CHAPTER 5: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BONE SAMPLES AND COMPARISON OF THE IRON AGE ANIMAL FINDINGS BETWEEN IRAN AND GILAN

246

Chapter 5: Chemical analysis of bone samples and Comparison of the Iron Age

animal findings between Gilan and the rest of Iran

5.1 Chemical analysis of bones from Gilan Iron Age Sites:

The animal bones found in archaeological excavations are invariably food debris.

Those killed for food, hide, and bones as well as kept for secondary usage like

traction, ploughing, carriage etc. are a primary and perennial source of subsistence in

ancient civilizations. Another category that has been in the focus of archaeological

researches is the bones, teeth and ivory of animals, which are one of the extensively

exploited raw materials by ancient societies for making objects like tools, decorative

beads, dice, animal figurine, spindle, whistles, musical instruments like flute and

rattle, etc. The use of ostrich eggshells used for making beads is also a well known

instance of the earliest examples of prehistoric art. Eventually all the bone artifacts fall

in the category of 'use assemblage' as per the definition of taphonomic history of an

archaeofaunal assemblage advocated by Gilbert (1979). Identification of the source

animal whose bones were used as raw material is yet another analytical method in the

field of archaeolozoology where chemical methods are emerging very useful today.

Human burials are one of the indispensable pieces of evidence which provide

significant clues to the identification of age, gender, social hierarchy, pathological

lesions (if any) and health status of the contemporary society by examining mode of

disposal of the dead, bone morphology, morphometrics and chemical examinations of

bones. Eventually the applications of archaeological chemistry for two types of

analysis like isotopic and trace elements are currently in practice for assessment of

past dietary behaviour. Identifying animal species in the face of taphonomic contrition

of skeletal preservation (Sathe & Joshi 2013, Balasse and Ambrose 2005), dietary

status of animals and humans (Pharswan & Farswan 2011, Sillen 1992, Gogte &

247

Kshirsagar 1988, Farswan & Price 2002,) and palaeoecology (Cerling et al. 2008) are

some of the recent milestones in chemical analysis of bones from Archaeological sites.

Bones are composed of structurally complex material, both organic and inorganic

chemicals. Living bone consists of three major components: organic matter,

principally proteins; minerals in the form of calcium phosphates; and water. The water

contents of buried bones and the sediments that surround them play as important a role

in their future integrity over archaeological time-scales as the chemistry and

availability of biological fluids do during life. A definite ratio of trace elements in the

bones (Parker & Toots 1965, 1980) has emerged a meaningful tool in reconstructing

palaeodiet of an individual. Field research in the modern ecosystems indicate that inter

and intra regional geological variability in elemental concentration produces variations

in dietary and bone elemental values within trophic levels (Fig.5.1 Sealy 2004).

The precise presence of trace elements viz. Strontium (Sr), Barium (Ba) and

Magnesium (Mg) is 99% and 93% and 65% respectively and resides in the skeleton of

the animal. Strontium-calcium ratios are normally reduced at higher trophic levels in

food webs, due to discrimination against strontium in favour of calcium by animals. Sr

is an element most widely used in dietary reconstruction and its 99% presence being

exclusively within the bone implies that analysis of bone mineral could disclose

feeding habits of different animals. Its representation depends on the trophic chain

from grasses to consumption by a herbivore inevitably suggests that carnivores will

have far lesser representation and thus carnivores and herbivores could be separated

with fair degree of accuracy on the basis of mean strontium contents. Sr and Ca are

similar elements in terms of their chemical properties. Ca is however, preferentially

extracted in the mammalian digestive tract, and strontium is preferentially removed in

the kidneys. Therefore Sr is depleted relative to Ca in the tissues of herbivores

compared to the plants they eat. Similar process exists in carnivores too where their

