Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Jiroft Culture Stepped Pyramid Ziggurats c. 2500BC, Iran


Thanos5150

Recommended Posts

The Ubaid of greater Mesopotamia had been building monumental mud brick stepped platforms as early as c. 5,000BC which it is said these structures were the inspiration for later ziggurats. The oldest ziggurats are believed to have been built c. 3000BC in Sialk, Elam (Iran):

tepe-sialk.jpg

sialk2.jpg

And Uruk, Mesopotamia (Iraq):

8aad5f9e4843439f25efe0c06224b71d.jpg

And yet despite this long tradition it is often claimed ziggurats did not become common place until after the ziggurat of Ur c. 2100BC:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTCy4tuqPnQ4S4BFd9a-4l

The Jiroft culture of Iran's cultural peak usually dated from 2500-2200BC though artifacts have been found at Jiroft sites dating back to 4000BC. In general the Jiroft appear to date back to c. 3000BC. Unfortunately the Jiroft culture is probably most well known in alt history circles for their prolific curious stone "handbags":

1eea33838ca38b19f37800ed723b755d--ancien

untitled5.png?w=750

hqdefault.jpg

More photos HERE.

Depicted on some of these handbags and objects, however, are clearly stepped pyramid/ziggurats:

20c365605b6ee817ba1a9802d3a8acb5.jpg

17ba54cb3433e2d006ad59595e7ff08f.jpg

b5c1385bfb63f4a91117ff98bfb1becf.jpg

In the Jiroft areas, 2 massive mounds were identified as archeological sites, Konar Sandal A and Konar Sandal B, with A being a ziggurat and B a large fortress of some kind. RCD gave a date range of 2880 to 2200BC.

konar-sandal-site.jpg

The Jiroft culture is a relatively recent discovery (2000) in which mass looting of the sites occurred before the authorities were tipped off and archaeological excavations began. Read HERE.

Dating of these sites has been contentious, but again by and large it appears the Jiroft culture dates back to c. 3000BC with a peak of 2500-2200BC. Jiroft pottery in context with some of the stone objects found in situ, however, has been found identical to other sites dated to c. 2800BC. It would seem the Iranians want this site to be a old as possible and Western scholars want it to be younger. My sense is the most reliable dating is c.2500BC. Again, while it is commonly said that ziggurats did not appear until Ur c. 2100BC, Uruk and Sailk clearly show this is not the case, which the sites and artifacts of the Jiroft culture an intriguing intermediary.   

More interesting reading: Jiroft and the Aratta Kingdom. The Jiroft as Arrata theory is also hotly debated, but personally it seems like a leading candidate at the very least.

Lee Anderson

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The classic Mesopotamian "Master of Beasts" motif:

m9zENc1z_400x400.jpg

As an aside, some may recall this Mesopotamian iconography among others is also found in Egypt. The famed Gebel el-Arak Knife dated to Naqada II c.3500-3200BC:

wiki_Gebel_el-Arak_Knife.jpg

Lots of interesting stuff going on here. Mesopotamian Master of Beasts motif with a Sumerian man no less. Also several boats related to the subjugation of presumably foreign prisoners implying a journey over open water was required. Dogs. 

Another example is found on the oldest tomb painting in Egypt, the Naqada II tomb 100 at Hierakonpolis:

OGhFvRDgE72zTXdW2M3y0g.png

 Hierakonpolis_Tomb_100_Master_of_animals

Tomb 100 is also the oldest tomb lined with mud brick whose walls were covered with plaster as well. 

Also a lot of stuff going on here with interpretations divided, namely does this naval scenes depict Mesopotamian interaction or not. Tomb 100 is a thread unto itself. 

For those of you who only care about woo you'll be happy to know the tomb 100 mural also depicts Atlantis: 

Earth_Tribes_Map.jpg

 Yayy. 

 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_d'Accoddi

Monte d'Accoddi is a Neolithic archaeological site in northern Sardinia, located in the territory of Sassari. The site consists of a massive raised stone platform thought to have been an altar. It was constructed by the Ozieri culture or earlier, with the oldest parts dated to around 4,000–3,650 BC.

