1

The Bronze Age in northeastern Iran

Christopher P. Thornton

<1>Introduction

Despite over 150 years of excavation, the northeast remains one of the least understood areas of

prehistoric Iran. The reasons for this are varied, but the noticeable lack of a comprehensive

excavation monograph from even one site in this region is the most likely culprit. Indeed, even

the most important type–sites of this region such as Tepe Hissar (Hesar), which has been studied

and discussed by some of the great prehistorians of the 20th century (e.g. Childe 1942: 357–8;

Piggott 1943; Mallowan 1965: 117–27), have seen less than 10% of the excavated finds

published. This dearth of published data has caused considerable confusion among scholars

attempting to use the incomplete publication record from such sites such as a reference for their

own research (e.g. Helwing 2006; Mousavi 2008; Mahfroozi and Piller 2009).

Since 2004, the author has been involved with a number of projects at the University of

Pennsylvania Museum, working with Robert H. Dyson Jr., Holly Pittman, Ayse Gürsan–

Salzmann, Michael Gregg, and others to publish its excavated Iranian collections. These include

artifacts and/or archival records from a number of northeast Iranian sites, including Tepe Hissar,

Tureng Tepe, Hotu and Belt (Pers. Ghar–e Kamarband) Caves, Shir–i Shian (Shir Ashian) and

Sang–e Chakhmaq, as well as related sites in north–central Iran such as Cheshmeh Ali (Rayy)

and Murteza Gerd. In addition, the author has been fortunate enough to travel to northeastern

Iran thanks to Dr. Hassan Fazeli and the ICAR. In Iran, the author benefited from numerous

dialogues and site–visits with exceptional Iranian colleagues working in this region, including

2

Ali Mahfroozi in Mazandaran; Kourosh Roustaei in Damghan–Shahrud; Qorban Ali Abassi and

Hamid Omrani in the southern Gorgan Valley; Ali Vahdati in western Khorasan; and Emran

Garajian in the northern Gorgan and Nishapur. Thus, much of the information synthesized in this

chapter comes from personal observation of museum collections and personal communications

from generous colleagues. Furthermore, this synthesis builds upon the pioneering work of J.

Deshayes (e.g. 1968, 1969a), R.H. Dyson, Jr. (e.g. 1977, 1991), V.I. Sarianidi (e.g. 1971), S.

Cleuziou (e.g. 1986, 1991), M. Tosi (e.g. 1973–74), P.L. Kohl (1984a) and others who attempted

to bring the late prehistory of northeastern Iran to the attention of the wider archaeological world.

This chapter is divided into three main sections. First, the cultural geography of northeastern

Iran will be summarized in order to outline the various environmental factors that have affected

human behavior there over the past 10,000 years or so. Second, the history of archaeological

investigation in this region will be summarized, with a focus on the major excavations and

regional surveys that have provided data enabling a broader synthesis. Third, the culture history

of the late prehistory of northeastern Iran, from Neolithic to Late Bronze Age (c. 7000–1500

BC), will be summarized with a particular focus on those type–fossils (ceramics and small finds)

that serve as chronological markers. While a chapter such as this cannot hope to be

comprehensive, it should provide a useful reference for new excavations in the region as well as

for projects aimed at publishing old excavations.

<1>Cultural geography

The region of northeastern Iran can be divided, somewhat crudely, into three distinct cultural and

ecological zones: the Caspian littoral, the Alborz highlands, and the relatively fertile plains of the

3

Iranian plateau that gradually disappear into the salt deserts to the south. The southern Caspian

littoral and the lush Gorgan plain provide some of the best agricultural land in all of Iran. Well–

watered by moisture coming off the Caspian Sea that collides with the high Alborz mountains,

the Caspian littoral has a semi–tropical climate and produces fantastic fruits, huge quantities of

grain (including, today, rice), and fresh fish that is exported to the upland interior. Similarly, the

Gorgan plain receives plentiful rainfall and provides superb land for irrigation, making this

region a mini ‘breadbasket’ for all of northern Iran. The northern part of the Gorgan plain

gradually merges into steppe grassland (the Turkoman plain) more suitable for nomadic

herdsmen than agriculturalists, while in the eastern part of the Gorgan plain, low hills gradually

transition into the Kopet Dagh mountains along the Iran–Turkmenistan border.

The contrast between the semi–tropical lowlands along the Caspian Sea and the often snow–

covered highlands of the nearby Alborz mountains cannot be over–emphasized. These

mountains, many as high as 3500–4000 m asl, are even today sparsely populated by only the

hardiest of people. In recent centuries, loggers, miners, and transhumant pastoralists have

comprised the majority of those living at such high altitides. In reality, our knowledge of the

prehistoric highland communities who inhabited northeastern Iran is minimal and studies of

similar societies elsewhere in Iran, e.g. in the Bakhtiyari mountains (Zagarell 1982), provide a

poor substitute. However, we can infer that in prehistory, any peoples living in these areas would

have had access to important resources such as timber, metal ore, gold, and semi–precious stones

(notably turquoise) which they, in turn, could have purveyed to lowland populations to the

northwest and to the societies of the Iranian plateau to the south and east.

Without a doubt, the Iranian plateau has been the heartland of Persian society for thousands of

years, long before the modern nation–state of Iran was formed. Averaging 900 m asl, the Iranian

4

plateau was a rich but impenetrable landscape overlooking the agricultural populations of

Mesopotamia and southern Central Asia for millennia. Until the 20th

century, the people of this

region subsisted on both herding and irrigated agriculture using qanat technology to draw water

from beneath the nearby mountains. These agro–pastoralists also engaged in resource

procurement, craft production, and long–distance trade, making them almost entirely self–

sufficient or, at least, symbiotically subsistent with their neighbors. The plateau does not,

however, lend itself to large populations – water and irrigable land are scarce, so settlements

were generally small until the Middle Ages brought new hydraulic technologies and extensive

trade networks to feed large urban populations.

To my knowledge, there has never been a comprehensive geographical or anthropological

study of northeastern Iran focusing specifically on land use and patterns of social movement

(see, e.g. Adle 1971). The ‘Turan Project’ of Brian Spooner and his students focused on

important issues such as desertification and traditional village life on the Plateau (Spooner 1965,

1974, 1985; Spooner and Horne 1980; Martin 1980; Horne 1994), but did not seek to understand

interactive patterns of socially conscribed land–use and population movement. Similarly,

William Irons’ (1972, 1975) study of the Yomut Turkmen along the Iran–Turkmenistan border

has become a classic reference on tribal organization of steppe nomads, but gives little insight

into the totally different pastoral and agricultural communities in the rest of northeastern Iran.

The only study of northeast Iranian cultural geography that provides information on large–

scale patterns of population movement and socio–economic relationships across the varied

landscape was carried out by Mohammad–Hossein Papoli–Yazdi (1991), who examined the

movement of Kurdish groups along the Iran–Turkmenistan border. Most Kurds in northeastern

Iran moved (or were moved) there in the 16th century to serve as a buffer against the raiding

5

Uzbek nomads from the north. The Kurds were perfectly suited to this role, as their traditional

east–to–west migration pattern (across the modern Iran–Iraq border within ‘Kurdistan’) helped

them to monitor the long stretch of plateau south of the Kopet Dagh Mountains. While we cannot

know whether such long–distance seasonal migration patterns existed in prehistory, the well–

documented movement of goods such as lapis lazuli from east to west for thousands of years

must have been orchestrated by groups familiar with such long–distance routes.