248

tissues are even more depleted in Sr compared to the tissues of the herbivores. Thus

the ratio in tissues should reflect the Sr/Ca ratios in the bedrock and the trophic levels

of animal that produced the tissue (Sealy 2004). Parker and Toots (1965) were the

first to show the application of analysing Tertiary fossils in identifying the role of

trace elements in palaeodietary reconstruction. They (Parker & Toots 1980) went on

further to infer that even the browsers could be discriminated against the grazers

presumably reflecting higher strontium concentrations in succulent herbs than in

grasses. The research on trace elements over more than the last five decades in

accordance with advances in methods and techniques of archaeological sciences has

amply shown its usefulness in characterising the palaeoecological behaviour of

animals, and in turn their dietary response over time across the continents (Sathe &

Paddayya 2013, Domingo et al. 2012, Pharswan & Farswan 2011, Weiner 2010,

Gogte & Kshirsagar 1988).

Fig. 5.1 Strontium/Calcium Ratio in Plants, Carnivores, and Herbivores

249

Diet Sr. Ba Mg Zn

Herbivorous High High High Low

Omnivorous Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate Intermediate

Carnivorous Low Low Low High

Marine High Low High -

Terrestrial Low High Low -

Table 5.1 Correlation of diet with mineral content of bones

Element Food source Trophic

chain

Comments

Ba Plant fibre, berries, tubers,

vegetables, nuts, meat

Herbivore-

carnivore

Diagenetic

Cu Crustaceans, molluscs, viscera,

meat, nuts, honey

Carnivore-

herbivore

Similar to Barium

Mg Green plants, cereals , vegetables,

nuts, meat

Herbivore-

Carnivore

High levels are related to

cereals-rich diets

Sr General marine and plant foods Herbivore-

Carnivore

Useful in palaeodiet

analysis

V Tubers, vegetables, nuts, milk Herbivore-

Carnivore

Of little use yet in

palaeodiet analysis

Zn Crustaceans, molluscs, meat,

cereals

Carnivore-

Herbivore

Diagenetically stable. Very

used in palaeodiet analysis

Table 5.2 Diagenetic profile of trace elements in bone

250

Against this backdrop, a small section of samples of human and horse bones from

three sites of Iron Age in Gilan, viz. Toul in Talesh, Khusro Khani in Dailaman, Boye

in Amlash area were examined to see the representation of any specific trace elements

that may have had any bearing on the diet and/or ecology of the area studied (Table.

5.4). Interestingly, in-depth scanning of the published researches in the Gilan Iron Age

in particular reveals the present study being the first ever approach in Iranian

Archaeology.

The samples subjected to Trace element analyses were examined at the Tata Institute

of Fundamental Research (TIFR), Mumbai and Sheetal Analytical Laboratory, Pune.

At TIFR the bones were examined using the X-Ray Fluorensce (XRF) while Sheetal

Laboratory by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (AAS) of Thermo Fischer

Scientific (model AA 303).

XRF analysis (TIFR, Mumbai):

XRF is an analytical method to determine the chemical composition of all kinds of

materials which can include solids, liquid, powder, filtered or other form. It is a fast,

nondestructive and accurate method requiring a minimum of specimen and specimen

preparation is done with bare minimum requirements. The elements that can be

analysed and their detection levels mainly depend on the spectrometer system used.

The concentration range goes from (sub) ppm levels to 100%. Generally, the elements

with high atomic numbers have better detection limits than lighter elements. As soon

as the sample is irradiated, the elements in the sample will emit fluorescent X-ray

radiation with discrete energies (determining the colours) of the radiation emitted by

the sample, thereby determining the elements present. By measuring the intensities of

the emitted energies (colours) one can determine how much of each element is present

in the sample.