The initial Ozieri structure was abandoned or destroyed around 3000 BC, with traces of fire found in the archeological evidence.[4] Around 2800 BC the remains of the original structure were completely covered with a layered mixture of earth and stone, and large blocks of limestone were then applied to establish a second platform, truncated by a step pyramid (36 m × 29 m, about 10 m in height), accessible by means of a second ramp, 42 m long, built over the older one.[4] This second temple resembles contemporary Mesopotamian ziggurats, and is attributed to the Abealzu-Filigosa culture.

(...)

Based on the evidence of architecture, ritual deposits and diagnostic pottery, G. and M. Webster argued, in 2017 & 2019, for the monument's status as a product of a migration event (probably exilic) initiated from Mesopotamia, during the first half of the 4th millennium B.C.E.

---

https://www.203challenges.com/monte-daccoddi-where-in-italy-youll-feel-like-youre-in-mesopotamia/

 

Why is Monte D’Accoddi so unusual, and where does Mesopotamia fit into the whole story?

The answer is simple: nowhere else in Italy or the whole Mediterranean has a similar altar been discovered. In terms of architecture, its closest relatives are ancient Sumerian temples called ziggurats (dating back to around 3000 BC). To date, 32 ziggurats have been discovered in Iran and Iraq, revealing with them some of the world’s oldest known scripts.

Archaeologists are perplexed at how such a similarity can be observed in two cultures that have never been connected in any way (at least as far historians know), especially in their cults and temple-building.

Sassari-Monte-dAccoddi-1-General-plan-of

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're like a National Geographic of the forum. I'm surprised there isn't interest in what you've posted. 

I have a question on this photo

tepe-sialk.jpg

Is there a ziggurat buried under that? If so, have you come across an explanation for how it was buried? I'm not familiar with the climate so don't know if winds buried it with what. Sand?

Now I know the handbags aren't handbags. They didn't hold anything and were made of stone and I'm wondering why they were ever called handbags.    I think it's interesting that the tablets with handles for the most part have constellations.

m9zENc1z_400x400.jpg

Scorpio and Leo? It's not a lion and looks to be a cheetah, leopard or jaguar.  I'm beginning to think they had some kind of astronomical value.

Edited by Infin8tee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Infin8tee said:

You're like a National Geographic of the forum. I'm surprised there isn't interest in what you've posted. 

Yeah, you'd think that. Ironically, fringe or ortho, while both profess to have such an interest in history neither seem to apply this interest beyond either promoting or debunking the fringe perspective. 
 

Quote

 

I have a question on this photo

tepe-sialk.jpg

Is there a ziggurat buried under that? If so, have you come across an explanation for how it was buried? I'm not familiar with the climate so don't know if winds buried it with what. Sand?

 

The full name of the site is "Tepe Sialk". Tepe is another word for "Tell" which means hill. You will find one of these attached to most Near East archeological sites because in these arid climates dirt accumulates and over time creating mounds which can get quite large i.e. hills. Anyhoo, I am not sure how much of the tell is left if any with most if not all of what is seen the remains of the mud brick. 

kc_tepesialk3.JPG 

Large sections of the exterior become eroded making it at a glance look natural. 

Quote

 

Now I know the handbags aren't handbags. They didn't hold anything and were made of stone and I'm wondering why they were ever called handbags.   I think it's interesting that the tablets with handles for the most part have constellations.

m9zENc1z_400x400.jpg

Scorpio and Leo? It's not a lion and looks to be a cheetah, leopard or jaguar.  I'm beginning to think they had some kind of astronomical value.

 

An interesting thought. There is a link in the OP to many different examples-as a group is this what you see? 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Abramelin said:

[snip]

The OP is about ziggurats in Iran and the historical implications which instead of actually discussing the topic your response is to try and create your own OP by copy and pasting a previous post  about Monte d'Accoddi. What is your point? Obviously this interests you, it was discussed at some length in that thread, but if you want this to be a topic why not just start your own thread? You even said yourself: "Ancient Sardinia is worth a thread on itself." which I agreed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Yeah, you'd think that. Ironically, fringe or ortho, while both profess to have such an interest in history neither seem to apply this interest beyond either promoting or debunking the fringe perspective. 

 

I would add that there seems to be a certain deliberate exclusion in archaeology in that ancient Egypt was the first 'advanced' society to which nothing else compares, leaving Mesopotamia in the dust.  Might have something to do with Egypt being the skeleton used to date all of the ancient world, which has nothing to do with forum posters other than an attitude of the Egyptologists are the elite. 