Papoli–Yazdi (1991: 213–50) also described the short–distance transhumance patterns of

semi–sedentary pastoralists (semi–nomads) of Turkic, Persian, and Kurdish ethnicity in northern

Khorasan. While the prevailing directions dominating such migratory patterns are ‘uphill’ vs.

‘downhill,’ many of the traditional routes taken by these pastoralists were north–to–south

movements through the passes in the Kopet Dagh to the piedmont zone of southern

Turkmenistan. One can imagine similar groups moving from the highlands of the Alborz

mountains or the Iranian plateau down to the Caspian littoral and the southern Gorgan plain. As

such, Papoli–Yazdi provides us with a modal for the cultural geography of northeastern Iran:

intra–regional, highland–lowland relationships complemented by inter–regional, east–to–west

movement of people and trade goods.

<1>History of excavation

In the mid–19th century, the Russian diplomat, Baron Clement Augustus de Bode, published a

short account of a hoard of gold and alabaster vessels, bronze weapons, and stone figurines

found near the city of Astrabad (modern–day Gorgan) in northeastern Iran (de Bode 1844).

Although numerous Western explorers had previously travelled through this region and often

6

noted archaeological sites and antiquities in their writing, the ‘Astrabad treasure’ can be credited

with sparking serious academic interest in the region (e.g. Rostovtzeff 1920). Indeed, it is

probably no coincidence that many of the earliest surveys in northeastern Iran were carried out in

the Gorgan valley (de Morgan 1896; Sykes 1911) and that some of the first archaeological

excavations in this region were carried out at Tepe Khargush (de Morgan 1896), Tureng Tepe

(Wulsin 1932, 1938), and Shah Tepe (Arne 1935, 1945), just outside of historic Astrabad.

A second early source of information on the archaeology of this region was provided by A.

Houtum Schindler (1887), who reported on some painted pottery from a mound near the city of

Damghan called Tepe Hissar. Similar sherds were studied in the 1920s by the great Iranian

expert Ernst Herzfeld (Dyson 2009), leading him to encourage the young German-American

archaeologist Erich F. Schmidt to carry out the first systematic excavations at Tepe Hissar

(Schmidt 1933, 1937) after the French monopoly over excavations in Iran ended in 1931.

Schmidt’s superb excavations and detailed (if incomplete) publications have served as a model

for archaeologists working across the Middle East, and made Tepe Hissar one of the best–known

sites in Near Eastern archaeology.

With the onset of World War II, archaeological research in northeastern Iran slowed

considerably and did not resume until the 1950s, when the lowlands of the Caspian littoral

became a popular place to work. The anthropologist Carleton S. Coon excavated Belt and Hotu

caves near Sari in Mazandaran (Coon 1951, 1952, 1957), inspiring Charles McBurney’s

excavations at nearby Ali Tappeh cave in the early 1960s (McBurney 1964, 1969). A French

expedition headed by Jean Deshayes excavated Tureng Tepe from 1960 to 1977 and produced a

number of important articles, yet no final monograph about the Bronze Age levels (Deshayes

1968, 1969b, 1977, and numerous preliminary reports in the journal Iran). In the early 1960s, an

7

Anglo–American team headed by David Stronach and Vaughn Crawford excavated further north

in the Gorgan plain at the site of Yarim Tepe (Crawford 1963; Stronach 1972), but thise site too

remains incompletely published. Finally, a Japanese team headed by Matsuzaki Hisashi

excavated a prehistoric site just southeast of Tureng Tepe called Tepe Hoseynabad in the early

1970s, but that has only recently been published outside of Japan (Ohtsu et al. 2010).

By the 1970s, archaeological interest in northeastern Iran had mostly moved back onto the

plateau as Marxian ideas about craft production and trade networks drove scholars closer to such

resources. A Japanese team headed by Seiichi Masuda excavated the Neolithic site of Sang–e

Chakhmaq near Shahrud, one of the most important (and least understood) Neolithic sites in the

Middle East (Masuda 1974, 1977, 1984; cf. Thornton 2010, forthc.). At the same time, an

Italian–American team returned to Tepe Hissar under the direction of Maurizio Tosi and Robert

H. Dyson, Jr. to carry out limited excavations in order to retrieve stratified organic material for

radiocarbon dating (Bulgarelli 1974; Dyson 1972, 1977; THRRP). In addition to these large

projects, a number of important archaeological surveys were conducted in the 1970s, including a

Japanese survey of the Gorgan (Ohtsu et al. 2010), a German survey of eastern Khorasan (Gropp

1995), an Italian survey of the Atrek Valley (Venco Ricciardi 1980), and an American survey of

the Darreh Gaz (Kohl and Heskel 1980; Kohl et al. 1982).

The Islamic Revolution of 1978–79 and the ensuing Iran–Iraq War (1980–88) effectively

ended prehistoric research in Iran until the 1990s, when Iranian scholars resumed survey and

excavation. Much of this research is unknown to Western scholars as it is either unpublished, or

published only in Persian and often in journals and booklets that are difficult to access in the

West. Notable work in this region by Iranian archaeologists after the Revolution includes survey

around Gorgan by the late M. Darvish Rouhani in 1984–5 (Abbasi 2007: 251); survey and test

8

excavations across Semnan Province from 1988–92 by Hassan Rezvani (1999); and salvage

excavations at Tepe Hissar in 1995 by Ehsan Yaghmaiyi (Mashkour and Yaghmaiyi 1996;

Mashkour 1997).

Since the 1990s, a number of young, well–trained Iranian archaeologists have focused their

attention on northeastern Iran. Much to their credit, these scholars often publish both in Persian

and in Western languages (notably in English), which will no doubt have an enormous effect

upon the wider world’s appreciation of northeastern Iran. At the same time, a handful of Western

scholars (and their students) have spent much of the 1990s and 2000s attempting to publish pre–

Revolutionary excavations conducted in this region (e.g. Martinez 1990; Orsaria 1995; Hiebert

and Dyson 2002; Leone 2004). Despite the tense political situation over the past decade, a lucky

few have even carried out excavations in northeastern Iran with their Iranian colleagues

(Mahfroozi and Piller 2009), or with their Iranian students (Fouache et al. 2010; Vahdati and

Francfort 2011). Our understanding of the late prehistory of northeastern Iran is in its infancy, in

spite of 150 years of interest in the region, but a new generation of both Iranian and Western

archaeologists is seeking to change that.

<1>Typological and chronological sequence

Northeastern Iran has long been recognized as an important frontier zone between the oasis

settlements of Central Asia and the highland sites of the Iranian plateau in late prehistory

(Sarianidi 1971; Tosi 1973–74; Kohl 1984a; Cleuziou 1986). Less well–recognized is the

important ‘social boundary’ (Wright 1984, 1989, 2002) between the western and eastern halves

of northeastern Iran (Biscione 1981; Kohl et al. 1982: 17–18), whereby the material culture of

9

eastern Mazandaran, Semnan, Golestan, and western Khorasan is entirely different from the

contemporary material culture of north–central and eastern Khorasan (southern Khorasan is

archaeologically terra incognita). A useful model has been put forth by Emran Garajian (pers.

comm. 2008), who suggested that the regions around Sari, Damghan, and Gorgan (up to the

Sumbar Valley of western Turkmenistan) could be thought of as the eastern frontier of northern

Iran, while Khorasan could be considered the northern frontier of eastern Iran. Recent surveys by

Ali Vahdati (pers. comm. 2010) have placed this social boundary zone somewhere between

Sankhast (east of Jajarm) and Touy (west of Esfarayen) in northwestern Khorasan (Vahdati

2011). Continued exploration and excavation by Iranian scholars in this region has done little to

change this model of a divided frontier zone in late prehistory (Garajian 2006, 2008; Vahdati

2010a, 2010b, 2011; Vahdati and Francfort 2011).

