Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq and the beginning of the Neolithic in north-east Iran.
Roustaei, Kourosh ; Mashkour, Marjan ; Tengberg, Margareta 等
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Introduction
As early as the 1960s, archaeological investigations in western
Iran--inspired by the work of Robert Braidwood from the Oriental
Institute, University of Chicago--showed the importance of the Zagros
region for understanding the Neolithic of the Near East (Braidwood 1961;
Figure 1). Recent archaeozoological and archaeobotanical research has
further revealed that this part of the Iranian plateau played an active
role in the domestication of animal and plant species and in the
Neolithic transition in the eastern part of the Fertile Crescent (Zeder
& Hesse 2000; Matthews et al. 2013; Riehl et al. 2013). By contrast,
the eastern part of the plateau has so far experienced only sporadic
archaeological investigation. In this region, the Neolithic period was
first identified during the 1960s, in the Gorgan plain, at the
multi-period sites of Turang Tappeh (Deshayes 1967) and Yarim Tappeh
(Crawford 1963), although these excavations mainly concerned later
periods. Prior to the Iranian Revolution of 1979, the only excavation
that focused specifically on the Neolithic of the region was conducted
by a Japanese team, in the 1970s, at the twin mounds of Tappeh Sang-e
Chakhmaq, near the town of Shahroud, on the southern flank of the Alborz
Mountains (Masuda 1973, 1974, 1976; Masuda et al. 2013). Neither of
these excavations was published in detail, and the nature and
characteristics of the regional Neolithic were not recognised by the
excavators; instead, the materials they recovered were ascribed to the
well-known Jeitun culture of southern Turkmenistan (e.g. Deshayes 1967;
Kohl 1984). Archaeological fieldwork during recent decades has brought
to light a wealth of new data that demonstrates both the nature of the
Neolithic of north-eastern Iran and its interaction with the Jeitun
culture (Roustaei 2014, forthcoming).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
The history of Neolithic studies in the Near East shows a
continuous shift in the areas targeted by researchers seeking to locate
the emergence of domestication. While in the 1960s and 1970s early
Neolithic sites of Iranian Zagros, such as Tepe Guran (e.g. Meldgaard et
al. 1963), Ali Kosh (Hole et al. 1969) and Ganj Darreh (e.g. Smith 1976)
were opening a promising window onto the initial stages of the Neolithic
way of life, a growing body of research in the Levant was accumulating
finer-grained data that put greater emphasis on the western flank of the
Fertile Crescent (e.g. Bar-Yosef & Meadows 1995). In the last two
decades, fascinating discoveries of very early Neolithic sites (tenth to
ninth millennium BC) in south-east Turkey and Syria have focused
attention on the importance of the upper reaches of the Euphrates and
Tigris in early domestication (Zeder 2011). Still more recent
discoveries of equally early Neolithic sites in the Iranian Zagros, such
as Chogha Golan and Sheikhi Abad, dating to the tenth to eighth
millennium BC (e.g. Matthews et al. 2013; Riehl et al. 2013), are,
however, once again raising the profile of the eastern flank of the
Fertile Crescent (Zagros Mountains) in the search for the beginnings of
Neolithic life. In short, the prevailing picture of the Neolithic
transition in south-west Asia suggests that early domestication began in
the Fertile Crescent and dispersed from there through other parts of
south-west Asia and Europe (e.g. Zeder 2008, 2011). This implies that
the Neolithic way of life was introduced into peripheral areas, such as
eastern Iran, from a core area' situated elsewhere.
In sharp contrast to the Fertile Crescent, the eastern regions of
the ancient Near East have to a large extent remained unexplored. East
of the Zagros, the number of early Neolithic sites decreases
substantially (Figure 1). In fact, in the vast area between Zagros and
the Indus Valley only two early Neolithic sites have been identified,
both dating to the seventh millennium BC: Sang-e Chakhmaq West Mound
(Iran) and Mehrgarh (Pakistan) (Jarrige 2008). They lie some 1500km
apart. In the case of Mehrgarh, the Neolithic transition of the Indus
Valley has been ascribed to both local developments and the introduction
of certain animal and plant species from other regions; by contrast,
there have been no serious attempts to situate the West Mound of Sang-e
Chakhmaq in the broader context of the Neolithic of the Near East.
The Japanese excavations
Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq lies on the plain of Bastam in the Alborz
foothills, 8km north of the town of Shahroud and about 400km east of
Tehran (Figure 1). The site comprises two adjacent mounds some 100m
apart, the West Mound and the East Mound. Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq was
discovered and extensively excavated during four seasons in the 1970s by
a team led by the late Seiichi Masuda of Tokyo University (Masuda 1973,
1976). The West Mound is circular in shape, covers c. 0.4ha and rises c.