Quote

The full name of the site is "Tepe Sialk". Tepe is another word for "Tell" which means hill. You will find one of these attached to most Near East archeological sites because in these arid climates dirt accumulates and over time creating mounds which can get quite large i.e. hills. Anyhoo, I am not sure how much of the tell is left if any with most if not all of what is seen the remains of the mud brick. 

Thanks for the info. I tried to find what was inside and it's making me crazy. Apparently there's nothing inside? 

Quote

An interesting thought. There is a link in the OP to many different examples-as a group is this what you see? 

For the most part I found the same animals on many; snake, cat, bull, scorpion. I always have an eye turned to constellations in ancient history especially when it comes to Mesopotamia where the first records of constellations have been found in Sumeria. If the Egyptologists would learn basic astronomy they might see Sagittarius (the archer) facing  Scorpio (as he is in the sky) on the macehead instead of a King Scorpion. But everything is about kings to the archaeologists. 

Scorpion | Ancient Egypt Online

But I was wrong about the dots and it being a cheetah or some such cat. The dots show up everywhere.

London and Paris Markets Fooded with Looted Iranian Antiquities - CAIS  Archaeological & Cultural News of Iran©

There are some basic geometric designs and I found one blank handbag. I compared the stone handbags to the reliefs and they're not quite the same.  I didn't see any reliefs with a design on the handbag, they're all blank. But there must be some connection as the shape is too similar. 

How Handbags Have Changed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

The OP is about ziggurats in Iran and the historical implications which instead of actually discussing the topic your response is to try and create your own OP by copy and pasting a previous post  about Monte d'Accoddi. What is your point? Obviously this interests you, it was discussed at some length in that thread, but if you want this to be a topic why not just start your own thread? You even said yourself: "Ancient Sardinia is worth a thread on itself." which I agreed. 

Relax.

I just wanted to show that maybe those who created those ziggurats went west, and arrived in Sardinia (and I don't think it was the other way round).

The ancient Sardinians were very probably the šrdn in Egyptian, one of the Sea Peoples. Now it happens that šarru dannu means something like 'mighty kings' in Assyrian.

Edited by Abramelin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Infin8tee said:

I would add that there seems to be a certain deliberate exclusion in archaeology in that ancient Egypt was the first 'advanced' society to which nothing else compares, leaving Mesopotamia in the dust. 

...? 

Quote

Might have something to do with Egypt being the skeleton used to date all of the ancient world, which has nothing to do with forum posters other than an attitude of the Egyptologists are the elite. 

Not sure about that, but true Egypt is the lynch pin which ironically the dating of Mesopotamia was established by the dating of Mesopotamian artifacts found in Naqada II/III Egypt. And all that based on the bogus use of the Sothic Cycle. 

15 hours ago, Infin8tee said:

Thanks for the info. I tried to find what was inside and it's making me crazy. Apparently there's nothing inside? 

Chocolaty nougat. 

Have to leave for the day. Get back to the rest later. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done a bit of reading concerning Jiroft, and the next is an interesting link with many more photo's :

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/history-magazine/article/jiroft-culture-iran-lost-civilzation

 

What interested me most, aside of the beautiful artifacts, were the tablets with the unknown script.

But...

"Some Iranian archeologists believe the discovered inscription is the most ancient script found so far, predating these others, and that the Elamite written language originated in Jiroft, where the writing system developed first and was then spread across the country.[5] Other scholars[6] have called the authenticity of the cyphers into question, suggesting they may be examples of several modern forgeries in circulation since the earlier looting[7] at the site."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture

 

"Not a minor event to be documented in the modern history of “Jiroft” is that, among both the artifacts confiscated within Iran itself and those surfacing and sold abroad, a number are most probably modern forgeries (Muscarella, 2001 [2005], pp. 181-89). In some cases this is recognized by other scholars of ancient Iranian cultures (e.g., Perrot and Madjidzadeh, 2006, pp. 147, 149). Some other objects seem questionable and raise doubts in our minds about their actual birth dates (Muscarella, 2001 [2005], pp. 189-97). Moreover, “Jiroft” forgeries continue to surface among the more recent examples confiscated within Iran itself, and on the Internet, as well as in dealers’ possession abroad."

https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jiroft-iii-general-survey-of-excavations

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

..? 

 

Nevermind. It's my personal opinion based on my research and really has nothing to do with the OP.