<2>Khorasan (east of the social boundary)

Although, wWith the possible exception of the Kopet Dagh region along the northern border

with Turkmenistan (Kohl and Heskel 1980; Venco Ricciardi 1980; Kohl et al. 1982; Rahbar

1997), our archaeological knowledge of Khorasan is quite limited (Korbel 1983; Gropp 1995).

However, it is clear that this province shared the material culture of the relatively well–known

Namazga–related sites of southern Turkmenistan in the fourth and third millennia BC (Masson

and Sarianidi 1972; Lamberg–Karlovsky 1973; Kohl 1981, 1984b, 1992; Masson 1992; Sarianidi

1992, 2002). The association between Khorasan and southern Turkmenistan is attested at a

number of excavated sites, including Tepe Borj (Garajian 2006) and Nishapur–P (Hiebert and

10

Dyson 2002) near Nishapur; Tepe Damghani near Sabzevar (Vahdati and Francfort 2011); and

Yam Tepe in the upper Atrek Valley (Biscione pers. comm., unpub.).

However, there are a few subtle differences between the sites of Khorasan and those in

southern Turkmenistan. For one, Late Neolithic, Djeitun–style ceramics of the 6th–early 5

th

millennia BC are so–far unknown in Khorasan – the earliest ceramics found are comparable to

Anau IA black–on–red wares of the mid–late 5th millennium BC (Vahdati 2010b: 28–30; see

below). Second, in the Namazga II–III period (mid–late 4th millennium BC), black–on–red wares

with distinctive zoomorphic motifs such as those from Nishapur–P (Hiebert and Dyson 2002:

138) and the Kopet Dagh region (Kohl et al. 1982: 8) appear to be relatively common, while they

remain quite rare (possibly imported?) at Namazga II–III sites of southern Turkmenistan. Third,

burnished grey wares – the hallmark of the western region of northeastern Iran in the 4th through

2nd

millennia BC – appear with some regularity at 3rd

millennium sites in Khorasan (Hiebert and

Dyson 2002; Vahdati and Francfort 2011; Biscione and Vahdati in prep.; Garajian 2006), while

they remain relatively rare at Namazga–sequence sites in southern Turkmenistan. Whether these

three observations will continue to be correct after further excavation remains to be seen, but the

highland–lowland dynamic between the intermontane valleys of northern Khorasan and the

settlements along the northern piedmont of the Kopet Dagh in Turkmenistan is a topic worth

pursuing.

<2>Semnan, Mazandaran, Golestan, and western Khorasan (west of the social boundary)

The western side of northeastern Iran also exhibits an interesting highland–lowland dynamic –

i.e. between the plateau sites along the southern flanks of the Alborz mountains (from Semnan to

11

Jajarm) and the sea–level sites along the Caspian littoral (from Sari to Gonbad–i Qavus). Unlike

in the east, where significant populations do not seem to appear until after Neolithic Djeitun–

related villages had disappeared from the Turkmen piedmont (Harris 2010), settlements in the

west arose on both the highland plateau and the lowland Caspian plain in tandem with

developments in southern Turkmenistan. Despite extensive archaeological research in both the

highlands and lowlands of the western region of northeastern Iran, the cultural and economic

relationship between the two is a complete mystery. Was there seasonal migration between

them? Did they share a symbiotic relationship based on production and trade? Did they rise and

fall in tandem or did they alternate in significance over the millennia? The complete publication

of excavated sites such as Tepe Hissar and Tureng Tepe, and perhaps new field investigations

focused on these lacunae in our knowledge, are needed before these questions can be answered.

The earliest excavated sites in this region date to the 8–7th millennia BC and belong either to

the Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic (on the Caspian coast) or the Aceramic Neolithic (on the plateau).

Examples of the former include the cave sites near Sari, such as Belt and Hotu Caves (Coon

1951, 1952, 1957; Dupree 1952) and Ali Tappeh (McBurney 1964, 1969). Examples of

Aceramic Neolithic sites are rarer still, with the incompletely published Japanese excavations at

Sang–e Chakhmaq near Shahrud providing the best sequence (Masuda 1973, 1974, 1976, 1977,

1984). Although an updated synthesis of this site has been published elsewhere (Thornton 2010,

forthc.), a brief synopsis will be given here of the transition from the Aceramic Neolithic to the

early Chalcolithic in northeastern Iran.

The sequence from the two mounds (West and East) at Sang–e Chakhmaq can be divided into

four general periods (Table 10.1): Aceramic Neolithic (c. 7th

mill. BC), Early Ceramic Neolithic

(c. late 7th–early 6

th mill. BC), Late Ceramic Neolithic (c. 6

th mill. BC), and Early Chalcolithic

12

(c. late 6th–early 5

th mill. BC). The Aceramic Neolithic levels are exclusively on the West Mound

and consist of large, well–built structures with prominent hearths containing evidence of in situ

lithic production, groundstone tools for processing grains, and bone tools made from deer antlers

and long bones. The Early Ceramic Neolithic levels above this period on the West Mound were

mostly eroded, although a few sherds described as ‘burnt–umber colored with polished surfaces’

(Kamuro 1977; Thornton forthc.) suggest parallels with what Dyson (1991: 266) called ‘Caspian

Neolithic Soft Ware’ from Belt and Hotu Caves.

The Late Ceramic Neolithic levels at the base of the East Mound sequence are notable for

their strong parallels with the Djeitun Culture of southern Turkmenistan (Harris 2010; Harris et

al. 1996; Masson 1971, 1992). There are also notable connections with north–central Iran

(specifically Sialk I) and with the Caspian cave sites, as well as a tradition of adapting these

different influences in a local style of pottery, small finds, and architecture (Thornton 2010,

forthc.). The transition from the Early Ceramic Neolithic on the West Mound to the Late

Ceramic Neolithic on the East Mound does not seem to have been abrupt, as many artifact types

and burial styles remained unchanged.

The transition to the Early Chalcolithic levels at Sang–e Chakhmaq (called the early

Transitional Chalcolithic period in Fazeli et al. 2009) tells a different story (see Masuda 1977).

Burials changed from simple, flexed inhumations to one of extended corpses lying on their

backs. The mudbricks used in house construction became shorter and squarer, more

standardized, and similar to Sialk II bricks in north–central Iran. Antler and deer bone essentially

disappeared, to be replaced almost exclusively by cattle bone for the manufacture of tools

(Masuda 1976: 64). While the multiple ceramic types of the Late Ceramic Neolithic levels still

appeared in small quantities in this latest phase, the dominant ceramic type in these Early

13

Chalcolithic levels is so–called ‘Cheshmeh Ali Ware’ – a well–fired, black–on–red ceramic type

of the early Sialk II period (c. 5200–4700/600 BC) found at every site in the western part of

northeastern Iran around 5000 BC (Dyson and Thornton 2009: 4, n. 6).

