PDA

View Full Version : Ancient mounds found in southeastern Iran



Angela
30-05-15, 18:13
This is the link to the article:
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/05/27/413138/Iran-Kerman-mounds-Bronze-Age-Faryab-Tubingen-University-Jiroft-Mesopotamia

It doesn't really describe the mounds.

This statement is intriguing:

"“The mounds are scattered in an area of 8,000 kilometers and date back to the period of time between the pre-Neolithic and Islamic eras,” said head of the Iranian archeology team Nader Alidad-Soleimani."

I think that by "mounds" they mean "tells" or remains of ancient settlements.

There's also this:
"The project was conducted over the past three months with the aim of studying the cultural exchange between Mesopotamia and the southeastern areas of ancient Persia during the Bronze Age."

The culture in question was the early Bronze Age Jiroft Culture, which dates from about 2500 to 2200 BC. I don't know anything about them other than what you can read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture

"The proposition of grouping these sites as an "independent Bronze Age (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age) civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization) with its own architecture and language", intermediate between Elam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam) to the west and the Indus Valley Civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization) to the east, is due to Yusef Majidzadeh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yusef_Majidzadeh), head of the archaeological excavation team in Jiroft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft). He speculates they may be the remains of the lost Aratta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aratta) Kingdom, but his conclusions have met with skepticism from some reviewers. Other conjectures (e.g. Daniel T. Potts, Piotr Steinkeller) have connected the Konar Sandal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konar_Sandal) with the obscure city-state of Marhashi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marhashi), that apparently lay to the east of Elam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam) proper."

"
The looted artifacts and some vessels recovered by the excavators were of the so-called "intercultural style" type of pottery known from Mesopotamia and the Iranian Plateau, and since the 1960s from nearby Tepe Yahya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tepe_Yahya) in Baft. The "Jiroft civilization" hypothesis proposes that this "intercultural style" is in fact the distinctive style of a previously unknown, long-lived civilization.[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)]
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Jiroft.Iran.jpg/200px-Jiroft.Iran.jpg' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jiroft.Iran.jpg)


location of Jiroft in Iran


This is not universally accepted. Archaeologist Oscar Muscarella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Muscarella) of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art) criticizes that the excavators resorted to sensationalist announcements while being more slow in publishing scholarly reports, and their claims that the site's stratigraphy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratigraphy) shows continuity into the 4th millennium as overly optimistic. Muscarella does nevertheless acknowledge the importance of the site."

"Archeologists believe the discovered inscription is the most ancient script found so far and that the Elamite written language originated in Jiroft, where the writing system developed first and was then spread across the country.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture#cite_note-4) Other scholars[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture#cite_note-5) have called the authenticity of the cyphers into question, suggesting they may be examples of several modern forgeries in circulation since the earlier looting[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiroft_culture#cite_note-6) at the site."


Anyone have anything that contradicts that or gives more detail?

Anyway, wouldn't it be nice if some human remains turned up at the site and we could get some ancient dna?

Fire Haired14
30-05-15, 18:31
Thanks for sharing this.

Just saying when talking about Ancient West Asia, we should keep in mind.....

West Asians today are mostly Neolithic West Asian or from earlier West Asians(maybe there's some decent from Neolithic Euros, but WHG is very low in West Asia). So, any changes, besides maybe a rise in ANE(Came via North of Caucasus or South-Central Asia), came from another location in West Asia. Unlike in Europe, we shouldn't be looking for genetic influences from very far away.

I've said this before but...

Modern West Asians belong to the same very old Western-specific(non existent in Eastern Asians) maternal lineages as did Neolithic Europeans, but to very differnt subclades of those haplogroups. Plus the Y DNA in West Asia today is a bit differnt(but they share G, H, T, and E-M78), mostly because of Y DNA J. The West Asians/Balkan who settled in Europe during the Neolithic probably had distant cousins throughout West Asia, who are the main ancestors of modern West Asians.

Angela
30-05-15, 19:37
Thanks for sharing this.

Just saying when talking about Ancient West Asia, we should keep in mind.....

West Asians today are mostly Neolithic West Asian or from earlier West Asians(maybe there's some decent from Neolithic Euros, but WHG is very low in West Asia). So, any changes, besides maybe a rise in ANE(Came via North of Caucasus or South-Central Asia), came from another location in West Asia. Unlike in Europe, we shouldn't be looking for genetic influences from very far away.

I've said this before but...

Modern West Asians belong to the same very old Western-specific(non existent in Eastern Asians) maternal lineages as did Neolithic Europeans, but to very differnt subclades of those haplogroups. Plus the Y DNA in West Asia today is a bit differnt(but they share G, H, T, and E-M78), mostly because of Y DNA J. The West Asians/Balkan who settled in Europe during the Neolithic probably had distant cousins throughout West Asia, who are the main ancestors of modern West Asians.

You're quite welcome.

However, there are some comments in your post with which I strongly disagree. I think Turkic people came from pretty far away, and not that long ago, and they've certainly had an impact on the Near East. Recent gene flow from SSA has also had an impact and that is far more different from Eurasian dna than any differences that exist between some of the ancient peoples who settled Europe. It's a great mistake, in my opinion, to think that the Near East is less complicated genetically than Europe. Such a Eurocentric point of view doesn't necessarily produce the most balanced interpretation of population genetics on a global scale.

As to the specific area that's the subject of this archaeological research, it is home to settlements that date from the pre-Neolithic to the Islamic era. Some of that pre-Neolithic dna could inform us as to when ANE arrived in the Near East, among other things, which would certainly be of interest even to people primarily interested in European genetics. A comparison of pre and post Bronze Age dna in the area could help to clarify the nature of any gene flow from or to the steppe.