3m above the surrounding ground. Here the Japanese team excavated a
480[m.sup.2] trench, reaching c. 3m below the surface at its deepest
point (Figure 2). The excavated sequence was divided into five
architectural layers (I-V from top to bottom). The plans of the
buildings remain almost the same throughout the occupational sequence.
Houses were constructed from sun-dried mud bricks and pise (hard-packed
earth or clay), some with finely plastered gypsum floors. The
plaster-floored rooms were usually divided into three parts
distinguished by different floor levels, and featured raised hearths and
mud-brick platforms (Masuda 1974: 23; Masuda et al. 2013: 216).
Only three small potsherds were found during the excavation of the
West Mound: two pieces from layer I and one from layer III. The upper
three layers were accordingly considered as pottery Neolithic, while the
two lowest layers, IV and V, were ascribed to the pre-pottery Neolithic
(Masuda 1984; Masuda et al. 2013). The 23 newly available AMS
(Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) dates, from the four lowermost of the
five layers (II-V) place the occupation of the West Mound in the
7200-6600 BC time range (Nakamura 2014). The samples analysed, which
lack details of their exact provenance, were charcoal collected during
the excavations of the 1970s.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The East Mound, oval in shape, covers an area of c. 1.9ha and rises
5m above the plain. It was excavated much more extensively than the West
Mound, with an excavated area of c. 1300[m.sup.2] divided between four
trenches (Figure 2). The excavations reached a depth of c. 6m and
revealed six occupation layers, defined on the basis of architectural
remains (I-VI, from top to bottom). The 14 newly available dates on
charcoal samples from the 1970s excavation programme indicate that
layers V-I of the East Mound span a period from c. 6200 to 5300 BC; no
date is available for the earliest layer (VI) (Nakamura 2014). The
architecture is characterised by mud-brick houses with irregular
quadrangular plans and large circular or ovoid hearths. Hand-made,
chaff-tempered, burnished painted pottery was common throughout the
sequence, which shows close similarities with the pottery of the Jeitun
culture of southern Turkmenistan (Masuda et al. 2013; Roustaei 2014).
The 2009 soundings
The Japanese excavations at Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq were not
accompanied by absolute dating or by faunal and floral analyses. Faunal
remains were extensively collected but remained unpublished until very
recently, and, furthermore, the 2014 report is very brief (Mashkour et
al. 2014). No systematic flotation was practised except on a small
sample of hand-retrieved grains (Fuller 2014). Until very recently
(Nakamura 2014) no reliable dating was available for the site. The
absence of information so vital for the characterisation of the
Neolithic transition east of Zagros led us to initiate a series of
surveys (e.g. Roustaei 2012a) and small-scale soundings at key sites in
the Shahroud area. Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq was especially important as
the only known Neolithic site in the whole of eastern Iran that had both
pre-pottery and pottery Neolithic occupation; this represents the
longest occupation sequence among the sites that have been identified in
the north-east region (Roustaei 2014). Our immediate goals were to
establish a sequence supported by absolute dates from pre-pottery to
pottery Neolithic in the region, and to obtain an overall impression of
the subsistence practices of Neolithic communities through examination
of remains of fauna and flora. It is with these objectives in mind that
one of the authors undertook stratigraphic soundings at both mounds in
2009 (Roustaei 2009).
The West Mound
In April 2009 a 2.5 x lm sounding was opened in the West Mound as
an extension to the northern edge of the earlier Japanese trench
(Figures 2 & 3). Virgin soil was reached at a depth of 2.43m below
the present ground surface. In the excavated sequence 49 contexts
(100-148 from top to bottom) were recognised and divided into four
phases (Figure 3) according to the formation process of archaeological
deposits rather than distinct changes in the material culture.
Architectural remains revealed in the West Mound sequence do not
add greatly to our current understanding based on the Japanese
excavations. The sequence included in situ eroded accumulations of
mud-brick or pise architecture interspersed with thick ash or charcoal
layers from possible hearths. Two small pieces of pottery found in Phase
3 confirm its use at the site; it is not possible to correlate this
pottery with that from the Japanese excavations (Masuda 1974) because
the stratigraphy was unpublished. The sherds are heavily chaff-tempered,
red-slipped, burnished, low-fired and rather hard.
The lithic industry of the West Mound is largely dominated by
unretouched bladelets and blades, with only a few backed bladelets,
drills, geometries, end scrapers and cores (Figure 4). Light brown
chert, grey flint and chalcedony were the favoured materials, but a few
items made of obsidian were also found. Obsidian, an exotic raw
material, was used from the beginning of the occupation and is present
throughout the sequence.
Most of the recovered small finds were objects made of stone or
baked and unbaked clay; few items were made from other materials such as
bone or shell. After lithics, clay objects were the most numerous small
find. A large number of the clay objects represented parts of clay
figurines, both anthropomorphic and zoomorphic, and in rare cases,
geometric 'tokens' (Figure 4).
