan area of Mehran plain in the west of Iran were examined. The results showed that although sometimes the ideas of Marxism in the analysis of societies at the beginning of urbanization in Iran can be inferred and followed for reasons such as social complexities; But so far, due to the popularity of historical-cultural trends in the Iranian archaeological community has not been reflected, and consequently the endogenous forces of social change in the early urbanization of Iran has received less attention from archaeologists. This means that the results of analyzing the data of the communities of the beginning of urbanization in Iran depend on the approach and approach of the researcher, whether functionalist, Marxism or other approach and thinking. Finally, the Marxist archaeological approach, due to its political nature, can follow the evolution of societies in the beginning of urbanization in Iran in the management of labor production, and the functionalist approach will consider the evidence of the beginning of urbanization from the perspective of necessity and need of society.
Keywords: Marxist, Functionalism, Iranian Archaeology, Evolution, The Beginning of Urbanization.
Introduction
The influence of Marxism on the process of theoretical developments in archaeology cannot be denied. Such influences can sometimes be traced in the social archaeological research of Iran, even though they have not been much studied. It should be accepted that thoughts that agree or disagree with any of these influences can work within a particular theoretical framework. Perhaps the emergence of later approaches in archaeology was due to the challenge of more advanced ideas. It seems that the archaeology of Marxism also occupied a central position in the theoretical developments of this knowledge. Thus, in Marxist archaeology, the analysis and explanation of archaeology to discover the models of social change is linked to the understanding of those in power, so that it explains how power is used for social change. Explaining the channels of communication between people to facilitate the production and distribution of goods may therefore have played an important role in the development of archaeological approaches and thought. It goes without saying that people must try to achieve collective benefits in order to achieve individual benefits. Hegel sees this as preparation for a person to take part in the state’s arena (Hegel, 2001:160-161) The extent to which Marx was influenced by Hegel can be seen in his discussion of private property. For when social conditions have advanced to the point where man is no longer able to satisfy all his needs himself, he enters the realm of exchange of goods or services. This means that individual needs are satisfied in exchange for the satisfaction of collective needs (Hahnel, 2002:71) Such an arrangement as a political economy makes more sense with urbanization. 
Although it is more or less accepted that the background of the social and political developments of society and the intellectual framework of the researcher influence the quality of research, archaeological studies will not be an exception to this rule in this case. Aware of this importance (the role of Marxist archaeology in the development of archaeology), this paper aimed at the relationship between Marxist and functionalist approaches in the archaeology of the early urban societies of Iran. Thus, one of the main questions of the research is how the studies on the early urban societies of Iran relate to Marxist archaeology. Were the theoretical theories of Marxist archaeology used or not in the analysis of societies at the beginning of urbanization in Iran? And what are their possible causes and interpretations? Therefore as stated, the main aim of this article is to understand the relationship between Marxist archaeological thinking and the functionalist perspective in the societies of early urbanization in Iran. 