251

The samples (Table 5.3) were soaked in de-ionised water for a couple of hours later

thoroughly washed using plastic brushes and air dried, placed before the x-ray gun and

time was set for 13mts each so that the adequate spectra could be obtained. The values

for each of the specimen with reference to the quantitative assessment of element

present are given in Table 5.3. The objectives of these analyses aimed at identifying

the representation of Ca/Sr ratio and other elements, and to see as to what could be the

representative difference between the values found in animals as well as humans. It is

a known fact that in the trophic chain, the humans may have lower levels of Sr.

compared to the herbivores and in that case it is interesting to see how the horse bones

responded to the taphonomic process and trophic levels of elemental absorption.

Table 5.3 Concentration of trace elements in bone samples according to XRF Analysis

(from Toul, Boye and Khosro khani sites)

Toul (Horse Bones)

Component Conc.

Ca 84.93274

Ti 0.2356365

Mn 0.5060682

Fe 8.861819

Cu 0.2070791

Zn 0.3287168

P 4.702727

Sr 0.2252084

Khosro Khani in Dailaman

Component Conc.

Sr 0.9564478

Fe 20.55997

Cu 0.387594

Ca 76.55723

Ti 1.538758

Boye in Amlash

Component Conc.

Sr 0.3481013

Fe 4.220777

Cu 0.2016272

Ca 94.56838

Zn 0.3166487

Mn 0.3444579

252

Fig. 5.2 Spectrum of Horse tooth from Toul

Fig 5.3 Spectrum of human bone from Boye

253

Fig 5.4 Spectrum of human bone from Khosro Khani

Fig 5.5 Horse tooth and bone for analysis from Toul- Gilan

254

Fig. 5.6 Human Hip bone fragment from Boye

Fig 5.7 Human vertebra and long bone fragment from Khosro Khani

AAS (Pune):

Fragments (and/or teeth) of the four samples examined under the XRF were also

subject to Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer, at Sheetal Laboratory in Pune city.

The samples weighing 5gms each were exhumed in a muffle furnace at 650o C and

concentrated Hydrochoric and Nitric Acids were added to ash and reflure for an hour.

The solution was aspirated on the AAS for different elements following the protocol

255

and wavelengths were measured on the basis of the spectra for Cu (copper), Z (Zinc),

Ca (Calcium) and Sr (Strontium). The values are enumerated below:

Table No. 5. 4 Trace element analysis of Iron Age bones from Gilan using AAS

Analysis

Sr. N

o.

Nam

e of

Sit

e

and

area

R

esea

rch

Met

hod

&

Yea

r Su

perv

isor

of

exca

vati

on

Tax

on

C

oppe

r (C

u)

Zin

c (Z

n)

Cal

cium

(Ca)

Stro

ntiu

m

(Sr)

1 Toul in

Talesh

Excavati

on

2003

M.

Khalatbari

Equus

Caballus

49.3

ppm

0.33%

7.37% 0.014%

2 Boye in

Amlash

Excavati

on

2008

Gh.

Aslani

Homo

Sapiens

9.34

ppm

0.35% 8.15 % 0.154%

3 Khosro

Khani in

Dailaman

Excavati

on

2004

Y. Fallahian Equus

caballus

37.7

ppm

0.29% 8.95 % 0.0165

%

Wavelen

gth

used

324.8 307.6 422.7 460.7

The interpretations for the values are on one hand the first ever data set for a snapshot

of the dietary preferences while on the other are seriously limited by the number of

specimens with reference to the skeletal parts and number of individuals of the same

taxon. The limited number of specimens is naturaly due to the legal and logistical

constraints of transporting archeological materials from Iran to India for analysis.

256

For example, a single horse (1n) bone and a tooth from Toul Talash cannot be a

representative of the entire assemblage. Such is also the case with the limited number

of human bones from Boye Amlash and Khusro Khani Dailaman. The results are

indeed a window to the palaeodietary reference to Iron Age of Gilan and stand open to

revision. Statistically satisfying numbers of specimens have to be drawn from each of

skeletal elements with desired number of individuals of each taxon, since the bone

histology and histo-chemistry has significant bearing on the elemental distribution

within and across the skeleton. It is worthwhile to give an example of a recent study

by Santos et al. (2008) who have demonstrated a clear correlation between strontium

and calcium concentrations and proximity to warmer/colder parts of the body of a

crocodile, implying higher Sr/Ca ratios for the bones which are closer to the heart.