A total of 18 archaeobotanical samples resulting from the
bucket-flotation of 1986 litres of sediment were recovered from ashy
layers throughout the sequence at the West Mound. Here, as at the East
Mound, the carbonised plant remains, generally well preserved, probably
represent the cleaning out of hearths and kilns. They should therefore
reflect, to a large extent, daily and domestic activities such as the
final stages of crop processing, food preparation and the use of
different types of fuel.
Domesticated cereals--wheat and barley--are present in samples from
the earliest levels at the West Mound (Table 1). Most of the crop
remains belong to at least two species of glume wheat: einkorn (Figure
5: A) and a second hulled wheat for which the morphology of the spikelet
base (Figure 5: C) is close to that of a tetraploid species, from either
emmer (T. turgidum) or Timopheev's wheat (T timopheevii). Einkorn
is so far identified from grain only, and the tetraploid wheat appears
to be predominant among both grain and chaff remains. Free-threshing
barley is attested from a single context.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
The samples are also rich in wild plants, both grasses and taxa
belonging to other families (Figure 5: D-F). Small-seeded legumes, of
the angular Astragalus-type, are recorded from most samples, as are the
characteristic nutlets from the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae). Many
species in this family grow in steppe environments and can also
withstand saline conditions. The sedges (Cyperaceae, Figure 5: E) are
common in wetter habitats, for example on periodically inundated soils.
Approximately 4321 faunal remains were recovered from the West
Mound trench (Table 2). The preservation of remains is very poor in both
mounds due to heavy fragmentation, and more than 90 per cent could not
be identified to the level of family or genus. Small ruminants, mostly
caprini, followed by gazelle (Gazella cf. subgutturosa) constitute the
bulk of the faunal assemblage (Figure 6). Horn cores, the most
diagnostic element for distinguishing wild and domestic forms, suggest
the presence of already domesticated forms of goat on the West Mound.
According to metric analyses of the goat remains most of the specimens
belong to a population of smaller-sized individuals than that of the
earlier Neolithic sites, such as Ganj Darreh (Zeder & Hesse 2000).
It was not possible to determine whether the sheep (Ovis) were fully
domesticated; that was also the case for cattle (Bos), which were
represented by only a few specimens. Carnivore remains, especially those
of canids (including domestic dog, wolf and jackal), were abundant.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
The East Mound
Two small soundings were opened at the East Mound. The main trench,
Trench 1 (2.5 x 1.5 m), was opened at the northern edge of the largest
of the four Japanese trenches. The second sounding, Trench 2 (1.5 x
1.5m) was located on the highest part of the site, c. 70m west of Trench
1 (Figure 2).
In Trench 1 (c. 4.7m in depth) 83 contexts (100-182 from top to
bottom) were recognised and grouped into five different phases (Figure
7). The excavated sequence consisted of intermittent layers of mud-brick
or pise architecture and their related accumulations. The structures
were constructed largely of mud bricks, which occurred in two forms: a
long, circular or oval section, pillow-shaped mud brick that measured
40-60 x 20-30 x 10cm and were present throughout the sequence, and a
rectangular mud brick with twin small impressions on the upper surface,
this type was restricted to the uppermost layers.
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 7 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 8 OMITTED]
In Phase 4, a horseshoe-shaped hearth was revealed (Figure 8). The
hearth, c. 2m in diameter, was constructed in pise, and a sequence of at
least six successive, delicately smoothed and burnished clay coatings
were visible within it. Hearths of this type are well known from Jeitun
culture sites in Turkmenistan (Masson & Sarianidi 1972, fig. 9).
Trench 2 was excavated to a depth of about 1 m. The excavated
deposits were divided into six contexts (200-205 from top to bottom)
representing a single phase. The main feature of the trench was a
0.5m-thick mud-brick wall running east-west across the trench (Figure
9). The mud bricks bear twin small depressions on their upper surfaces,
different to those found in Trench 1. In the south-west corner of the
trench, associated with the mud brick wall, the upper part of a human
cranium was unearthed, belonging to an intra-site burial.
The pottery of the East Mound is handmade. Wares and decorative
motifs change only slightly through time, and plant material alone was
used as temper. The colour of the paste varies from cream to orange,
with some minor variations (Figure 10). Almost all sherds bear a thick
clay slip, usually light brownish-cream, cream, orange, or buff-cream.
Nearly all sherds show various degrees of burnishing, usually in the
form of thin horizontal parallel bands. The common shapes of vessels are
deep bowls and jars, but other forms also occur, such as basins.