The reasons and mechanism for the spread of the Cheshmeh Ali Ware technological style

(including the use of grit temper, well–controlled kilns, elaborate painted designs, and possibly

the fast wheel; see Fazeli et al. 2010) from north–central Iran to nNortheastern Iran remain

unclear. It is important, however, to reiterate the key point made by Fazeli and Abbasnejad

Sereshti (2005) that inter–regional ceramic styles such as Cheshmeh Ali Ware are notable only in

relation to the relatively unknown intra–regional ceramic styles of the Late Neolithic through

Early Chalcolithic phases. This is particularly true in northeastern Iran, where discussions of

long–distance connections with north–central Iran or southern Turkmenistan have superseded

careful study of indigenous processes of social and cultural development in localized regions

(Thornton forthc.; Vahdati Nasab et al. forthc.; Gregg and Thornton forthc.).

The middle of the 5th millennium BC appears to have been a period of decline in both north–

central and northeastern Iran, although very few sites of this phase have been found (Dyson and

Thornton 2009). In this period (called ‘Late Transitional Chalcolithic’ in Fazeli et al. 2009), the

Cheshmeh Ali Ware style devolved into less finely made ceramics involving simple geometric

and linear designs, abandoning the elaborate zoomorphic designs of the preceding period. These

later ceramics are called Anau IA Ware after the famous site in southern Turkmenistan where

they were first found and described (Schmidt 1908; Hiebert and Kurbansakatov 2003). While the

western part of northeastern Iran may have retracted somewhat, it is important to note that in the

Anau IA phase (ca. 4500 BC) sites first appeared in the Darreh Gaz, the Atrek Valley, and in the

other intermontane valleys of the eastern part of northeastern Iran (discussed above).

14

For unknown reasons, the Anau IA phase ended somewhat abruptly with the rise of numerous

localized cultural traditions towards the end of the 5th millennium BC. In north–central Iran, the

late Sialk II phase gave way to the distinctive Sialk III1–3 phase (c. 4300–4000 BC), distinguished

by the return to robust mudbrick architecture and naturalistic motifs on painted pottery, as well

as the rise of large, elaborately painted zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines (Thornton

and Pittman forthc.). In southern Turkmenistan, we see the development of the Namazga I–II

culture out of the preceding Djeitun tradition. In northeastern Iran, the best–known of these local

styles is the Hissar I culture of the Damghan plain (Schmidt 1933, 1937), although so little of

this material has been published from the Tepe Hissar excavations that it is difficult to reach any

conclusions about it. Both Qaleh Khan (Garajian 2008) and Aq Tappeh (Shahmirzadi and

Nokandeh 2001) in the upper Gorgan Valley appear to have post–Anau IA layers, but in the

absence of comprehensive reports on these sites it is nearly impossible to define the local

cultures.

By the mid–late 4th millennium BC, we have a much better understanding of the development

of these localized cultures across northeastern Iran, thanks mainly to the pioneering work of the

Italian–American team at Tepe Hissar. I which in 1976, this team carried out one of the first re–

study projects of an Iranian type–site utilizing modern methods of stratigraphic assessment,

ceramic typological analysis and radiocarbon dating (Dyson 1977; Dyson and Howard 1989). By

cutting back old sections and placing small test–trenches in key locations, the team managed to

contextualize the older excavations at Hissar (Schmidt 1933, 1937), Tureng Tepe (Wulsin 1932,

1938), and Shah Tepe (Arne 1935, 1945) and to situate these within an absolute chronology

(Dyson 1991; Thornton et al. 2012). While the analysis of these data is still ongoing (Gürsan–

Salzmann forthc.), it is clear that the rise of the Hissar II culture (c. 3600–2800 BC) was driven

15

mainly by the creation of workshops dedicated to the large–scale processing of lapis lazuli and

alabaster, and the equally large–scale production of copper–base alloys and lead/silver,

presumably for export (Tosi 1984; Thornton 2009).

During this period of economic and cultural florescence in northeastern Iran, we also find the

earliest evidence of complex societies in the fertile lowland plains along the Caspian littoral.

While Djeitun–, Cheshmeh Ali–, and Hissar IC–style ceramics have all been found at sites in the

Gorgan plain, they usually appear eroding out of later mudbricks as the strata to which these

sherds originally belonged are unreachable below the water table – notable exceptions being

Yarim Tepe (Crawford 1963) and Pookerdvall near Gorgan, which has stratified, Djeitun–style

ceramic layers above the water table (Abassi et al. in press). Thus, only in the Hissar II period

can we begin to understand the complex dynamics of interaction between lowland sites like

Tureng Tepe, Shah Tepe and Narges Tepes (Abassi 2007) and their counterparts on the plateau,

like Tepe Hissar. Interestingly, this was also the period in which reduction–fired, monochromatic

grey wares first appeared at sites from north–central Iran to southern Turkmenistan. However, it

was not until the end of the 4th or early 3

rd millennium BC that grey wares superseded other

ceramic types, such as the distinctive burnished, incised, or black–painted red wares of the

Gorgan and Mazandaran plains, which are found as far north as the Sumbar valley in

southwestern Turkmenistan (Khlopin 1997: Pl. 13) and as far south as Tepe Hissar (Thornton et

al. 2012). Other distinctive finds from this period across the western part of northeastern Iran

include double–headed spiral pins, stone ‘handbags’, and certain bead types.

The rapid expansion and collapse of the proto–Elamite phenomenon across the Iranian plateau

at the beginning of the 3rd

millennium BC effectively ended complex society in north–central

Iran for nearly a millennium, yet it had little overt effect upon the societies of northeastern Iran.

16

Although Tepe Hissar seems to have declined in tandem with the proto–Elamite collapse (the

nebulous Hissar IIIA period), due perhaps to some sort of economic inter–dependence with

north–central Iran, the lowland sites flourished in the first half of the 3rd

millennium BC.

Whereas lapis lazuli production had peaked at Hissar in period IIB, c. 3400–3000 BC, lapis

production at Tureng Tepe peaked somewhat later, in period IIIA, c. 3000–2500 BC (Deshayes

1968: 37; 1969: 14). A similar situation can be observed further north at the contemporaneous

Parkhai II cemetery of the Sumbar valley, where richly–adorned graves of Period IV (c. 3000–

2500 BC) contained elaborately decorated ‘altars’ and ornaments of lapis, silver, and other

valuable materials, suggesting a time of great prosperity (Khlopin 2002: 141). This shift to the

north in the early 3rd

millennium BC parallels the rise of important centers of production and

trade in the Namazga IV period of southern Turkmenistan, such as Ak–depe to the west (Kircho

1999; Gundogdyyew et al. 2010) and Altyn–depe to the east (Masson 1988; Kircho 2001;

Masson and Berezin 2005; Kircho et al. 2008).