Discussion
It seems that the connection of the relevant Marxist concepts of most of the findings of the societies at the beginning of the urbanization of Iran can be studied. However, they have not been mentioned under the title of Marxist archaeology and it seems that the main reason for this is to be found in the nature of the researchers’ approach and perspective in analyzing the archaeological data. Moreover, it should be added that significant archaeological studies have been carried out in the category of societies at the beginning of the urbanization of Iran. Nevertheless, the fluidity of theoretical discussions and their necessity in archaeological studies on the one hand, and the exploration of different perspectives and thoughts, including the Marxist approach and functionalism in analyzing the data of societies at the beginning of urbanisation of Iran on the other hand, can support the dynamics of researches and create possible scientific challenges in the relevant topic. delivered in order to evaluate the hypotheses of the guiding research, the general approach of the Iranian archaeology to the thoughts of Marxism was considered first, and then how the Marxist thoughts are related to the societies at the beginning of the urbanization of Iran was examined through some results of archaeological excavations. In order to achieve this goal, the descriptive-historical method was used together with an analytical approach. Therefore, some of the studies on the sites of the beginning of urbanization of Iran, including the sites of Susa and Choghamish in the southwest, the Pishwa terracotta mound in the central plateau, the civilization of Jiroft and the Shahr-i-Sokhta in the southeast, and the site of Chogha Ahovan in the Mehran Plain in western Iran, have been studied, which makes it seem that the thoughts of Marxism can be sought in the analysis of societies at the beginning of the urbanization of Iran for reasons such as the indicators of complexity; But the studies on the categories of social archaeology, including Marxist thought and the influence of endogenous forces on social development, have received little attention. One of the reasons for this is the popularity of historical-cultural archaeology and the kind of perspective in dealing with data analysis. Because the result of data analysis of societies at the beginning of urbanization in Iran depends on the way of thinking, including functionalism (necessity of society for the formation of cultural elements and components) and Marxism (based on materialism and emphasis on the effect of class conflict in social changes with the aim of achieving the evolutionary stages of socialism and communism). The political-social background of the society, such as the confrontation with imperialism and capitalism, the belief in the materialist worldview and ideals of Marx as a whole, and the social goals of so-called mass thinking can also be considered as other factors. In the event that the connection of Marxist thoughts and their social ideas in the studies of the societies of the beginning of urbanization with the consideration of social mechanisms and related to production, it can be inferred from the point of view of Marxist archeology. 
Conclusion
The potential of production and relations of production in hierarchizing society and forming governing institutions in most of the sites of the beginning of urbanization in this study, including Tepeh Sofalin-Pishwa, could be examined from the perspective of Marxist archaeology. Also, this view can be based on the conflict arising from the exploitation of factors of production and employers by ignoring human agency in the transformations of societies at the beginning of urbanization of Susa Plain or Chogha Ahavan area, from the perspective of Marxist archeology, according to the historical determinism in the process of materialist development of society, labor as a commodity plays an essential role in the transformation of a society. This is because the management of labor with the consent of the elites at the end of the Late Copper and Stone Ages and at the beginning of the early Bronze Age is one of the main features of societies at the beginning of urbanization. From the point of view of functionalism, however, it is better that all research on specialization or economic and social hierarchies not be considered as exclusively influenced by and attributed to Marxist thought. This means that the results obtained from the data analysis of the societies at the beginning of urbanization in Iran depend on the researcher’s approach and way of thinking, be it functionalist, Marxist or any other approach and way of thinking.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Marxist
  • Functionalism
  • Iranian Archaeology
  • Evolution
  • The Beginning of Urbanization
- آجرلو، بهرام، ۱۳۹۰، «درآمدی بر باستان‌شناسی و سیاست». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 1: ۱-۱۳.
- اشرف، حمید، ۱۳۸۲، جمع‌بندی سه‌ساله. بی‌جا، انتشارات ا. ف. خ. ا.
- زهتابیان، غلامرضا؛ رفیعی‌امام، عماد؛ علوی‌پناه، سید کاظم؛ و جعفری، محمد، 1383، «بررسی آب زیرزمینی دشت ورامـین جهـت استفاده از آبیاری اراضی کشاورزی». پژوهش‌های جغرافیایی، 48: 91-102.
- جوانمردزاده، اردشیر؛ و دارابی، حجت، ۱۳۹۱، «پروژه باستان‌شناسی دشت مهران: زیستگاه‌های دوران آغازشهرنشینی و شهرنشینی». باستان پژوهی، 2: ۸۱-۹۶.
- حصاری، مرتضی، 1396، «شناخت، بازخوانی و مدل‌سازی بخشی از معماری هزارۀ سوم پ.م. ایران؛ براساس نقش‌مایه‌های سنگ صابونی». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی ایران، 7 (12): 83-98.
- حصاری، مرتضی؛ و یوسفی‌زشک، روح‌الله، 1388، «پیدایش نهادهای پیش ‌حکومتی در فلات‌مرکزی ایران؛ خان‌سالارهای آغازایلامی در تپه سفالین-پیشوا». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 1 (2): 1-22. 