Painted pottery was abundant at the East Mound. All of the
recognised motifs are geometric with the most common consisting of
parallel horizontal, vertical and oblique lines, especially in the upper
layers. Wavy lines were predominant in the lower layers (Phases 5 and
4). Other common motifs include chequerboards, triangles and lozenges
rendered in various combinations. The favoured colours for painting were
brown, reddish-brown or red, with rare examples of black.
[FIGURE 9 OMITTED]
The lithic assemblage, akin to that of the West Mound, shows an
overwhelming majority of bladelets and blades, followed, in much lower
numbers, by flakes, drills, end scrapers, cores and geometries (Figure
11). As at the West Mound, the materials used were a light-brown chert
and, to a lesser degree, grey flint. No obsidian was found on the East
Mound but new raw materials occurred for the first time: turquoise,
alabaster and shale. In addition, more than 100 fragments of baked or
unbaked clay objects were found and over 200 small stone beads. The
latter were generally made of grey stone, probably shale, with outer
diameters hardly exceeding 6mm. There are rare examples of marble,
turquoise and wood; the latter was found in a charred state. A few beads
were made of a bivalve shell, Didacna sp., (Figure 11), that originated
in the Caspian Sea. More than 30 shell fragments were found in Trench 1,
whereas they were rare at the West Mound. In the East Mound shell
remains were concentrated in the lowermost contexts (182-173) of Phase
5; some were probably used as pendants. Needles and awls were common
among the bone objects.
Other artefacts included seven intact or broken spindle whorls made
of pottery and a foliated stone, probably shale, bearing witness to the
presence of local activities of spinning and weaving (Figure 11: 1).
Squat cylinders of terracotta with no visible impurities in the clay
were also recorded (Figure 11: 4). Surprisingly, no copper artefacts
were found during the 2009 soundings, although some pieces were reported
from the Japanese excavations (see Masuda 1976, fig. 7: 11, 12).
At the East Mound, 41 flotation samples corresponding to 3232
litres of sediment were collected. Hulled tetraploid wheat continues to
dominate the plant record, but a new wheat type appeared in the samples
from this mound: free-threshing or naked wheat represented by both grain
and chaff remains (Table 1). While the grain only allows a determination
to the level of a broad category of free-threshing wheats (Triticum
aestivum/durum), the morphology of the rachis segments is characteristic
of hexaploid bread wheat (T. aestivum). Einkorn is no longer attested
and, as at the West Mound, barley appears only sporadically. The
proportion of wild plant remains is considerably lower than in earlier
periods.
[FIGURE 10 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 11 OMITTED]
Approximately 5074 faunal remains were recovered from both trenches
at the East Mound (Table 2). As at the West Mound, small ruminants are
dominant with a majority of domestic forms, although wild caprines are
still present in the assemblage. Here again, as at the West Mound, goats
outnumber sheep. The kill-off pattern of goats, based on tooth wear,
indicates the high consumption of meat from animals slaughtered between
six months and two years old (Payne 1973; Vigne & Helmer 2007). Milk
production could not be clearly evidenced from the East Mound faunal
assemblage.
The increased frequency of cattle (Bos) remains on the East Mound
is a clear indication of its incorporation into the domestic package by
this stage, and its domesticated status is supported by morphological
evidence; these animals are significantly smaller than the aurochs in
earlier Near Eastern assemblages. Red deer (Cervus elaphus) and onager
(Equus hemionus) are present among the large hunted species, besides the
gazelle (Figure 6).
Dating
In order to contextualise the findings from Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq,
a radiocarbon dating program was run on 13 samples of charred wood
pieces from different contexts of both mounds. The identified charcoal
fragments belonged to various tree species such as Salix/Poplus,
Juniperus and Tamarix. The AMS [sup.14]C dating was carried out at the
[sup.14]CHRONO Centre, Queens University, Belfast (Table 3, Figure 12).
The dates from the West Mound trench are coherent and clearly
indicate that that mound was formed during a relatively short period of
time; a maximum of 300 years according to the seven radiocarbon dates.
In Trench 1 in the East Mound, the 4.7m stratigraphic sequence seems to
have formed within a similar time span. The single date from Trench 2
(East Mound) is much younger than the uppermost level of Trench 1; they
are separated chronologically by an interval of at least 300 years, but
this does not necessarily mean a real temporal gap in the cultural
sequence as the two trenches are some 70m apart.
[FIGURE 12 OMITTED]
In general, the settlement at the West Mound was founded around c.
7000 BC and lasted for about 300 years, until around 6700 BC. After a
chronological gap of possibly 500 years the settlement of the East Mound
was established in c. 6200-6100 BC, which lasted for nearly 1000 years
until around 5300 BC.