Quote

Not sure about that, but true Egypt is the lynch pin which ironically the dating of Mesopotamia was established by the dating of Mesopotamian artifacts found in Naqada II/III Egypt. And all that based on the bogus use of the Sothic Cycle.

The entire dating process was established in the 1800's. And it's worse than the Sothic Cycle. The middle east is dated according to how it relates to Egypt, unless C14 is used, which is rarely.

Felix Hoflmayer "Radiocarbon Dating and Egyptian Chronology -- From the "Curve of Knowns" to Bayesian Modeling"  2016

https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199935413-e-64

"For a long time, the Egyptian historical chronology was the sole chronological reference system not only for the Nile Valley itself but also for the Bronze and Iron Age eastern Mediterranean basin. It was indeed the backbone of history, especially during the second and much of the first millennium BC.  Before the advent of radiocarbon dating, absolute dates for the local relative chronological sequence of the southern and central Levant (modern-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, and Lebanon) were heavily dependent on the Egyptian historical chronology, and also the relative chronological sequences for Middle and Late Bronze Age Cyprus were linked to the historical chronology of the Nile Valley."

O.G.S. Crawford "Man and His Past" 1921  google books pg.72
 "Absolute age in archaeology is rare and for periods earlier than about 600 BC rests ultimately all the world over upon Egypt and Mesopotamia. A system of relative chronology can be established by excavation in any country that has been long inhabited, but it is left hanging in the air until linked up with Egypt, whether directly or indirectly through a third region. "

Raymond Weill Bases "Methodes et Resultats de la Chronologie Egyptienne" 1926
"It is no exaggeration to say that we continue to arrange the history of Egypt and to place the facts of this history in the very same order that is a legacy of Julius Africanus who wrote in the third Christian century."

H.R. Hall "The Oldest Civilization of Greece" 1901 pg.18-19
https://archive.org/details/oldestcivilizati00halluoft/page/18/mode/2up

"It has been necessary to thus discuss the vices as well as the virtues of archaeological evidence, because of late there has grown up an increasing tendency to regard the hypotheses of the archaeologist as necessarily inspired, to regard him as the exponent of an exact science, which he is not. Excavations may be carried on in a scientific manner, but archaeology is not a science. Archaeological " science " is merely a branch of knowledge which is now sufficiently advanced to be able to frame more or less probable hypotheses with regard to the remains of the handiwork of ancient peoples which its expert excavators and explorers have discovered. Absolute certainty in these matters is only possible where a continuous literary tradition has always existed : the modern study of European and American prehistoric archaeology, for instance, which has no literary tradition by its side, must always remain largely guesswork. The main scheme of the history of ancient Egypt is now a certainty, not a mere hypothesis; but it is very doubtful if it would ever have become a certainty if its construction had depended entirely on the archaeologists. The complete skeleton of the scheme was provided by the continuous literary tradition preserved by the Egyptian priest Manetho ; this has been clothed with flesh by the archaeologists, and in the course of this process it has become clear that in the main Manetho had articulated his skeleton correctly. But in the case of European and American prehistoric archaeology there exist no skeletons to be clothed, and in the case of early Greek archaeology the skeleton, though it exists, is but an unsatisfactory specimen, from which many of the most important bones are missing, while others are evidently misplaced, so that the task of clothing it with flesh is a very difficult and a very uncertain one."
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 hours ago, Abramelin said:

And.... it's back to Ancient Egypt again.

Evidently you didn't see the words "mesopotamia" and "mediterranean"  in my quotes. Nor did you grasp the concept of how dating the Mediterranean relies on Egyptian chronology. The subject of the OP is the ancient Mediterranean, is it not? I laid the quotes out as steps back in time to summarize how Mesopotamian's dates are always related to Egypt.  I swear I saw dates in the OP so it might be of interest to know just how these dates are formed. But then there are always people who accept the dates without question. 

Yes, it's always back to ancient Egypt since the archaeologists use ancient Egypt to date the Mediterranean. Take it up with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Trelane said:
1 hour ago, Infin8tee said:

The subject of the OP is the ancient Mediterranean, is it not?

Actually no, no it isn't.

Thankyou for your extensive contribution to the thread.

All the material presented so far would make for lengthy conversations, and you post 5 words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Infin8tee said:

Thankyou for your extensive contribution to the thread.