- خدیو، طاهر، 1387، «مارکسیسم ایرانی در بستر مارکسیسم سه قاره‌ای». فرهنگ و اندیشه، 26: ۲۲۷-۲۵۳.
- دارک، کن. آر، ۱۳87، مبانی نظری باستان‌شناسی. ترجمۀ کامیار عبدی، تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
- دارک، کن. آر.، 1393، مبانی نظری و عملی در باستان‌شناسی با فصل‌هایی در زیست‌شناسی، تاریخ و معرفت‌شناسی. به‌کوشش: ناهید غفوری، تهران: ایران نگار.
- دیانت، محسن، 1395، «تأثیر نظریۀ کارکردگرایی بر شکل‌گیری بروکراسی و ساختار فرهنگ در ایران». فصلنامۀ پژوهش‌های سیاسی جهان اسلام، 6 (2): 125 - 105.  
- مائو، تسه‌دون، ۱۹۶۹، منتخب آثار . جلد اول، پکن، ادارۀ نشریات زبان‌های خارجی.
- مجیدزاده، یوسف، 1382، جیرفت کهن‌ترین تمدن شرق. وزارت فرهنگ و ارشاد اسلامی، سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی کشور.
- مجیدزاده، یوسف، ۱۳۸۹، «نام خلیج‌فارس و باستان‌شناسان خارجی». اطلاعات سیاسی - اقتصادی، ۲۷۴: ۶۰-۷۳.   
- مجیدزاده، یوسف، ۱۳۹۲، "آغازشهرنشینی در ایران. چاپ سوم، تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
- سبحانی، جعفر، بی‌تا، «مارکسیم و نیروی محرک تاریخ». مکتب اسلام، 19 (۵): ۳۱۲-۳۱۷.
- سرداری‌زارچی، علیرضا، 1384، «فن مدیریت اداری و شکل‌گیری جوامع پیچیده در جنوب‌غرب ایران در هزارۀ چهـارم پیش‌ازمیلاد». پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد باستان‌شناسی، دانشگاه تهران (منتشر نشده).
- شاطری، میترا، 1395، «تأملی بر کارکردشناسی درفش‌های دورۀ صفوی». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی، 6 (11): 163-176.
- عسکرپور، وحید، 1388، «باستان‌شناسی پسافرایندی؛ معرفت‌شناسی، نظریه‌پردازی و روش‌شناسی». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی مدرس، 1 (2): 50-63. 
- علی‌بیگی، سجاد؛ و خسروی، شکوه، 1388، «شواهدی از نهادهای اقتصادی اجتماعی جوامع عصر آهن در مرکز فلات ایران». مطالعات باستان‌شناسی، 1(1): 85-108.
- علیزاده، عباس، ۱۳۷۲، «پیچیدگی ساختار اجتماعی-اقتصادی و فن مدیریت تجاری در یک جامعۀ پیش‌ازتاریخ». باستان‌شناسی و تاریخ، 7 (1 و 2)، (یادنامۀ هلن جی. کنتور)، (پیاپی ۱۳ و ۱۴): ۲۶-۴۴.
- کولمن، سایمون؛ و هلن واتسون، 1372، درآمدی به انسان‌شناسی. ترجمـۀ محسن ثلاثی، تهران: نشر سیمرغ.
- گراب، ادوارد. جی.، 1373، نابرابری اجتمـاعی، دیدگاه‌های نظریه‌پردازان کلاسـیک و معاصـر. ترجمـۀ محمـد سیاه‌پوش و احمدرضا غروی‌زاد، تهران: نشر معاصر.
- معصومی، غلامرضا، 1389، تاریخچۀ علم باستان‌شناسی. تهران: انتشارات سمت.