Concluding remarks
So far, Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq is the only known Neolithic site
east of Zagros Mountains with both pre-pottery (at the West Mound) and
pottery Neolithic (at the East Mound) components spanning an
occupational sequence of 1500 years. As absolute dating shows (Table 3;
see also Nakamura 2014), there is a c. 500 year gap between the final
settlement of the West Mound and the earliest occupation of the East
Mound. This gap can be considered responsible for differences between
the two settlements in the architecture, in certain of the small finds
and in the presence of pottery. Nevertheless, some aspects of the
material culture, specifically the lithic assemblage, remain unchanged
from the West Mound to the East Mound, as do the general spectra of
plants and animals exploited (see below). In the absence of
contradictory evidence, we may suppose that the established pottery
Neolithic represented at the East Mound, which is the type-site for the
Neolithic of north-east Iran, is the direct successor to a preceding
culture that had already flourished at the West Mound.
The West Mound was established in the late eighth millennium BC,
probably as a permanent agro-pastoral village with well-built mud-brick
structures furnished mostly with gypsum floors, a technique frequently
used in the pre-pottery Neolithic B phase (PPNB) in the Levant (cf.
Kingery et al. 1988). The inhabitants of the site practised wheat and
barley cultivation and goat herding. Insufficient data prevents us being
confident about whether domesticated sheep or cattle were part of their
subsistence base. A few hundred years later, however, these livestock
were firmly incorporated in the Neolithic subsistence pattern of the
East Mound, as was free-threshing wheat. The agro-pastoral settlement of
the West Mound has no apparent known predecessor in north-east Iran
(Roustaei 2014), and its appearance raises the question of how the
Neolithic way of life was introduced into the region. Interpreting the
West Mound in the wider geographic context of south-west Asia is a
difficult task, as the nearest relevant sites are located some 700-800km
to the west in the Central Zagros (Figure 1). Nevertheless, given that
almost no part of the north east of Iran has been intensively surveyed,
it is entirely possible that sites contemporary with or earlier than the
West Mound are yet to be found.
Agriculture was practised at Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq from the
earliest phases and it is likely that the crop species (wheat and
barley) were introduced in an already domesticated form from elsewhere.
As is the case at many other early Neolithic sites in the Near East, the
crop assemblage is based on the cultivation of hulled wheat species,
among which a tetraploid emmer-like type seems to dominate throughout
the sequence. Einkorn is rarely attested so far and seems to be a minor
crop here, in contrast to, for example, Jeitun in southern Turkmenistan
where it is more common (Charles & Bogaard 2010). In the Shahroud
plain, einkorn seems to drop out of the crop assemblage in the pottery
Neolithic--it is not recorded for this period at the East Mound or at
later sites in the same area (see Roustaei 2014). From the pottery
Neolithic free-threshing wheat appears; this represents an early
occurrence in a region where it might have originated. Indeed, the
Sharoud plain, and north-east Iran in general, is situated within the
range of distribution of Aegilops tauschii, which, by crossing with a
cultivated tetraploid wheat, was the origin of the hexaploid wheat
species (Zohary et al. 2012: 47-51). Barley is present throughout the
chronological sequence considered here but never seems to constitute a
major crop.
So far, no cultivated pulses, such as lentils, peas or vetches,
have been recorded; and neither has flax. In this respect, the situation
at Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq is different from many other Neolithic
villages (in the Near East or Europe) where pulses and fibre crops were
part of early agricultural economies. On the other hand, this situation
is similar to that at Jeitun where cereals also seem to have constituted
the only cultivated crops (Charles & Bogaard 2010). It is thus
possible that early subsistence economies in north-east Iran and
southern Central Asia relied only on the cultivation of cereals,
accompanied by animal husbandry.
The faunal analysis of the West Mound and East Mound reveals no
major evolution in species composition or husbandry practices during the
stratigraphic sequence of either site. Slight changes between the two
mounds are visible and expressed by the increase of sheep (Ovis) and
cattle (Bos) ratios, and by the decrease of carnivores and mesofauna in
the East Mound. Despite the small size of the identified bones in the
2009 faunal assemblage, the presence of species from different
ecological ecotones suggests the exploitation of a wide territory around
the site. The arid steppe was the closest environment and is evidenced
by the presence of gazelle and onager, while wooded areas were probably
the source of red deer, and rocky and piedmont environments the source
of wild sheep and goat.
One of the most important contributions of this study is the
determination of the domesticated status of goat, sheep and cattle: the
three pivotal species in the 'Neolithic package'. The
assemblage of Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq indicates that goat was already
domesticated at the time of the West Mound occupation, but there is no
clear indication for the presence of domestic sheep or cattle at that
stage. By the time the East Mound was occupied, both are present in
their domesticated state. How and when domesticated goat reached
north-east Iran is obviously a key question to be explored, as is the
origin of the complex architecture on the West Mound. Also worthy of
note is the absence of evidence for domestic pig from both sites.