Highland settlements in northeastern Iran such as Tepe Hissar returned to prominence in the

mid–late 3rd

millennium BC (Hissar IIIB period), due perhaps to their intermediary role between

the rising centers of Margiana and the expanding trade routes of the plateau. The many burials

from this period excavated by Schmidt (1937: 232–61), as well as the plethora of valuable items

found in the Burned Building (Dyson 1972), all suggest that this was a phase of heightened

socio–economic status and increased wealth. This was also a time of great artistic achievement in

the lowlands of northeastern Iran, as evidenced by the finely made, pattern–burnished grey ware

ceramics and the decorative beads, pins, pendants, and vessels in various materials distributed

from Gohar Tepe near Sari (Mahfroozi and Piller 2009: Fig. 5) to the Period III graves of the

Sumbar valley (Khlopin 2002: 45–61). In addition, hoards of drinking vessels and fenestrated

17

braziers from Hissar (incorrectly attributed to Hissar IIIC by Schmidt 1937: 158–9) and

elaborately dressed figurines from Tureng Tepe (Olsoen 2012) bespeak a level of ritual activity

not previously attested in northeastern Iran.

The end of the 3rd

millennium was a period of significant change in northeastern Iran, the

sequence and drivers of which are still not understood. Dramatic changes in the architecture of

settlements occurred at both highland and lowland sites. At Tepe Hissar, the well–planned

architecture of Period IIIB was abandoned and replaced by the poorly–organized structures of

the early Hissar IIIC period (Deshayes’s Period IIIC1) that were laid out without regard to the

plan of the earlier settlement (Schmidt 1937: 155; Gürsan–Salzmann forthc.). At Tureng Tepe an

enormous, mud brick ‘haute terrasse’ (high terrace) was constructed in the center of the

settlement, representing perhaps the earliest example of monumentality in this region (Deshayes

1977; Leone 2004). Paralleling this material evidence of social stratification and political

centralization was the first appearance of truly elite burials, such as those of the ‘Warriors’, the

‘Priest’, and the ‘Little Girl’ at Hissar (Schmidt 1933: 438–52).

At around the same time (whether before or after these architectural changes is unclear),

material culture of the early Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex (early BMAC or

Namazga V, c. 2200–2000 BC) appeared at all of these sites, sometimes intermixed with local

grey ware ceramics (Hiebert and Lamberg–Karlovsky 1992). The most obvious examples of

BMAC items are the grooved stone columns found atop the ‘haute terrasse’ at Tureng Tepe

(Deshayes 1975: Fig. 1); in Period IIa levels at Shah Tepe (Arne 1945: 282); and in elite burials

and hoards at Hissar (Schmidt 1937: Pl. 61). The Astrabad treasure discussed above also

contained a number of BMAC–related items, such as miniature ‘trumpets’ (Rostovtzeff 1920: 6–

7) with ready parallels at Hissar (Schmidt 1937: 209), but it also contained a number of Hissar

18

IIIC–style (non–BMAC) artifacts, such as stylized female figurines made from stone plates

(Schmidt 1933: Pl. 132). Entirely missing from these purported BMAC assemblages in the

western part of northeastern Iran is even a single sherd of Namazga V–VI pottery, with the sole

exception of a BMAC necropolis found in the frontier zone between Jajarm and Isfareyan at

Tepe Chalow near Sankhast (Biscione and Vahdati in prep.). Although the data are sparse, the

archaeological and biological evidence (Hiebert 1998; Hemphill 1999) suggests that wealthy and

influential immigrants from Margiana likely migrated into northeastern Iran around 2000 BC,

where they seem to have integrated into local communities in ways that we do not yet

understand.

The early 2nd

millennium levels at Tepe Hissar were mostly all eroded by the time Schmidt

arrived at the site, although certain artifacts from near–surface contexts – such as jars with

vertical handles (Schmidt 1937: Pl. 41, H2871) and socketed spearheads (Schmidt 1937: Pl. 50,

H2779) – suggest that such layers may have existed. Far better evidence of early 2nd

millennium

occupation comes from the lowlands of the western region of northeastern Iran, from Tepe

Bazgir in the east (Nokandeh et al. 2006) to Tureng Tepe (period IIIC1–2) in the west (Deshayes

1973). We know little about this ‘late BMAC’ period in northeastern Iran (equivalent to

Namazga VI), and even less about the Late Bronze Age, post–BMAC period (c. 1800–1500 BC;

equivalent to the Takhirbai period in Margiana). Many sites in the lowland areas contain Late

Bronze Age assemblages that transition into the Early Iron Age, e.g. at Gohar Tepe (Mahfroozi

and Piller 2009: 183), in the Sumbar Valley (Khlopin 1986), and possibly at Tureng Tepe (period

IIIC2; Deshayes 1973). However, most of this material is unpublished or from mortuary contexts,

so our understanding of social development in this region remains limited.

19

<1>Conclusion

Decades of anthropological and archaeological research haves shown that so–called ‘frontier

zones’ were often areas of intense social and cultural innovation, where ideas and styles were

hybridized and manipulated for local usage (Lightfoot and Martinez 1995; Parker and Rodseth

2005). While our understanding of the late prehistory of northeastern Iran is still quite limited, it

is clear that we are dealing with a duel–frontier scenario. First, the entire region played an

important role as a frontier zone between central Iran (and, by extension, the greater Near East)

and southern Turkmenistan (and, by extension, Central Asia). This is what I would call an inter–

regional frontier zone. Second, northeastern Iran was divided for millennia between the east

(Khorasan) and the west (Semnan, Gorgan, Damghan, Mazandaran) for reasons that are still not

entirely clear. This is what could be called an intra–regional frontier zone, demarcated by a

number of ‘social boundaries’ over the millennia in the western–most part of modern–day

Khorasan province.

Northeastern Iran has long been a dynamic cultural landscape in which diverse groups of

people interacted in various ways. Precious resources such as timber, semi–precious stones, salt

from the dasht, and metal ores no doubt drew people to this region, while arable land and well–

protected valleys encouraged them to stay. Just as Papoli–Yazdi’s important study of the

movement of pastoralists across this landscape in recent history raises a number of intriguing

possibilities of relevance to traditional patterns of migration and trade, the archaeological record

suggests even broader diachronic movements of ideas, trends, technologies, and people between

central Iran and southern Turkmenistan through this critical frontier zone. Hopefully the

forthcoming publication of a number of older excavations in this region, combined with new

stratigraphic excavations by Iranian colleagues, will shed light on the intra–regional interactions

20

that caused northeastern Iran to play such an important role in the development of large–scale

societies in the Middle East and Central Asia.

<1>Acknowledgements

Thanks first and foremost to the editor for inviting me to contribute to this volume. Ali Vahdati

and Raffaele Biscione provided important comments and new information that greatly improved

this paper, while Kyle Olsoen must be thanked for translating a number of articles from Persian

to English for me. David Massey provided the topographic map, while Narges Bayani and Anne

Bomalski provided the plates. Finally, this chapter would be impossible were it not for a number

of fantastic colleagues, both in Iran and elsewhere, whose generosity and dedication to the late

prehistory of northeastern Iran are truly inspiring.

<1>Further reading

There has not been a compelling synthesis of the archaeology of northeastern Iran since the

1980s (see citations in text). A good reference for prehistoric Iranian material culture in general

is Voigt and Dyson (1992), but that is somewhat out–of–date. The new research of Hassan Fazeli

Nashli and his colleagues (e.g., Fazeli Nashli et al. 2009, 2010) and Barbara Helwing and her

colleagues (e.g., Helwing 2004; papers in EMM) in north–central Iran provides the closest

parallels to sites in the northeast and anchors the chronology of this region substantially.