AAS experiments bring out the values for Cu, Zn, Ca and Sr., which show an

interesting pattern (Table: 5.4). The values for copper (Cu) are predominantly much

higher compared to that of Calcium and Strontium, while the Zn exhibits negligible

variations. However, the value in horse tooth and bone are competitive with those of

humans and shows the need of a larger bone samples from all the groups for a fair and

reasonable elemental representation with respect to the taxon and their dietary regime.

The values of Zn, Ca and Sr. in horse are significantly low except Cu which appears

much higher and is not expected in herbivores.

As far as the Cu content in Human bones from the sites is concerned, the specimen

from Khusro Khani is significantly high and shows strong possibility of consumption

of animal meat and fish. On the other hand, the specimen from Boye has a much lower

Copper content, perhaps indicating that the individual in question consumed

comparatively lower amounts of meat and fish. This is interesting given the literary

evidence of palaeodiet in Gilan (as stated in Chapter 3), which tends to emphasise on

the role of meat and fish in the diet of the Iron Age people. Similar studies carried out

257

on more than 165 human bones from the Chalcolithic site of Inamgaon in Pune Dist.

in India have clearly shown higher copper/Zinc values for the human bones which

come from the archaeological levels well known to have experienced drought like

conditions and people's excessive dependence on animal meat and fish for subsistence

(Gogte & Kshirsagar 1988).

Besides dietary interpretations, this study also intended to see as to how bones have

interacted with the sediments and can this be documented at trace elemental levels.

Titanium (T) is an example whose representation on the bone surfaces was

exceptionally higher while as the x-ray probe passed through the cortical bone the

presence has reduced to zero, and when the bone was further cleaned, even the

surfaces showed dismal presence of titanium. It has been the part of the protocol of

elemental analysis to include soil samples, to assess the elemental profile of the soil

that has been found in association with the bone. The concentration in soil is always

higher than in bones but the degree of in situ fossilisation is also ascertained with

precision. The bones examined in this study came from museum repositories and did

not accompany the soil samples hence the values presented here represent only the

bone chemistry.

Strontium/ Calcium ratios too contibute to our understanding of proportion of meat

and vegetables in the diet of human populations Statements like comparison of dietary

composition of meat and vegetables between archaeological sites or the region may

not be possible in this study but obviously the beginning has been made in the field of

palaeobiochemistry and the candidate has plans as part of his postdoctoral to

undertake these aspects in future.

258

5.2. The comparison between the animal findings of Iron Age in other parts

of Iran with findings from Gilan:

The chronology of Iran Iron Age includes the period between 1500 to 550 BC (the

beginning of Achaemenid dynasty) which include Iron Age periods I, II and III. The

chronology is based on the 72 samples of carbon-14 tests in Hasanlu Tepe, Dinkhah

Tepe, Aghrab Tepe, and Ziviyeh, among which the trinomial classification of Iron Age

is based on surveying the pottery and other artifacts discovered from the Tepe of

Hasanlu (Dyson 1965). However, some archaeologists believe in four-fold Iranian

Iron Age. In this case, Iron Age includes the period until the middle of the first

millennium BC i. e. is middle of Parthian (Malekzadeh 2002: 33; Khalatbari 2004:

186).

Iron Age IV, which is observed more in the north of Iran (case study is the present

research), seems a lot more representative of the general Iron Age traditions, so that

culture of this period is influenced by the Iron Age culture rather than those of the

Achaemenid and Parthian dynasties.

