Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-n8gtw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T21:33:38.261Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tracking Pleistocene occupation on the Eastern Iranian Plateau: preliminary results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2022

Ali Sadraei ,
Ceri Shipton ,
Omran Garazhian ,
Mahya Azar ,
Roghayeh Zafaranlou  and
Mohammad Reza Soroush
Ali Sadraei*
Affiliation:
Ronin Institute, Montclair, New Jersey, USA
Ceri Shipton*
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, UK McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge, UK
Omran Garazhian
Affiliation:
Independent Researcher, Kalmar, Sweden
Mahya Azar
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Neyshabur, Iran
Roghayeh Zafaranlou
Affiliation:
General Directorate of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts of South Khorasan, Birjand, Iran
Mohammad Reza Soroush
Affiliation:
General Directorate of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts of South Khorasan, Birjand, Iran
*
*Authors for correspondence ✉ ali.sadrayi@ronininstitute.org & c.shipton@ucl.ac.uk
*Authors for correspondence ✉ ali.sadrayi@ronininstitute.org & c.shipton@ucl.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Tracking Pleistocene Human Occupations in the East of Iran project was initiated with two field seasons in 2020 and 2022. The authors present the results of this fieldwork, which identified 176 Palaeolithic localities, demonstrating the presence of Lower Palaeolithic and Middle Palaeolithic occupations in the Ferdows-Sarayan-Qaen plains.

Keywords

IranLower PalaeolithicMiddle PalaeolithicPleistocenehominin occupation

Information

Type
Project Gallery
Information
Antiquity , Volume 97 , Issue 391 , February 2023 , e1
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd

Introduction

In recent decades, the Iranian Plateau has been shown to be key to the dispersal of Pleistocene hominin populations into Central and South Asia (Vahdati Nasab et al. Reference Vahdati Nasab, Clark and Torkamandi2013). Most studies have focused on the Zagros highlands and occasionally the central parts of the Alborz range (e.g. Berillon et al. Reference Berillon2007), as well as the north and west of the Central Iranian Plateau (e.g. Bazgir et al. Reference Bazgir2017; Vahdati Nasab et al. Reference Vahdati Nasab2019; Heydari-Guran et al. Reference Heydari-Guran2021). The eastern part of the Plateau, however, has seen limited study (although see Coon Reference Coon1951; Ariai & Thibault Reference Ariai and Thibault1975; Sadraei & Anani Reference Sadraei and Anani2018; Sadraei et al. Reference Sadraei, Farjami, Zafaranlou and Vahedi2022).

The Eastern Iranian Plateau extends from the Strait of Hormuz in the south-west to the borders of the Indian subcontinent in the south-east, and from the north coast of Iran (on the Caspian Sea) to the central plains of Asia, making it particularly significant in terms of hominin occupation and migration (Figure 1). The Tracking Pleistocene Human Occupations in the East of Iran project attempts to clarify various aspects of the Pleistocene occupation of the east part of the Plateau and the role that this area played in the dispersal of hominin populations into Asia.

Figure 1.

The location of some of the Palaeolithic sites discussed in the text, as well as the identified localities within the survey area: 1) Kashafrud; 2) Khunk; 3) Mirak; 4) Garmrod; 5) Bawa Yawan; 6) Kaldar (map by A. Sadraei).

Comprehensive survey in the Ferdows-Sarayan-Qaen plains

Field surveys conducted in 2020 and 2022 focused on the north-eastern edge of the Lut Desert, covering an area of around 7000km2 (Figure 2). Due to the size of the survey area, we used intensive pedestrian survey to cover the maximum area possible, with foothills and slopes being the primary focus. The presence of playa lakes and the relatively low altitude of the region, as well as rich sources of basaltic rock and andesite, create unique conditions that would have attracted Pleistocene populations to this area. The surveys revealed 176 new Palaeolithic localities within this landscape. The most common type of sites were open-air, comprising 167 localities, with the remaining nine being rockshelters and caves. All the identified sites contained lithics, which were sampled for further study to determine specific periodisation. The highest number of lithics collected from a single locality was 280, while the smallest was 30. On average, 40 lithics were recorded per site.

Figure 2.

Examples of landscape within the survey area (photographs by A. Sadraei).

Of these sites, 24 contained between a minimum of 30 and maximum of 82 stone tools that could be attributed to the Lower Palaeolithic, comprising choppers, large flakes, polyhedrons, massive scrapers, and bifaces comparable to Acheulean industries in Arabia and India (Figure 3). These tools were generally produced from basalt and quartz, and the sites are characterised by their proximity to basalt raw material sources.

Figure 3.

Bifaces identified in Ferdows Plain (photograph by A. Sadraei).

A total of 114 sites produced artefacts with Middle Palaeolithic affinities. These are mainly located on the slopes of moorland heights and covered areas between less than one hectare and tens of hectares. Flint and chert comprise the main raw materials and in some cases thousands of lithics can be identified on the surface. The presence of Levallois technology and points characterises these lithic industries (Figure 4), which are comparable to localities identified on the Central Iranian Plateau (see: Vahdati Nsab et al. Reference Vahdati Nasab, Clark and Torkamandi2013, Reference Vahdati Nasab2019).