All the material presented so far would make for lengthy conversations, and you post 5 words.

II am only but a learner in this sub forum and I mostly lurk in these threads. I just thought it prudent that we please stay on topic.

Nowhere in the OP was the ancient Med even remotely mentioned. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Trelane said:

II am only but a learner in this sub forum and I mostly lurk in these threads. I just thought it prudent that we please stay on topic.

Nowhere in the OP was the ancient Med even remotely mentioned. 

 

First statement in the OP :

"The Ubaid of greater Mesopotamia had been building monumental mud brick stepped platforms as early as c. 5,000BC"

From wiki on History of the Mediterranean regionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Mediterranean_region

"The cultural stage of civilization (organised society structured around urban centers) first arises in Southwest Asia, as an extension of the Neolithic trend, from as early as the 8th millennium BC, of proto-urban centers such as Çatal Hüyük. Urban civilizations proper begin to emerge in the Chalcolithic, in 5th-to-4th-millennium Egypt and in Mesopotamia."

"During the Ubaid 2 and 3 periods (5500–5000 BC), southern Mesopotamian Ubaid influence is felt further to the south as far as the Persian Gulf. Ubaid artifacts spread also all along the Arabian littoral, showing the growth of a trading system that stretched from the Mediterranean coast through to Oman."

 I'm guessing that thanos didn't need to include the word mediterranean since he undoubtedly knows what region he's speaking of. But you can probably tell us exactly what region the Ubaid covered. No? I mean since you're so concerned with staying on topic and all, we wouldn't want to stray into an area that wasn't Mesopotamia. 

From wiki again :

"Mesopotamia (Ancient Greek: Μεσοποταμία Mesopotamíā; Arabic: بِلَاد ٱلرَّافِدَيْن Bilād ar-Rāfidayn; Classical Syriac: ܐܪܡ ܢܗܪ̈ܝܢ‎, Ārām-Nahrīn or ܒܝܬ ܢܗܪ̈ܝܢ, Bēṯ Nahrīn)[1] is a historical region of Western Asia situated within the Tigris–Euphrates river system, in the northern part of the Fertile Crescent. It occupies the area of present-day Iraq, and parts of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Kuwait."

So exactly what is your point of contention? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 1:24 AM, Infin8tee said:

I'm surprised there isn't interest in what you've posted. 

I've posted about the Jiroft culture many years ago.

And I am surprized Thanos posted about it, but I am glad he did.

But a lot of the artifacts appear to be forgeries, so what are we discussing here?

 

About staying on topic:

You must have noticed Thanos' response to my post about Sardinia. I only thought it was interesting that a ziggurat-like structure showed up in the western part of the Mediterranean, and of about the same age as the oldest (Sialk) in Mesopotamia.

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Infin8tee said:

The entire dating process was established in the 1800's. And it's worse than the Sothic Cycle. The middle east is dated according to how it relates to Egypt, unless C14 is used, which is rarely.

Felix Hoflmayer "Radiocarbon Dating and Egyptian Chronology -- From the "Curve of Knowns" to Bayesian Modeling"  2016

https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199935413-e-64

"For a long time, the Egyptian historical chronology was the sole chronological reference system not only for the Nile Valley itself but also for the Bronze and Iron Age eastern Mediterranean basin. It was indeed the backbone of history, especially during the second and much of the first millennium BC.  Before the advent of radiocarbon dating, absolute dates for the local relative chronological sequence of the southern and central Levant (modern-day Israel, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, and Lebanon) were heavily dependent on the Egyptian historical chronology, and also the relative chronological sequences for Middle and Late Bronze Age Cyprus were linked to the historical chronology of the Nile Valley."

O.G.S. Crawford "Man and His Past" 1921  google books pg.72
 "Absolute age in archaeology is rare and for periods earlier than about 600 BC rests ultimately all the world over upon Egypt and Mesopotamia. A system of relative chronology can be established by excavation in any country that has been long inhabited, but it is left hanging in the air until linked up with Egypt, whether directly or indirectly through a third region. "

Raymond Weill Bases "Methodes et Resultats de la Chronologie Egyptienne" 1926
"It is no exaggeration to say that we continue to arrange the history of Egypt and to place the facts of this history in the very same order that is a legacy of Julius Africanus who wrote in the third Christian century."