Basic chronology and three categories of Iran Iron Age have come about thanks to the

efforts of two researchers, viz. Kyler Young and Robert Henry Dyson. Young initially

defined three periods in term of ceramic horizons (Young 1965), followed by Dyson,

who later used the numbers I, II and III for the three periods. Young agreed with the

same terminology and scheme of numbering. Archaeologists believe that the cultural

homogeneity throughout Iran in Iron Age I was seen in black gray pottery, and the

lack of homogeneity was visible in Iron Age II where red and brown clay beside with

gray pottery were common, and in Iron Age III buff pottery was common.

Due to the initial statements of most Archeologists, Iron Age culture had suddenly

emerged on the Iranian Plateau, and these changed occurred due to the entering of

259

immigrant Iranian ethnic groups in the late second millennium BC to the territory of

Iran. They believe that by the arrival of immigrants, tradition of painted pottery which

was common in Iran before was abolished, and manufacture of pottery polished by ash

was replaced. Also, the burial of the dead under living areas of houses was replaced by

a tradition of burial in a separate area outside the house.

Recently, some archaeologists have attempted to explore new and innovative

arguments about Young’s ideas. Thus, contrary to earlier statements, changes in

Iranian Iron Age were not sudden, but the change was gradual, and the influence of

indigenous cultures exists at the Iron Age in Iran. In particular, the dynamics of later

Bronze Age cultures is undeniable in the culture of Iron Age. The new findings

indicated the fundamental differences between ceramic materials obtained from Iron

Age cemeteries with those obtained from residential sites of Iron Age. This shows that

we should look differently at Iron Age cemeteries and settlement sites. Also it is noted

that all Iranian areas should not assume the same cultural assimilation that is

fundamentally extended to the whole of Iran in Iron Age I. There are fundamental

differences between the North, North-West, Central Plateau and Southern Iran (Talai

2008: 176 - 177).

In the fourth chapter of this thesis, comprehensive subjects were discussed on the

existence of animal remains of Gilan Iron Age in two parts of direct remains including

skeletal materials, and indirect object, such as containers and other debris from the

spouted species, rhyton, animal figurine, animal designs, objects belonging to animal

shapes and other some cases involving animal manifestations. But in this part of the

chapter 5, there is an attempt to suggest that whether the existence of such objects just

belongs to Gilan Iron Age, or has been common in Iron Age in other parts Iran. Also if

animal lived in other areas in Iron Age of Iran, what are the similarities and

differences between these remains with Gilan Iron Age animal remains?

260

However, in total, due to the expansion of land area in Gilan in comparison to whole

Iran's lands, Gilan Iron Age site frequency is much higher than other parts of Iran. But

there are other parts of Iran Iron Age discoveries of highly reliable and is the basis for

the chronology of this period. Some of Iron Age sites in other areas in Iran (outside of

Gilan) include:

Sialk cemetries of A, B, located in Kashan in the central Iranian Plateau (Ghirshman

1939), Gholi Darvish area of northern border of city of Qom in central Iranian Plateau

(Sarlak 2006), Ghaytariyeh cemetery in north Tehran (Kambakhsh 1969), Khorvin

cemetery in the northern part of central Iranian Plateau (Vanden berge 1964), Ozbaki

Tepe located in the northern part of the central Plateau of Iran's Alborz Province

(Majidzadeh 2003) Sagz Abad Tepe located in the northern part of the central Plateau

of Iran's Qazvin Plain (Talai 2002) and (Fazeli et al, 2010) Hasanlu Tepe in North

West Province West Azarbaijan, Iran (Dyson 1965) Haftvan Tepe located in the North

west province of west Azerbaijan, Iran (Burney 1975), Dinkhah Tepe located in Iranian

Azerbaijan (Gilbert 1977), Gian Tepe located in Nahavand in the West of Iran

(Ghirshman 1935), Kurdlar Tepe, northwest Iran (Lippert 1979), Godin Tepe in the

Kermanshah Province of Iran-West Shelf (Young 1974) Lema Cemetery in Zagros

Mountains of Iran located in Boyer Ahmad (Rezvani et al, 2007) Gohar Tepe located

in East of Mazandaran in northern Iran (Mahforuzi 2007), Tepe Kalar (Mousavi and

Abbas Nejad 2006) located in the NW province in Iran (Map No. 5.1).