- ملک‌شهمیرزادی، صادق، ۱۳۸۲،‌ایران در پیش‌ازتاریخ: از آغاز تا سپیده‌دم شهرنشینی. چاپ دوم، تهران، سازمان میراث‌فرهنگی کشور.
- ملک‌زاده، مهرداد؛ و ‌بیانی، شیرین، ۱۳۷۵، تاریخ مهر در ایران از هزارهۀچهارم تا هزارۀ اول. چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات یزدان.
- موسی‌پورنگاری، فریبا؛ و مرتضوی، مهدی، 1394، «گفته‌ها و ناگفته‌هایی در مورد باستان‌شناسی روندگرا». پژوهش‌های باستان‌شناسی ایران، 9: 26-7. 
- وفایی، آرمان؛ و اسماعیلی‌جلودار، محمداسماعیل، 1396، «تأثیر رویکردهای مردم‌شناسانۀ انتشارگرایی، کارکردگرایی و ساختارگرایی بر باستان‌شناسی اسلامی با تحلیلی انتقادی بر تعاریف و روش‌شناسی‌ها». نامۀ انسان‌شناسی، 15 (27): 149- 180.     
- ولی‌پور، حمیدرضا، ۱۳۷۸. «درآمدی بر باستان‌شناسی اجتماعی». باستان پژوهی، 4: ۱۲-۱۵.
- یداللهی، سیما، ۱۳۸۳، «باستان‌شناسی اجتماعی: نگاهی به شیوه‌های بازسازی». باستان پژوهی، ۱۲: ۱۶-۲۵.
- Ajorloo, B., 2011, “An Introduction to Archaeology and Politics”. Archaeological Studies, 1: 1-13. (In Persian).
- Alibeygi, S. & Khosrowi, Sh., 2009, “Evidence of Iron Age Socio-Economic Institutions in the Central Plateau of Iran”. Archaeological Studies, 1(1), 85-108. (In Persian).
- Alizadeh, A., 1993, “Social-Economic Complexity, Managerial Techniques, and Trade in a Prehistoric Society”. Journal of Archaeology and History, 7(1-2): 26-44. (In Persian).
- Ashraf, H., 2003, Three-Year Summary. Tehran: Publication of the Association of Iranian Writers. (In Persian).
- Askarpour, V. (2009). “Post-processual Archaeology: Epistemology, Theory, and Methodology”. Archaeological Researches in Iran, 1(2): 50-63. (In Persian).
- Bandović, A., 2012, “Gustaf Kossinna and the Concept of Culture in Archaeology”. Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology, 7 (3): 629-648.
- Binford, L. R., 1962, “Archaeology as Anthropology”. American Antiquity, 28 (2): 217–225.
- Biscioneh, R., 1974, “Relative chronology and pottery conections between Shahr-I Sokhta and Mondigak, Estern Iran”. IstitutoItaliano di PaleontologiaUmana, II: 131-145.
- Childe, V. G., 1950, “The Urban Revolution”. Town Planning Review, 21(1): 3-17.
- Clark, G., 1957, Archaeology and Society, Reconstructing the Prehistoric Past Methuen & Co Ltd. Great Britain.
- Clarke, D., (ed.), 1972, Models in archaeology. Methuen and co ltd, London.
- Coleman, S. & Watson, H., 1993, An Introduction to Anthropology. (M. Salasi, Trans., Tehran: Simorgh Publishing. (In Persian).
- Dark, K. A., 2008, “An Introduction to Archaeological Theory”. (K. Abdi, Trans.). Tehran: University Press Center. (In Persian).
- Dark, K. A., 2014, Theoretical and Practical Foundations of Archaeology with Chapters on Biology, History, and Epistemology. (N. Ghaffari, Ed.). Tehran: Iran Negar. (In Persian).
- Darvill, T., 2008, Marxist archaeology. In: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Archaeology. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 17 May. 2021, from https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199534043.001.0001/acref-9780199534043-e-2428.