<1>Bibliography

21

Abassi, Q.A. 2007. Narges Tepe of the Gorgan Plain. In The 9th Annual Symposium on Iranian

Archaeology, 247–6. Tehran: Archaeological Reports 7 (in Persian).

Abassi, Q.A., H. Omrani, and H. Zeyqami. in press. Tepe Pookerdvall: A Neolithic enclosure in

the Gorgan Plain.

Adle, C. 1971. Contribution à la géographie historique du Damghan. In Le Monde Iranien et

l’Islam, 69–104. Geneva: Hautes Etudes Islamiques et Orientales d’Histoire Comparée 4.

Arne, T.J. 1935. The Swedish Archaeological Expedition to Iran, 1932–1933. Copenhagen: Acta

Archaeologica 6.

———. 1945. Excavations at Shah Tepe. Stockholm: Reports from the Scientific Expedition to

the North-Western Provinces of China under the leadership of Dr. Sven Hedin Publication 27.

Biscione, R. 1981. Centre and periphery in late protohistoric Turan: The settlement pattern. In

South Asian Archaeology 1979, ed. H. Härtel, 203–13. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.

———. n.d. The testing–pit at Tappeh Yam, Upper Atrek Valley, Xorasan. Unpubl. report.

Biscione, R., and A.A. Vahdati. in prep. Excavations at Tepe Chalow, northern Khorasan, Iran.

Bulgarelli, G.M. 1974. Tepe Hissar: Preliminary report on a surface survey, August 1972. EW

24: 15–27.

Childe, V.G. 1942. Ceramic art in early Iran. Antiquity 16: 353–58.

Chlopin, I.N. 1986. Jungbronzezeitliche Gräberfelder im Sumber–Tal, Südwest–Turkmenistan.

Munich: Materialien zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archäologie 35.

22

Cleuziou, S. 1986. Tureng Tepe and burnished grey ware: A question of ‘frontier’? Oriens

Antiquus 25: 221–56.

———. 1991. Ceramics ix. The Bronze Age in northeastern Persia. EnIr 5: 297–300.

Coon, C.S. 1951. Cave explorations in Iran 1949. Philadelphia: UMM 5.

———. 1952. Excavations in Hotu Cave, Iran, 1951, a preliminary report. PAPS 96/3: 231–49.

———. 1957. The seven caves. New York: Alfred Knopf.

Crawford, V.E. (1963). Beside the Kara Su. The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 22: 263–

73.

Bode, C.A. de. 1844. On a recently opened tumulus in the neighbourhood of Asterabad, forming

part of ancient Hyrcania, and the country of the Parthians. Archaeologia 30: 248–55.

Deshayes, J. 1968. Tureng tepe and the plain of Gorgan in the Bronze Age. Archaeologia Viva 1:

35–8.

———. 1969a. New evidence for the Indo–Europeans from Tureng Tepe, Iran. Archaeology

22/1: 10–17.

———. 1969b. Tureng Tepe et la periode Hissar IIIC. Ugaritica 6: 139–63.

———. 1973. Rapport préliminaire sur les septième et huitième campagnes de fouilles à Tureng

Tepe (1967 et 1969). BAI 3: 81–97.

———. 1975. Les fouilles récentes de Tureng Tepe: La terrasse haute de la fin du IIIe millénaire.

CRAIBL: 522–30.

23

———. 1977. A propos des terrasses hautes de la fin du IIIe millénaire en Iran et en Asie

centrale. In Le Plateau iranien et l’Asie Centrale des origines à la Conquête islamique, ed. J.

Deshayes, 95–111. Paris: Éditions du CNRS.

Dupree, L. 1952. The Pleistocene artifacts of Hotu Cave, Iran. PAPS 96: 250–7.

Dyson, R.H., Jr. 1972. The Burned Building of Tepe Hissar IIIB: A restatement. Bastan

Chenassi va Honar–e Iran 9–10: 57–83.

———. 1977. Tepe Hissar, Iran, revisited. Archaeology 30/6: 418–20.

———. 1991. Ceramics: Neolithic period through Bronze Age in northeastern and north–central

Persia. EnIr 5/3: 266–75.

———. 2009. Tepe Hissar. EnIr Online Edition.

Dyson, R.H., Jr., and C.P. Thornton. 2009. Shir–i Shian and the fifth millennium sequence of

northern Iran. Iran 47: 1–22.

Fazeli Nashli, H., and R. Abbasnejad Sereshti. 2005. Social transformation and interregional

interaction in the Qazvin Plain during the 5th, 4th, and 3rd millennia B.C. AMIT 37: 7–26.

Fazeli Nashli, H., A. Beshkani, A. Markosian, H. Ilkani, R. Abbasnejad Sereshti, and R.L.

Young. 2009. The Neolithic to Chalcolithic transition in the Qazvin Plain, Iran: Chronology

and subsistence strategies. AMIT 41: 1–21.

Fazeli Nashli, H., M. Vidale, P. Bianchetti, G. Guida, and R.A.E. Coningham. 2010. The

evolution of ceramic manufacturing technology during the Late Neolithic and Transitional

Chalcolithic periods at Tepe Pardis, Iran. AMIT 42: 87–112.

24

Fouache, E., H.–P. Francfort, J. Bendezu–Sarmiento, A.A. Vahdati, and J. Lhuillier, J. 2010. The

Horst of Sabzevar and regional water resources from the Bronze Age to the present day

(northeastern Iran). Geodinamica Acta 23/5–6: 287–94.

Garajian, O. 2006. Some traces of Turkmenistan prehistoric cultures in Khorasan Province in

Iran. In The Second Symposium of Iranian young archaeologists, Iran – Tehran, ed. S. Zare,

69–98. Tehran: ICHTO.

———. 2008. Stratigraphic soundings and architectural documentation of Qaleh Khan: A

preliminary report. In The 9th Annual Symposium on Iranian Archaeology, vol. 3. Tehran:

ICAR (in Persian).

Gregg, M.W., and C.P. Thornton. forthcoming. A preliminary analysis of the prehistoric pottery

from Coon’s excavations of Hotu and Belt Caves in northern Iran: Implications for future

research into the emergence of village life in western Central Asia. IJAH.

Gropp, G. 1995. Archäologische Forschungen in Khorasan, Iran. Wiesbaden: TAVO Beiheft 84.

Gundogdyyew, O., T. Hojanyyazow, and A. Gurbanow. 2010. Akdepe – The ancient

archaeological site of Turkmenistan. Ashgabat: Archaeological and Ethnographic Institute.

Gürsan–Salzmann, A. forthcoming. Chronology at the crossroads of Western Asia: Bronze Age

ceramic sequence from Tepe Hissar, Iran. Philadelphia: UMM.

Harris, D.R. 2010. Origins of agriculture in Western Central Asia: An environmental–

archaeological study. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Harris, D.R., C. Gosden, and M.P. Charles. 1996. Jeitun: Recent excavations at an Early

Neolithic site in southern Turkmenistan. PPS 62: 423–42.

25

Helwing, B. 2004. Tracking the Proto–Elamite on the central Iranian plateau. In The potters of

Sialk, ed. S.M. Shahmirzadi, 45–58. Tehran: SRPR 3.

———. 2006. The rise and fall of Bronze Age centers around the Central Iranian Desert: A

comparison of Tappe Hesar II and Arisman. AMIT 38: 35–48.