Figure 4.

Examples of the main Middle Palaeolithic formal tools identified in Ferdows Plain: 1–3) recurrent centripetal Levallois cores; 4–5 & 7–8) Levallois point; 6) Dejete point (scale in cm) (photographs by A. Sadraei).

Eight localities were attributed to the Upper Palaeolithic, characterised by carinated and bladelet cores, along with retouched blades (Figure 5). A further 30 localities have Epipalaeolithic affinities, including backed tools and thumbnail scrapers, and are comparable to the Epipalaeolithic in the Zagros. These assemblages display an increased diversity of raw materials, including jasper, chalcedony and, in some cases, quartz.

Figure 5.

Some of the main Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic stone tools identified within the survey area: 1) carinated core; 2) bladelet core; 3) point on bladelet; 4) endscraper; 5) notch; 6–7) backed and truncated bladelets; 8) thumbnail scraper (photographs by A. Sadraei).

Conclusion

While Palaeolithic studies have focused on the western and central parts of Iran, our project takes the first step towards recognising the key role that the Eastern Iranian Plateau played in the dispersal of hominin populations into Central and South Asia. The ease of access to stone raw material, the presence of playa lakes and the relatively low altitude of this region compared with the higher north-eastern areas, made this an attractive region for hunter-gatherer populations, as demonstrated by the 176 identified localities that are attributable to the various Palaeolithic subdivisions. The presence of bifacial industries with similarities to Acheulean industries in India and Arabia, and of Levallois technology, and tools characteristic of the Late Palaeolithic, opens a new window for studying the role that this part of Iran played in the dispersal of Pleistocene hominin populations into Central and South Asia, and demonstrates the potential of this area to offer a clearer understanding of the complexities associated with the lithic industries in Asia. Due to the surface contexts of the findings, however, there is a possibility that the assemblages at these sites comprise palimpsests of different periods. It will only be possible to investigate our findings in more detail by conducting stratigraphic excavations at key sites, such as Dagh Jazireh.

Funding statement

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency or from commercial and not-for-profit sectors.

References

Ariai, A. & Thibault, C.. 1975. Nouvelles précisions a propos de l'outillage Paléolithique ancient sur galets du Khorassan (Iran). Paléorient 3: 101–108. https://doi.org/10.3406/paleo.1975.4191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazgir, B. et al. 2017. Understanding the emergence of modern humans and the disappearance of Neanderthals: insights from Kaldar Cave (Khorramabad Valley, western Iran). Scientific Reports 7: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep43460CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berillon, G. et al. 2007. Discovery of new open-air Palaeolithic localities in Central Alborz, northern Iran. Journal of Human Evolution 52: 380–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coon, C.S. 1951. Cave explorations in Iran 1949. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Heydari-Guran, S. et al. 2021. The discovery of an in situ Neanderthal remain in the Bawa Yawan rockshelter, west-central Zagros Mountains, Kermanshah. PLoS ONE 16: e0253708. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sadraei, A. & Anani, B.. 2018. Kalat-e Shour, Sarayan, evidence of the presence of Pleistocene population in the Eastern Iranian Plateau. L'Anthropologie 122: 722–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anthro.2018.10.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sadraei, A., Farjami, M., Zafaranlou, R. & Vahedi, H.. 2022. An introduction to the Late Pleistocene lithic industries in the east of the Iranian Plateau in light of the new findings from Sarbisheh Plain. Lithic Technology. First View. https://doi.org/10.1080/01977261.2022.2082028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vahdati Nasab, H., Clark, G.A. & Torkamandi, S.. 2013. Late Pleistocene dispersal corridors across the Iranian Plateau: a case study from Mirak, a Middle Palaeolithic site on the northern edge of the Iranian Central Desert (Dasht-e Kavir). Quaternary International 300: 267–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2012.11.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vahdati Nasab, H. et al. 2019. The open-air Palaeolithic site of Mirak, northern edge of the Iranian Central Desert (Semnan, Iran): evidence of repeated human occupations during the Late Pleistocene. Comptes Rendus Palevol 18: 465–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crpv.2019.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. The location of some of the Palaeolithic sites discussed in the text, as well as the identified localities within the survey area: 1) Kashafrud; 2) Khunk; 3) Mirak; 4) Garmrod; 5) Bawa Yawan; 6) Kaldar (map by A. Sadraei).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Examples of landscape within the survey area (photographs by A. Sadraei).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Bifaces identified in Ferdows Plain (photograph by A. Sadraei).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Examples of the main Middle Palaeolithic formal tools identified in Ferdows Plain: 1–3) recurrent centripetal Levallois cores; 4–5 & 7–8) Levallois point; 6) Dejete point (scale in cm) (photographs by A. Sadraei).

Figure 4

Figure 5. Some of the main Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic stone tools identified within the survey area: 1) carinated core; 2) bladelet core; 3) point on bladelet; 4) endscraper; 5) notch; 6–7) backed and truncated bladelets; 8) thumbnail scraper (photographs by A. Sadraei).