Some items excavated at Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq point to distant
contacts. Obsidian, relatively frequent in the lower layers at the West
Mound but absent from the East Mound, is of exogenous origin. Recent
analyses on two pieces from our excavation show an origin in the eastern
Anatolian Plateau (work in progress with B. Gratuze). In addition to
obsidian, rare items of turquoise and copper were found at the site. The
nearest potential source of copper is some 100km to the south, on the
northern fringe of Dasht-e Kavir desert, and for turquoise some 300km to
the east, near Neishabour (Roustaei 2012b).
Having a secure and sequential series of [sup.14]C dates for both
mounds of Tappeh Sange Chakhmaq now enables us to propose a solid
framework for the earliest stages of the Neolithic way of life on the
north-eastern Iranian Plateau, including Kopet Dagh. The detailed
archaezoological and archaeobotanical studies now being undertaken will
enhance our understanding of the exploitation of animals and plants by
early settlers in this remote part of the ancient Near East (cf. Tosi
1973-1974). The massive amounts of charred remains of plants recovered
and briefly reported here will be of utmost importance in studies of
early agriculture on the Iranian Plateau.
doi: 10.15184/aqy.2015.26
Acknowledgements
Radiocarbon dating was supported by UMR 7209-CNRS/MNHN and the PPF
Biodiversite actuelle et fossile. We would also like to thank the
anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
References
BAR-YOSEF, O. & R. Meadows. 1995. The origins of agriculture in
the Near East, in T.D. Price & A.G. Gebauer (ed.) Last hunters-first
farmers: new perspectives on the prehistoric transition to agriculture:
39-94. Santa Fe (NM): School for American Research.
BRAIDWOOD, R.J. 1961. The Iranian prehistoric project 1959-60.
Iranica Antiqua 1: 3-7.
CHARLES, M. & A. BOGAARD. 2010. Charred plant macro-remains
from Jeitun: implications for early cultivation and herding practices in
Western Central Asia, in D.R. Harris (ed.) Origins of agriculture in
western Central Asia: an environmental-archaeological study. 150-65.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology.
CRAWFORD, V. 1963. Beside the Kara-Su. Bulletin of the Metropolitan
Museum of Art 22: 263-73.
DESHAYES, J. 1967. Ceramiques peintes de Tureng Tepe. Iran 5:
123-31.
FULLER, D. 2014. Charred remains from Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq and a
consideration of early wheat diversity on the eastern margins of the
Fertile Crescent, in A. Tsuneki (ed.) The first farming village in
northeast Iran and Turan: Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq and beyond, February
10-11, 2014 (Programme and Abstracts): 33-34. Tsukuba: University of
Tsukuba.
HOLE, F., K.V. FLANNERY & J.A. NEELY. 1969. Prehistory and
human ecology of the Deh Luran plain: an early village sequence from
Khuzistan, Iran (Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology 1). Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
JARRIGE, J.-F. 2008. Mehrgarh Neolithic. Pragdhara 18: 135-54.
KINGERY, D., P.B. VANDIVER & M. PRICKETT. 1988. The beginnings
of pyrotechnology, part II: production and use of lime and gypsum
plaster in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Near East. Journal of Field
Archaeology 15: 219-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/009346988791974501
KOHL, P. 1984. Central Asia: Palaeolithic beginnings to the Iron
Age. Paris: Editions Recherchesur les Civilasions, Synthese 14.
MASHKOUR, M., J.-D. VIGNE, A. MOHASEB, S. BREHARD, C. BEMILI, W.
REYNOLDS, J. DAUJAT, K. DEBUE & A. TSUNEKI. 2014. Neolithisation of
eastern Iran: new insights through the study of the faunal remains of
Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq, in A. Tsuneki (ed.) The firstfarming village in
northeast Iran and Turan: Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq and beyond, February
10-11, 2014 (Programme and Abstracts): 27-32. Tsukuba: University of
Tsukuba.
MASSON, V.M. & V.I. SARIANIDI. 1972. Central Asia: Turkmenia
before the Achaemenids. Translated by Ruth Drawings. London: Thames
& Hudson.
MASUDA, S. 1973. Excavations at Tappe Sang-e Cagmaq, in F.
Bagherzadeh (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st annual symposium of
archaeological research in Iran, 1972: 1-5. Tehran: Iranian Center for
Archaeological Research.
--1974. Excavations at Tappeh Sang-e Cagmaq, in F. Bagherzadeh
(ed.) Proceedings of the 2nd annual symposium of archaeological research
in Iran, 1973: 23-33. Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological
Research.
--1976. Report of the archaeological investigations at Sahrud,
1975, in F. Bagherzadeh (ed.) Proceedings of the 4th annual symposium on
archaeological research in Iran: 63-70. Tehran: Iranian Center for
Archaeological Research.