- Delougaz, P. & Kantor, H., 1996, Chogha Mish: first five seasons of excavation 1961-1971. Vol I, Part 2: Plates, edited by: Abbas Alizadeh, Chicago, Illinois.
- Deyanat, M., 2016, “The Impact of Functionalism Theory on the Formation of Bureaucracy and Cultural Structure in Iran”. Journal of Islamic World Political Studies, 6(2): 105-125. (In Persian).
- Difrine, M., 2019, The role of Marxism in the archaeological interpretations of past societies. Munich, Kenyatta University GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/508866.
- Giddens, A., 1994, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. (M. Siyahpoosh & A. Ghorooye Zad, Trans.). Tehran: Contemporary Publishing. (In Persian).
- Hahnel, R., 2002, The ABCs Political Economy, A Modern Approach. London: Pluto Press.
- Hegel, G. W. F., 2001, Elements of the Philosophy of Right, Grundlinien der Philosophie des RechtsoderNaturrecht und Staatwissenschaftim Grundrisse. trans. S. W. Dyde, S. W. Dyde (ed.), Ontario: Batoche Books.
- Hegel, G. W. F., 2001, Elements of the Philosophy of Right, Grundlinien der Philosophie des RechtsoderNaturrecht und Staatwissenschaftim Grundrisse. trans. S. W.Dyde, S. W. Dyde (ed.), Ontario: Batoche Books.
- Hesarai, M., 2017, “Understanding, Reinterpretation, and Modeling a Part of Third Millennium BCE Iranian Architecture Based on Soapstone Seal Impressions”. Archaeological Researches in Iran, 12: 83-98. (In Persian).
- Hesari, M. & Yousefizeshk, R., 2009, “Emergence of Pre-state Institutions in the Central Plateau of Iran: The Early Elamite Rulers at Sefid-e-En”. Archaeological Studies, 1(2): 1-22. (In Persian).
- Hodder, I., 1991, Archaeological Theory in Europe: The Last Three Decades. Routhledge, London.
- Javanmardzadeh, A. & Darabi, H., 2012, “The Archaeological Project of Mehran Plain: Settlements and Urbanization in the Early Periods”. Bastanpazhuhi, 2: 81-96. (In Persian).
- Khadiv, T., 2008, “Iranian Marxism in the Context of Three-Continental Marxism”. Farhang va Andisheh, 27: 227-253. (In Persian).
- Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. & Tosi, M., 1973, “Shahr-iSokhta and Tepe Yahya: tracks on the earliest history of the Iranian Plateau”. East and West, 23 (1/2): 21-57.
- Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C., 1972, “Tepe Yahya 1971: Mesopotamia and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands”. Iran, 10: 89-100.
- Lambton, A., 1969, Persian Land Reform 1962-1966. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Majidzadeh, Y., 2003, “Jiroft: The Oldest Civilization of the East”. Tehran: Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Iran. (In Persian).
- Majidzadeh, Y., 2010, “The Persian Gulf Name and Foreign Archaeologists”. Information on Political and Economic Issues, 274: 60-73. (In Persian).
- Majidzadeh, Y., 2013, The Beginning of Urbanization in Iran (3rd Edition). Tehran: University Press Center. (In Persian).
- Malek Shahmirzadi, S., 2003, Iran in Prehistory: From the Beginning to the Dawn of Urbanism (2nd Edition). Tehran: Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Iran. (In Persian).
- Malekzadeh, M. & Shirinbeyani, H., 1996, The History of Mithra in Iran from the Fourth to the First Millennium BCE (2nd Edition). Tehran: Yazdan Publishing. (In Persian).
- Mao, T., 1969, Selected Works. Vol. 1. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press. (In Persian).
- Masoumi, G., 2010, A History of Archaeology. Tehran: SAMT Publishing. (In Persian).
- McGuire, R. H., 1993, 1992, “Archaeology and Marxism”. Archaeological Method and Theory, 5: 101-157.
- Miller, M., 1956, Archaeology in the U. S. S. R. New York, Frederick A. Praeger.