All of this would be over and beyond the fact that Iranians (and others) might be just as interested in the population genetics of the people in this area as Germans or the British might be interested in the population genetics history of their own area. It's not always just about Europe, you know.

Fire Haired14
31-05-15, 00:34
of this would be over and beyond the fact that Iranians (and others) might be just as interested in the population genetics of the people in this area as Germans or the British might be interested in the population genetics history of their own area. It's not always just about Europe, you know.

I'm not being Eurocentric. I don't get how you could interpret my comment as Eurocentric. My post was a bit off-subject, and I admitted that. Saying that people outside of West Asia haven't made a massive impact genetically on West Asia since the Neolithic isn't being Eurocentric, it's being realistic. I'm saying what the data says.

My comment actually does relate to this a little bit. Because we can cross out a mass population replacement in West Asia in the last 8,000 years or so, unlike in Europe. I mentioned Europe, because that's the only region we have ancient genomes from, and Neolithic ones give clues as to West Asia's history. Neolithic Euros are a snapshot into Balkan/West Asians from over 8,000 years ago, so their relation to West Asians tells us West Asians descend from Neolithic Euro's distant cousins. That's pretty informative about West Asian origins. My comment was all about West Asia.


Some of that pre-Neolithic dna could inform us as to when ANE arrived in the Near East, among other things, which would certainly be of interest even to people primarily interested in European genetics.

I'm not focused on European genetics. I'm just interested in genetics, or anything that causes you to think in a similar way(like cop shows). I've even looked up stuff about dog origins for fun a few times. My comment was about West Asia.

Angela
31-05-15, 01:41
This is a thread about an ancient site in West Asia. When I expressed curiosity about what dna from the site, if any were ever found, might show, you immediately went into a discussion about the population genetic history of Europe and how Neolithic farmers and West Asians are related, and how there has been more admixture of different populations in Europe than in West Asia. All well and good, but I couldn't see what that had to do with this site and what we might learn from it.

That indicated a preoccupation with European genetics to me, since that topic hadn't even been mentioned, but if you say that's not the case, great. There's a lot more to population genetics than just what relates to Europeans, and I'm glad hobbyists are also interested in other areas. I hope someday academics get around to spending more research time on something besides the Indo-Europeans and the "R" lineages.

Fire Haired14
31-05-15, 03:03
This is a thread about an ancient site in West Asia. When I expressed curiosity about what dna from the site, if any were ever found, might show, you immediately went into a discussion about the population genetic history of Europe and how Neolithic farmers and West Asians are related, and how there has been more admixture of different populations in Europe than in West Asia. All well and good, but I couldn't see what that had to do with this site and what we might learn from it.

That indicated a preoccupation with European genetics to me, since that topic hadn't even been mentioned, but if you say that's not the case, great. There's a lot more to population genetics than just what relates to Europeans, and I'm glad hobbyists are also interested in other areas. I hope someday academics get around to spending more research time on something besides the Indo-Europeans and the "R" lineages.

You're totally miss interpreting me!! Think about it....

We only have ancient genomes from Europe, and Neolithic ones tell a lot about West Asian history. I was using them to make the point that no massive replacements have occurred in West Asia since the Neolithic. And to show that modern West Asians descend from a differnt set of ancient West Asians than Neolithic Euros, possibly pointing towards West Asian-cousins mixing and replacing each other(why we don't see EEF-mtDNA in West Asia today very often?). That's a big discovery!

It directly relates to any discussion about Pre-Historic West Asia.


All well and good, but I couldn't see what that had to do with this site and what we might learn from it.

Yes, I was a bit off-topic. I was interested in what you posted but didn't know enough to have a discussion about it. So, I posted about the knows and unknowns of West Asian genetics. Something we know is Neolithic-continuum and 1,000s of years of only minority outside influence. I agree discussing bout Haak 2015 and Laz 2014 is beating a dead horse, and I'm getting bored of it too. I regret posting.


There's a lot more to population genetics than just what relates to Europeans, and I'm glad hobbyists are also interested in other areas. I hope someday academics get around to spending more research time on something besides the Indo-Europeans and the "R" lineages.

Academics aren't Eurocentric either. Reich and others have worked with South Asians, Native Americans, and others. After Laz 2014 I guess he and others were angry over the mysterious ANE-signal, and wanted to learn where it comes from. I like learning about any region of the world. That's why I took like 500 hours of work to go through SouthWest Asian mtDNA(see here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4339-Analysis-of-over-2-000-HVR1-profiles-From-SouthWest-Asia&p=79606#post79606)).

The focus is going to go towards West and South-Central Asia in the next several years. There's also already been serious work in China and Japan, to.

Sile
31-05-15, 09:31
southeast Iran is called GEDROSIA in AuDna mixture

Goga
01-06-15, 18:28
It was a time when Aryan (Summerian) J2a from West Asia moved slowly into CentralSouth Asia and the Indus Valley.


5000-years-old Jiroft artifacts


http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-23.jpg
http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-1.jpg
http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-9.jpg
http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-13.jpg
http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-15.jpg
http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-43.jpg


http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-40.jpg

http://news.payvand.netdna-cdn.com/news/11/nov/ancient-artifacts-Jiroft-Iran-48.jpg

http://www.payvand.com/news/11/nov/1049.html

khufu
03-06-15, 14:43
Elam beautiful civilization has nothing to do with the Sumerian

sumarian has related with south iraq and bahrain civilizations not with iran

elam maybe j2 but thise south east iran and sind maybe r1b or r1a if was north west iran or south west iran maybe we say j2

no related btween elam west iran and sind

MOESAN
05-06-15, 18:25
Your pictures are beautiful, thanks, but aside of that, what permits you to speak of 'aryan' and 'sumerian' as synonymous in a way or another?