--1984. Excavation at Tappeh Sang-e Caxmaq. Archivfur
Orientforschung 31: 209-12.
MASUDA, S., T. GOTO, T. IWAZAKI, H. KAMURA, S. FUROSATO, J. IKEDA,
A. TAGAYA, M. MINAMI & A. TSUNEKI. 2013. Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq:
investigatsions of a Neolithic site in northeastern Iran (translated by
D. Gainty J. Sather), in R. Matthews and H. Fazeli Nashli (ed.) The
neolithisation of Iran: the formation of new societies: 201-40. Oxford:
Oxbow Books.
MATTHEWS, R., W. MATTHEWS & Y. MOHAMMADIFAR. 2013. The earliest
Neolithic of Iran: 2008 excavations at Sheik-e Abad and Jani (Central
Zagros Archaeological Project 1). Oxford: Oxbow Books.
MELDGAARD, J., P. MORTENSEN & H. THRANE. 1963. Excavations at
Tappeh Guran. Acta Archaeological 34: 97-133.
NAKAMURA, T. 2014. Radiocarbon dating of charcoal remains excavated
from Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq, in A. Tsuneki (ed.) The first farming
village in northeast Iran and Turan: Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq and beyond,
February 10-11, 2014 (Programme and Abstracts): 9-12. Tsukuba:
University of Tsukuba.
PAYNE, S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles
from Asvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23: 281-303.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3642347
RIEHL, S., M. ZEIDI & N.J. CONARD. 2013. Emergence of
agriculture in the foothills of the Zagros mountains of Iran. Science
341: 63-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science. 1236743
ROUSTAEI, K. 2009. Preliminary report on the stratigraphic
soundings at Sang-e Chakhmaq Tappeh. Report prepared for the Iranian
Center for Archaeological Research (in Persian).
--2012a. Archaeological survey of the Sahroud area, northeast Iran:
a landscape approach. Archaologische Mitteilungenaus Iran und Turan,
Band 44: 191-219.
--2012b. Archaeo-metallurgical reconnaissance of ancient mines and
slag sites on the northern edge of the Dasht-e Kavir Desert, Iran.
Iranica Antiqua 47: 351-98.
--2014. The Neolithisation of northeastern Iranian plateau.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Tarbiat Modares University (in Persian).
--Forthcoming. An emerging picture of the Neolithic of northeast
Iran. Iranica Antiqua 51.
SMITH, P.E.L. 1976. Reflections on four seasons of excavations at
Tappeh Ganj Darreh, in F. Bagherzadeh (ed.) Proceedings of the 4th
annual symposium on archaeological research in Iran: 11-22. Tehran:
Iranian Center for Archaeological Research.
TOSI, M. 1973-1974. The northeastern frontier of the Ancient Near
East. Mesopotamia 8-9: 21-76.
VIGNE, J.-D. & D. HELMER. 2007. Was milk a 'secondary
product' in the Old World neolithisation process? Its role in the
domestication of cattle, sheep and goats. Anthropozoologica 42: 9-40.
ZEDER, M. 2008. Domestication and early agriculture in the
Mediterranean basin: origins, diffusion, and impact. Proceedings of
National Academy of Sciences 103:11597-604.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0801317105
--2011. The origins of agriculture in the Near East. Current
Anthropology 52 (supplement 4): 221-35.
ZEDER, M.A. & B. HESSE. 2000. The initial domestication of
goats (Capra hircus) in the Zagros mountains 10,000 years ago. Science
287: 2254-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.287.5461.2254
ZOHARY, D., M. HOPF & E. WEISS. 2012. Domestication of plants
in the Old World. The origin and spread of domesticated plants in
south-west Asia, Europe and the Mediterranean basin. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Received: 30 June 2014; Accepted: 28 August 2014; Revised: 25
November 2014
Kourosh Roustaei (1), Marjan Mashkour (2) & Margareta Tengberg
(2)
(1) Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, Cultural Heritage
and Tourism Research Centre, 1136917111 Tehran, Iran (Email:
kouroshroustaei@gmail.com)
(2) Archeozoologie, Archeobotanique (UMR 7209), Sorbonne
Universites, AINHM, UPAIC, CURS; CP56, 55 rue Buffon 75005 Paris, France
(Email: mashkour@mnhn.fr; tengberg@mnhn.fr)
Table 1. Distribution of archaeobotanical
remains in the West Mound and East Mound.