It should be noted that it is not yet clear picture of the whole drawing of Iron Age in

Iran, reports are usually incomplete, scattered and unpublished, and the discovery of

animal remains in particular has received little attention. However, despite the

enormous breadth and scope of the Iranian Plateau and the problems of access to

resources, here the knowledge of continuation or interruption in the animal findings of

Iron Age compared to other parts of Gilan in Iran are discussed.

261

5.2.1 Comparison of skeletal materials of animals:

It was mentioned in the chapter 4 that despite the insufficient care in recording of

animal remains, there are reports of numerous burials of horse and bones (in scattered

patches) of wild and domestic animals. However, it is the problem of lack of

awareness of importance of faunal remians that has taken a considerable toll on the

information regarding man animal interactions. This is a common practice in Gilan

Archaeology where the bones have not generally been paid their due attention.

The findings of Hasanlu Tepe, located in north-western Iran in many ways are

comparable with Iron Age findings of Gilan, especially with those of Marlik Tepe.

However, But from the point of view of animal issues direct remnants to be seen at the

horse remains at Hasanlu, which according to the investigation are created due to a fire

that occurred inside a building where they were trapped and died as a result (Dyson

2008). And this is unlike the traditional horse burials in site like Marlik, Kalouraz, and

Maryan of Gilan.

In fact, in Hasanlu Tepe, there are two categories. One is direct presence of animals

that probably lived in the site, and then their organs and skeletal remnants have been

found in the area, for example, artifacts from the 9 horse skeletons can be noted that

the average height of the horse's shoulder is 140 cm. The condition of remnants of a

horse skeleton in Hasanlu shows that it was trapped in a burning building and died

there (Plate 5.1, Fig. 1).There are many small bones of the fish can be noted that the

basin may have been caught near the Hill. But the second group consists of animal

remains directly related to the presence of Iran's South Sea pearl or elephant ivory.

Certainly, these kinds of organisms where all or part of the body is used in the

construction industry and the jewelry area, are not native to the region but are brought

in as raw materials or semi-prepared goods. The remnants of sea shells in the south

262

area of Marlik in Gilan Iron Age are observed but yet no industries involving elephant

ivory have been observed in the Gilan Iron Age.

Hasanlu Tepe, the place known as the burned building, a hall is located that is

surrounded in the chamber and on the side walls, by deer skulls that have been found

unique (Dyson 2008: 34). In Kurdlar Tepe in North West Iran a large number of

animals have been discovered and recorded. These remnants belonged to the late

second millennium BC. In this area, 97% animal meat comes from domesticated

animals, and only 3% of the bones of wild animals have been investigated. Farm

animals such as sheep at Tepe Kurdlar 50%, beef 20%, 10%, goats, dogs, 8% and 2%

of pigs and donkeys were also 2%. (Talaei 2008: 30).

For several seasons of Gohar Tepe explorations (located in the northern Iranian

province of Mazandaran), a large number of pieces of animal remains were found

which mostly included skeletons belonging to cow, hog and dog (Plate 5.1 Fig. 1 and

2). Following the discovery of the bones of the pig and jugs stored grain, Land Rover

believes that this confirms the popularity of farmers and residents living in such

activities have a major role (Mahforuzi 2007). Deer antlers are also cases obtained

from Gohar Tepes and in this regard, the area is comparable with Toul and Ghale

Kouti in Gilan, where amidst the debris from the site the deer discovered from the

cemetery.