- Mousapour Negari, F. & Mortazavi, M., 2015, “The Said and Unsaid in Processual Archaeology”. Archaeological Researches in Iran, 9: 7-26. (In Persian).
- Redman (ed.), 1978, Archaeology. London: Academic Press, inc.
- Rothman, M., 1994, “Sealing as a control Mechanism in Prehistory: tepeGawraXI, X and VII”. In: chifdom and early states in near East,: organizational Dynamics of Complexity, edited by G. Stien and M.S.Rothman.Prehistory Press. Madison, Wisconism. (Orientally published in 1984): 137-144.
- Sardari Zarchi, A., 2005, “Administrative Management Techniques and the Formation of Complex Societies in Southwest Iran during the Fourth Millennium BCE”. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Tehran. (In Persian).
- Shateri, M., 2016, “A Reflection on the Functionalist Approach in Safavid Seals”. Journal of Archaeological Research, 11: 163-176.
- Shennan, S., 1989, “Introduction: Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity”. In: Approaches to Cultural Identity, edited. by: Stephen Shennan, One World Archaeology, vol. 10, Unwin Hyman, London: 1-32.
- Sobhani, J. (n.d.). “Marxism and the Driving Force of History”. Maktab-e Eslam, 19(5): 312-317. (In Persian).
- Soner Akin, A., 2015, “Review on the Roots of Marxist Approach in Archaeology”. Mustafa Kemal University International Journal of Archaeology, 3, (4): 33-38. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20150304.11. 
- Spriggs, M., 1984, Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, USA.
- Tosi, M. & Piperno, M., 1973, “Lithic Technology behind the Ancient Lapis – Lazuli Trade”. Expedition, 16: 15 – 23.
- Tosi, M. & Piperno, M., 1978, “The development of urban societies in Turan and the Mesopotamian trade with the East: the evidence from Shahr-Sokhta”. Mesopotamien und seine nachbarn: politische und  kulturelle Wechselbeziehungen im Alten Vorderasien vom 4.-1. Jht v. Chr. 2 Teile, 1: 57-77. 
- Trigger, B., 1989, A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press.
- Vafaei, A. & Esmaili Jalodar, M. I., 2017, “The Impact of Anthropological Approaches of Diffusionism, Functionalism, and Structuralism on Islamic Archaeology: A Critical Analysis of Definitions and Methodologies”. Anthropological Researches, 15(27): 149-180. (In Persian).
- Valipour, H. R., 1999, “An Introduction to Social Archaeology”. Bastanpazhuhi, 4: 12-15. (In Persian).
- Valipour, H. R.; Davoudi, H.; Mostafapour, I. & Grezak, A., 2013, “Tepe Khaleseh, A Late Neolitic Site  in Zanjan Province, The Neolitsaion  of Iran The Formation of New Societies”. Themes from the Ancient Near East BANEA Publication Series, Vol. 3, Edited by: Roger Mattews And Hassan FazeliNashli.
- Wright, H. T., 1970, Toward An Explaniton of the Origin of the state.Mimeo.
- Wright, H., 1981, An Early Town on the Deh Luran Plain: Excavation at Tepe Farukh Abad, Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 13. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
- Yadollahi, S., 2004, “Social Archaeology: An Examination of Reconstruction Methods”. Bastanpazhuhi, 12: 16-25. (In Persian).
- Yoffee, N., 1993, Too many chief? (or, safe Text’s for the 90s,). In: Archaeological Theory: Who sets the agenda, Norman Yoffee and Andrew sherrat (eds). Cambridge :combridge university press: 60 – 77.
- Young, M., 2002, “The Nazi Archaeology”. Nebraska Anthropologist,  17: 29 – 35.
- Zahtabian, G.; Rafiei Emam, E.; Alavi Panah, S. K. & Jafari, M., 2004, “Investigation of groundwater resources in Varamin plain for irrigation use”. Journal of Geographical Researches, (48): 91-102. (In Persian).