Hemphill, B.E. 1999. Foreign elites from the Oxus civilization? A craniometric study of

anomalous burials from Bronze Age Tepe Hissar. American Journal of Physical

Anthropology 110/4: 421–34.

Hiebert, F.T. 1998. Central Asians on the Iranian Plateau: A model for Indo–Iranian

expansionism. In The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age peoples of eastern Central Asia, ed.

V.H. Mair, 148–61. Philadelphia: University Museum Publications.

Hiebert, F.T., and R.H. Dyson, Jr. 2002. Prehistoric Nishapur and the frontier between Central

Asia and Iran. IrAnt 37: 113–50.

Hiebert, F.T., with K. Kurbansakatov. 2003. A Central Asian village at the dawn of civilization:

Excavations at Anau, Turkmenistan. Philadelphia: UMM 116.

Hiebert, F.T., and C.C. Lamberg–Karlovsky. 1992. Central Asia and the Indo–Iranian

borderlands. Iran 30: 1–15.

Horne, L. 1994. Village spaces: Settlement and society in northeastern Iran. Washington:

Smithsonian Institution Press.

Houtum Schindler, A. 1877. Notes on some antiquities found in a mound near Damghan. JRAS

9: 425–27.

26

Irons, W.G. 1972. Variation in economic organization: a comparison of the pastoral Yomut and

the Basseri. Journal of Asian and African Studies 7: 88–104.

———. 1975. The Yomut Turkmen: A study of social organization among a Central Asian

turkic–speaking population. Ann Arbor: Anthropological Papers of the Univ. of Michigan 58.

Kamuro, H. 1977. Ceramics. In Tappeh Sang–i Chaxmaq, ed. S. Masuda, 15–20.

Tokyo/Hiroshima: University of Hiroshima.

Khlopin, I.N. 1997. Eneolit Jugo–Zapadnogo Turkmenistana. St. Petersburg: Evropeskij Dom.

———. 2002. Bronze Age of south–west Turkmenistan. Saint Petersburg: Russian Academy of

Science (in Russian and English).

Kircho, L. 1999. K izucheniju pozdnego eneolita juzhnogo Turkmenistana. Saint Petersburg:

Russian Academy of Sciences.

———. 2001. Osobennocti Proizvodstva Pocelenija Altyn–depe v Epokhu Paleometalla. Saint

Petersburg: Materialy Juzhno–Turkmenistanskoj Arkheologicheskoj Kompleksnoj Ekspeditsii

Vypusk 5.

Kircho, L., G.R. Korobkova, and V.M. Masson. 2008. Tekhniko–Tekhnologicheskij Potentsial

Eneoliticheskovo Naselenija Altyn–depe kak Osnova Stanovlenija Rannevorodskoj

Tsivilizatsii. Saint Petersburg: Proceedings of the Institute for the History of Material Culture

Proceedings 28.

Kohl, P.L. 1981. The Bronze Age civilization of Central Asia: Recent Soviet discoveries.

Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.

27

———. 1984a. Prehistoric ‘Turan’ and southern Turkmenia: The problem of cultural diversity.

In Frontiers of the Indus Civilization, ed. B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta, 321–31. New Delhi: Books

& Books.

———. 1984b. Central Asia: Paleolithic beginnings to the Iron Age. Paris: Éditions Recherche

sur les civilisations.

———. 1992. Central Asia. In Chronologies in Old World archaeology, 3rd

ed., ed. R.W.

Ehrich, 179–95. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Kohl, P.L., and Heskel, D. 1980. Archaeological reconnaissance in the Darreh Gaz plain: A short

report. Iran 18: 160–72.

Kohl, P.L., R. Biscione, and M.L. Ingraham. 1982. Implications of recent evidence for the

prehistory of northeastern Iran and southwestern Turkmenistan. IrAnt 17: 1–20.

Korbel, G. 1983. Archäologische Ergebnisse einer Geländebegehung im Gebiet von Torbat–e

Djâm und Tayyebat. AMI 16: 18–56.

Lamberg–Karlovsky, C.C. 1973. Prehistoric Central Asia. Antiquity 47: 43–6.

Leone, E. 2004. La piramide scalonata di Tureng Tepe e i suoi confronti con strutture

cerimoniali nell’Iran orientale e nell’Asia Media. Unpubl. MA thesis, Univ. of Bologna.

Lightfoot, K.G., and A. Martinez. 1995. Frontiers and boundaries in archaeological perspective.

Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 471–92.

Mahfroozi, A., and C.K. Piller. 2009. First preliminary report on the joint Iranian–German

excavations at Gohar Tappe, Mazandaran, Iran. AMIT 41: 177–209.

Mallowan, M.E.L. 1965. Early Mesopotamia and Iran. London: Thames and Hudson.

28

Martinez, L.–A. 1990. Les inhumations de l’Âge du bronze de Tureng Tepe, Iran. Unpubl. M.A.

thesis, Univ. of Paris 1.

Mashkour, M. 1997. The subsistence economy of Hissar IIIB: The study of faunal remains. In

Archaeological Reports of Iran1, 125–32. Tehran: ICAR.

Mashkour, M., and E. Yaghmayi. 1996. Faunal remains from Tappeh Hessar (Iran), results of the

1995 excavation. In Proceedings of XIII UISPP Congress, ed. C. Arias, A. Bietti, L.

Castelletti and C. Peretto, 543–51. Forli: Abaco Edizioni.

Masson, V.M. 1971. Poselenie Djeitun. Moscow: Materiali i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR

180.

———. 1988. Altyn–depe. Philadelphia: UMM 55.

———. 1992. The Bronze Age in Khorasan and Transoxiana. In History of civilizations of

Central Asia, vol. 1, ed. A.H. Dani and V.M. Masson, 225–46. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

Publishers Pvt Ltd.

Masson, V.M., and J.E. Berezkin. 2005. Khronologija Epokhi Pozdnevo Eneolita –– Srednej

Bronzy Srednej Azii (pogrebenija Altyn–depe). Saint Petersburg: Proceedings of the Institute

for the History of Material Culture 16.

Masson, V.M., and V.I. Sarianidi. 1972. Central Asia: Turkmenia before the Achaemenids.

London: Thames and Hudson.

Masuda, S. 1973. Excavations at Tappe Sang–e Cagmaq. PASARI 1: 1–2.

———. 1974. Excavations at Tappeh Sang–e Caxmaq. PASARI 2: 23–33.

29

———. 1976. Report of the archaeological investigations at Sahrud, 1975. PASARI 4: 63–70.

———. 1977. Tappeh Sang–i Chaxmaq. Tokyo/Hiroshima: University of Hiroshima.

———. 1984. The excavation at Tappeh Sangh–e Caxmaq. AfO 31: 209–12.

McBurney, C.B.M. 1964. Preliminary report on Stone Age reconnaissance in north–eastern Iran.

PPS 30: 382–99.

———. 1969. The cave of Ali Tappeh and the Epi–Palaeolithic in N.E. Iran. PPS 34: 385–413.

Morgan, J. de. 1896. Mission scientifique en Perse. Paris: Ernest Leroux.

Mousavi, A. 2008. Late Bronze Age in North–Eastern Iran: an Alternative approach to persisting

problems. Iran 46: 105–20.