Explorations conducted in the region of Ozbaki, including 5 single Tepes named "Yan

Tepe," "Jeiran Tepe", "Maral Tepe", "Dushan Tepe" and "Ozbaki Tepe" (Majidzadeh

2003: 91), yielded both direct and indirect animal representation. Most of these

settlements and burial mounds belong to the Iron Age. A large number of handles

made out of animal bones have been found as well as pieces made from animal bones

and a cylindrical cup made of animal bones and several bone reels made from the hip

263

bones of the animal, are other things that have been discovered in the area of Ozbaki.

(Plate 5.1 Fig. 4, 6 and Plate 5. 2 Fig. 6,7)

Sagz Abad at the geographical location of (N 39 ˚ 64́ 13 ˝) & (E 40 ˚ 53́ 20/6˝) at a

height of 1275 meters above sea level located in Qazvin plain, where several

excavations took place, and the remnants of animal bones have been found. Bones of

animals in Sagz Abad show that people living in the area in the Iron Age, provided

about 60 percent of their animal protein from meat of domestic animals (Talai 2008:

23) such as goats, sheep, cattle and horses, and provided about 40 percent of the meat

of wild animals such as wild pigs, wild horses and gazelle. Beef included about 8%,

and horse about 4 percent of domestic animals in Sagz Abad (Plate 5.1 Fig. 5, 7).

During the first and fourth seasons of exploration in Gholi Darvish, a large number of

domestic and wild animals, including parts of the jaw bones, teeth, horns, spine,

pelvis, legs, hands and feet were found among the debris of Iron Age. Categories and

specific scientific experiment have not been addressed yet and hence other features

may not be available.

Among special cases related to bones of Gholi Darvish, it appears to have variety of

cut marks indicating patterns of carcass processing. The horns were also cut away

from the skull but there are no visible reasons available for such an exercise.

According to the images presented from series of bones, it can be assumed that the

bones of the animals were mostly belonged to the Canidae, and antlers depicted

belonged to the group Cervidae (Plate 5. 2 Fig. 1, 2, 3, 5). The Thule cemetery

excavated animal bones and horns like Toul and Khosro Khani of Deilaman in Gilan

were also reported.

In the extensive excavations conducted in 2006 in the Tepe Kelar (located in the North

West province in Iran) lots of ceramic objects were discovered in Tepe Kelar, and

264

because of the residential area belonging to Iron Age often broken or defective objects

have been found. In this regard direct evidence for the presence of animals on the hill

is related to large pieces of animal bones amidst the layers that have been discovered

during the Iron Age. Though the detailed study of bones has not been carried out, it

can be stated that at first glimpse the bones are of the size of small animals like dogs,

wolves, foxes, and deer. Making tools using animal bones were common, among them

the example can be cited of a needle made from animal bones (Plate 5. 2 Fig. 4).

In terms of burial practices and architecture of the tombs and pottery there are some

similarities between those of the Lema cemetery (Boyer Ahmad Province, Zagros

Mountains, Iran), and Gilan Iron Age sites. And yet the Lemma findings which are

comparable to the discoveries of artifacts from Gilan are few.

Remnants of the skull and jaws of an animal beside the body in human burials have

been found in the Lemma. Though the identification of animal is not clear, this can be

seen as an evidence of intentional or unintentional present of animal near human (Plate

5.2 Fig. 8).

The findings of the remnants of animals in different sites Iron Age in Iran, Similar to

what we saw earlier in the Gilan Iron Age sites, states that however, in most of these

sites presence of a variety of animal life and their relationship with humans Iron Age

subject is undeniable.

If the data recording on the skeletons and bones was better, statistics of variety of

animals on the premises could be offered, but by current records, what has been stated

here is sufficient. However, in the conclusion, the reasons for the greater presence of

animals in the Iron Age of Gilan in comparison with the rest of Iran will be discussed.