West Mound
Taxa 148 147 146
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
West Mound
Taxa 136 129 116
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
East Mound
Context
Taxa 107 133 125
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
East Mound
Context
Taxa 123 122 120
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
East Mound
Context
Taxa 113 108 107
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
East Mound
Context
Taxa 105 103
Barley Hulled barley Hordeum
vulgare
Naked barley H. vulgare
var. nudum
Barley, H. vulgare
undetermined
Hulled Barley, rachis H. vulgare
Emmer-type Triticum cf.
hulled wheat dicoccum
Wheat Einkorn Triticum
monococcum
Hulled wheat Triticum
Terraploid Iriticum
hulled wheat, turgidum/
spikelet base timophevii
Hulled wheat, Triticum
spikelet base
Free- Free-threshing Triticum
threshing wheat aestivuml
durum
Wheat Free-threshing Triticum cf.
wheat, rachis aestivum
segment
Undeterminate Wheat, Triticum spp.
undetermined
Cereals Cereals, Cerealia
undetermined
Cereals, Cerealia
rachis
segments
Wild Goat grass Aegilops
grasses
Goat grass, Aegilops
spikelet base
Brome grass Bromus
Eremopyrum
Grass Type 1 Poaceae spp.
Grasses undet. Poaceae spp.
Grasses Poaceae spp.
undet., rachis
Wild pulses Astragalus- Astragalus
type
Wild pulses Fabaceae
Diverse Mustard family Brassicaceae
wild
plants Goosefoot Chenopodiaceae
family
Sedges Cyperaceae
Plantago
Thymelaea
Key:
N<10
N=10-100
N>100
Table 2. The faunal spectra for the West Mound and East Mound.
NISP Weight (g)
West East West East
Number of remains Mound Mound Total Mound Mound Total
Capra 16 37 53 79 471 550
Ovis 2 25 27 12 274 286
Caprine 111 196 307 277.5 1147 1424.5
Wild caprine 0 10 10 0 104.3 104.3
Bos 1 7 8 35 1113 1148
Gazella sugutturosa 15 35 50 46 109.5 155.5
Cervus elaphus 1 5 6 3 109 112
Sus scrofa scrofa 0 1 1 0 1 1
Equus hemionus 0 2 2 0 87 87
Subtotal Herbivores 146 318 464 452.5 3415.8 3868.3
Canis sp. 4 8 12 7 11 18
Vulpes sp. 1 1 2 0.5 5 5.5
Martes foina 10 0 10 30 0 30
Carnivore cf. 10 0 10 5.2 0 5.2
Mustela
Carnivore 0 4 4 0 2 2
Lepus europaeus 20 9 29 5.2 5 10.2
Testudo graeca 3 2 5 3 1.3 4.3
Mesofaune 59 33 92 45.5 32.3 77.8
Subtotal Carnivora 107 57 164 96.4 56.6 153
and Mesofauna
Small ruminant 635 1702 2337 1161.4 3934.3 5095.7
Medium mammal 74 255 329 75.1 396.2 471.3
Large mammal 4 12 16 43 141 184
Unidentified 3355 2730 6085 1583 2856.6 4439.6
Subtotal 4068 4699 8767 2862.5 7328.1 10190.6
Unidentified
bones
Total 4321 5074 9395 3411.4 10800.5 14211.9
Table 3. Radiocarbon dates for West and
East Mounds at Tappeh Sang-e Chakhmaq.
Trench Radiocarbon
Site Lab code no. Phase Context age (BP)
East UBA-13479 2 -- 204 6543 [+ or -] 27
Mound UBA-13480 1 1 108 7109 [+ or -] 44
UBA-13555 1 1 123 7297 [+ or -] 35
UBA-13556 1 2 131 7028 [+ or -] 30
UBA-13557 1 4 160 7041 [+ or -] 31
UBA-13558 1 5 182 7271 [+ or -] 30
West UBA-13472 1 1 106 7983 [+ or -] 26
Mound UBA-13473 1 1 112 8005 [+ or -] 27
UBA-13474 1 2 116 8009 [+ or -] 27
UBA-13475 1 3 129 8015 [+ or -] 27
UBA-13476 1 3 134 8026 [+ or -] 29
UBA-13477 1 4 141 8067 [+ or -] 32
UBA-13478 1 4 147 8031 [+ or -] 31
Calibrated Calibrated
2[sigma] 2[sigma]
age range age range
Site Lab code (BP) (BC)
East UBA-13479 7423-7499 5550-5474
Mound UBA-13480 7848-8009 6060-5899
UBA-13555 8024-8176 6227-6075
UBA-13556 7794-7936 5987-5845
UBA-13557 7953-7947 5998-5846
UBA-13558 8016-8166 6217-6067
West UBA-13472 8726-8995 7046-6777
Mound UBA-13473 8774-9001 7052-6825
UBA-13474 8847-9006 7057-6825
UBA-13475 8776-9007 7058-6827
UBA-13476 8776-9012 7063-6827
UBA-13477 8780-9089 7140-6831
UBA-13478 8776-9015 7066-6827