H.R. Hall "The Oldest Civilization of Greece" 1901 pg.18-19
https://archive.org/details/oldestcivilizati00halluoft/page/18/mode/2up

"It has been necessary to thus discuss the vices as well as the virtues of archaeological evidence, because of late there has grown up an increasing tendency to regard the hypotheses of the archaeologist as necessarily inspired, to regard him as the exponent of an exact science, which he is not. Excavations may be carried on in a scientific manner, but archaeology is not a science. Archaeological " science " is merely a branch of knowledge which is now sufficiently advanced to be able to frame more or less probable hypotheses with regard to the remains of the handiwork of ancient peoples which its expert excavators and explorers have discovered. Absolute certainty in these matters is only possible where a continuous literary tradition has always existed : the modern study of European and American prehistoric archaeology, for instance, which has no literary tradition by its side, must always remain largely guesswork. The main scheme of the history of ancient Egypt is now a certainty, not a mere hypothesis; but it is very doubtful if it would ever have become a certainty if its construction had depended entirely on the archaeologists. The complete skeleton of the scheme was provided by the continuous literary tradition preserved by the Egyptian priest Manetho ; this has been clothed with flesh by the archaeologists, and in the course of this process it has become clear that in the main Manetho had articulated his skeleton correctly. But in the case of European and American prehistoric archaeology there exist no skeletons to be clothed, and in the case of early Greek archaeology the skeleton, though it exists, is but an unsatisfactory specimen, from which many of the most important bones are missing, while others are evidently misplaced, so that the task of clothing it with flesh is a very difficult and a very uncertain one."
 

Indeed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Infin8tee said:

First statement in the OP :

"The Ubaid of greater Mesopotamia had been building monumental mud brick stepped platforms as early as c. 5,000BC"

From wiki on History of the Mediterranean regionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Mediterranean_region

"The cultural stage of civilization (organised society structured around urban centers) first arises in Southwest Asia, as an extension of the Neolithic trend, from as early as the 8th millennium BC, of proto-urban centers such as Çatal Hüyük. Urban civilizations proper begin to emerge in the Chalcolithic, in 5th-to-4th-millennium Egypt and in Mesopotamia."

"During the Ubaid 2 and 3 periods (5500–5000 BC), southern Mesopotamian Ubaid influence is felt further to the south as far as the Persian Gulf. Ubaid artifacts spread also all along the Arabian littoral, showing the growth of a trading system that stretched from the Mediterranean coast through to Oman."

 I'm guessing that thanos didn't need to include the word mediterranean since he undoubtedly knows what region he's speaking of. But you can probably tell us exactly what region the Ubaid covered. No? I mean since you're so concerned with staying on topic and all, we wouldn't want to stray into an area that wasn't Mesopotamia. 

From wiki again :

"Mesopotamia (Ancient Greek: Μεσοποταμία Mesopotamíā; Arabic: بِلَاد ٱلرَّافِدَيْن Bilād ar-Rāfidayn; Classical Syriac: ܐܪܡ ܢܗܪ̈ܝܢ‎, Ārām-Nahrīn or ܒܝܬ ܢܗܪ̈ܝܢ, Bēṯ Nahrīn)[1] is a historical region of Western Asia situated within the Tigris–Euphrates river system, in the northern part of the Fertile Crescent. It occupies the area of present-day Iraq, and parts of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Kuwait."

So exactly what is your point of contention? 

*sighs* No point at all. Carry on, by all means.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contemporary with Jiroft, c.3200-2,000BC, was the eastern Iranian site of Shahr-i Sokhta known as the "burnt city". By the mid 3rd millennium it was one of the largest cities on earth with just one cemetery having an estimated 25,000-40,000 burials. Like many urban centers in Mesopotamia its growth was largely due to increased trade with the Sumerians.  

Of course there is also the famed Elamite city of Susa of Iran c. 4,200-1300BC, one of the great cities of history. Contemporary with the Ubaid and Sumerians they were directly influenced and had relations with both the least of which building monumental brick stepped platforms by as early as the end of the 5th millennium. With the rise of Uruk in the 4th millennium so grew its influence over Susa which the cultural and material similarities become increasingly ubiquitous so much so it is often argued Susa became colonized by Uruk. A famous Susa 4th millennium cylinder seal impression of a horned palace facade building:

412px-King-priest_with_bow_fighting_enem

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.