Nokandeh, J., H. Omrani, and G.–A. Abbasi. 2006. Preliminary report of discovery of the Bazgir

Hoard in Gorgan Plain, 2001. In Archaeological Reports 4, ed. S. Etemadi, 113–29. Tehran:

ICAR.

Ohtsu, T., K. Furuse, T. Adachi, M. Karami, H. Nojima, Y. Arimatsu, and K. Wakiyama. 2010.

Preliminary report of the Iran Japan Joint Research Study of the Gorgan Material in the

National Museum of Iran, Tehran.

Olsoen, K.G. 2012. The figurines of Tureng Tepe: Ceramic bodies and social life at a Bronze

Age site in northeastern Iran. Unpubl. B.A. thesis, Ohio State Univ.

Orsaria, F. 1995. Shah Tepe: A new approach to an old excavation. Rivista degli studi Orientali

69/3–4: 481–495.

30

Papoli–Yazdi, M.–H. 1991. Le nomadisme dans le Nord du Khorassan, Iran. Paris/Tehran:

Institut français de Recherche en Iran.

Parker, B.J., and L. Rodseth. 2005. Untaming the frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and

History. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Piggott, S. 1943. Dating the Hissar sequence – the Indian evidence. Antiquity 17: 169–82.

Rahbar, M. 1997. Excavations at Bandiyan, Darreh Gaz, Khorasan. In Archaeological Reports of

Iran 1, 9–32. Tehran: ICAR.

Rezvani, H. 1999. Prehistoric settlement patterns and cultures in Semnan Province, Central

Plateau, Iran. In The Iranian world: Essays on Iranian art and archaeology presented to Ezat

O. Negahban, ed. A. Alizadeh, Y. Majidzadeh and S.M. Shahmirzadi, 220–1. Tehran: Iran

University Press.

Rostovtzeff, M. 1920. The Sumerian treasure of Astrabad. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 6:

4–27.

Sarianidi, V. 1971. Southern Turkmenia and northern Iran: Ties and differences in very ancient

times. EW 21/3–4: 291–310.

———. 1992. Food–producing and other Neolithic communities in Khorasan and Transoxania:

Eastern Iran, Soviet Central Asia and Afghanistan. In History of civilizations of Central Asia,

vol. 1, ed. A.H. Dani and V.M. Masson, 109–26. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Pvt

Ltd.

———. 2002. Margush: Ancient Oriental kingdom in the old delta of the Murghab River.

Ashgabat: Turkmendowlethabarlary.

31

Schmidt, E.F. 1933. Tepe Hissar Excavations 1931. The Museum Journal 23/4: 322–485.

———. 1937. Excavations at Tepe Hissar: Damghan. Philadelphia: The University Museum.

Schmidt, H. 1908. Archaeological excavations in Anau and Old Merv. In Explorations in

Turkestan: Expedition of 1904, ed. R. Pumpelly, 83–216. Washington: Carnegie Institution of

Washington Publication 73.

Shahmirzadi, S.M., and J. Nokandeh. 2001. Aq Tappeh. Tehran: Iranian Cultural Heritage

Organization.

Spooner, B. 1965. Arghiyan: The area of Jajarm in western Khorasan. Iran 3: 97–107.

———. 1974. City and river in Iran: Urbanization and irrigation of the Iranian Plateau. New

Haven: Society for Iranian Cultural and Social Studies.

———. 1985. Anthropology. EnIr 2: 107–16.

Spooner, B., and L. Horne. 1980. Cultural and ecological perspectives from the Turan program,

Iran. Expedition 22/4: 4–10.

Stronach, D. 1972. Yarim Tepe. In Excavations in Iran, the British contribution, 21–3. Oxford:

Organizing Committee of the Sixth International Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology.

Sykes, P.M. 1911. A sixth journey in Persia. GJ 37/1: 1–19.

Thornton, C.P. 2009. The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age metallurgy of Tepe Hissar,

northeast Iran: A challenge to the ‘Levantine paradigm’. Unpubl. Ph.D. diss., Univ. of

Pennsylvania.

32

———. 2010. Sang–e Chakhmaq. EnIr Online Edition.

———. forthcoming. Sang–i Chakhmaq: A Neolithic site in northeastern Iran. In The

Neolithisation of Iran, ed. R.J. Matthews and H. Fazeli Nashli. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Thornton, C.P., A. Gürsan–Salzmann, and R.H. Dyson, Jr. 2012. Tepe Hissar and the fourth

millennium of Northeastern Iran. AIN.

Thornton, C.P., and H. Pittman. forthcoming. The small finds. In Cheshmeh Ali: A Neolithic and

Chalcolithic site in north–central Iran, ed. T. Matney, H. Fazeli Nashli, H. Pittman and C.P.

Thornton. Philadelphia: UMM.

Tosi, M. 1973–74. The northeastern frontier of the Ancient Near East. Mesopotamia 8–9: 21–76.

———. 1984. The notion of craft specialization and its representation in the archaeological

record of early states in the Turanian Basin. In Marxist perspectives in archaeology, ed. M.

Spriggs, 22–52. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

Vahdati, A.A. 2010a. Archaeological investigations in Shahr–i Belqays (Medieval Isfarayen).

Tehran: Iranian Cultural Heritage Publications.

———. 2010b. Tepe Pahlavan: A Neolithic–Chalcolithic site in the Jajarm Plain, north–eastern

Iran. IrAnt 45: 7–30.

———. 2011. A preliminary report on a newly discovered petroglyphic complex near Jorbat, the

Plain of Jajarm, north–eastern Iran. Paléorient 37/2: 177–87.

Vahdati, A.A., and H.–P. Francfort. 2011. Preliminary report on the soundings at Tappeh

Damghani, Sabzevar. IJAH 24/2: 17–36 (in Persian).

33

Vahdati Nasab, H., C.P. Thornton, S.M. Mousavi Kouhpar, N. Sykes, and R. Naderi.

forthcoming. Late Neolithic site of Rashak III rock shelter, Mazandaran, Iran. In The

Neolithisation of Iran, ed. R.J. Matthews and H. Fazeli Nashli. London: Oxbow Books.

Venco Ricciardi, R. 1980. Archaeological survey in the upper Atrek Valley (Khorassan, Iran):

Preliminary report. Mesopotamia 15: 51–72.

Wright, R. P. 1984. Technology, style and craft specialization: Spheres of interaction and

exchange in the Indo–Iranian Borderlands, third millennium B.C. Unpubl. Ph.D. diss.,

Harvard University.

———. 1989. New tracks on ancient frontiers: Ceramic technology on the Indo–Iranian

Borderlands. In Archaeological thought in America, ed. C.C. Lamberg–Karlovsky, 268–79.

Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

———. 2002. Revisiting interaction spheres — social boundaries and technologies on inner and

outermost frontiers. IrAnt 37: 403–18.

Wulsin, F.R. 1932. Excavations at Tureng Tepe, near Asterabad. New York: Supplement to the

Bulletin of the American Institute for Persian Art and Archaeology 2/1.

———. 1938. The early cultures of Astarabad (Turang Tepe). In A survey of Persian Art, vol. 1,

ed. A.U. Pope and P. Ackerman, 163–7. London: Oxford Univ. Press.

Zagarell, A. 1982. The prehistory of the northeast Bakhtiyārī mountains, Iran: The rise of a

highland way of life. Wiesbaden: TAVO Beiheft 42.