265

5.2.2 Comparison of spouted containers like bird beak:

As mentioned in Chapter 4, in some areas of Iron Age Gilan, spouted containers,

usually of ceramic and some made of metal were found. Their spout shape was

inspired by the birds’ beak or muzzle. In a number of such containers, in addition to

the above features, animal figurine has been installed too.

Of two of Gilan Iron Age findings, which also have a bird beak-shaped spout also

have bird statuettes are on the same, one is the artifacts discovered from Maryan

(Aghevler) (Refer to: Fig. 4.32) and the other is artifacts of Iron Age in Gilan (Refer

to: Fig. 4.47). The same has been found in some other sites Iron Age in Iran. One is

bowl of ceramic artifacts, from the gray layer belonging to the Iron Age in Hasanlu,

which is now on display at the National Museum of Tehran under number 3090 (Plate

5.3 Fig. 1). This ceramic container, in addition to having a spout which is quite similar

to Pelican, has the image of animal figurine on it, which cannot be identified correctly

due to poor preservation.

Iron Age ceramic mound artifacts within the Ozbaki had some of the same features as

the bird beak-like spout and figurine on the tube, and only the animals depicted on

them maybe different (Plate 5.3 Fig. 2), However, two of these ceramics are derived

from two enclosures Hasanlu and Ozbaki, on another aspect which is having a

prominent role within the body of the animal are similar.

Among the other discovered artifacts which were influenced by the presence of

animals in Gholi Darvish, that is comparable to the findings of Gilan Iron Age, a spout

container which now under number 9805 is being housed at the National Museum in

Tehran can be noted more than anything else. (Plate 5.3 Fig. 3) The vessel also

features artifacts from the Marlik, Hasanlu and Ozbaki.

266

Also, among other similar containers of animal revealed within the areas of Maryan,

Hasanlu, Ozbaki, Gholi Darvish, the artifacts of the Khorvin (Plate 5.3 Fig. 4) and

artifacts from the region of Luristan (Plate 5.3 Fig. 6) can be noted. But in typical of

another similar artifact within the area of Sorkhdam in Luristan belonged to Iron Age

III, which is kept in the National Museum of Tehran, under No. 1346, an animal

figurine instead of being placed on spouts, is on the handle and embodied within the

hand of container (Plate 5.3 Fig. 7).

The discovery of the same cultural materials at different points in Iran which are

influenced by the animal's presence, however attest that all the major areas of the

Iranian Plateau in Iron Age had some aspects in common.

Other spouted ceramic containers whose spout seems to be affected by the presence of

animal are bird species and are made like a head; a large number has been discovered

in the Gilan Iron Age (Refer to: fig. 4.18 to 4.48). But these containers are not only

found exclusively in Gilan Iron Age sites, but also at other sites in other provinces of

Iran, and it can only be said that the containers are more found in Gilan.

In Iron Age cemetery of Sialk (located in the southeast of Kashan in Esfahan province,

including both large and small hills which are about 700 meters away from each other)

objects made primarily of ceramic are seen. The main feature of these containers, in

addition to having features that other sites Iron Age in north and central Plateau of

Iran (Gilan) have, are that according to tradition, while some prehistoric ancestors

living in the Tepe Sialk before Iron Age, they are still like the early ceramics painted

with the colors (Ghirshman 1939). Generally, drawing complicated designs depict

such as horses and equestrian motifs on the surface of spouted containers was widely

common in Sialk (Plate 5. 4 Fig. 9 to 11).

In spouted container as the artifacts of the Iron Age in Sialk, Hasanlu, Ozbaki, Gholi

Darvish, the Luristan in Iran (outside of Gilan) it can be seen that these containers are

267

very similar in terms of form to artifacts of areas such as Marlik, Kalouraz, Jamshid

Abad, Halime jan, Lasulokan, Boye, Maryan and Toul in Gilan province.The only

difference is that unlike in the cases of artifacts from the area Here (Sialk) colour

painting with geometric and animal designs on the body, handles and spouts are used.

Also beak-like spouted containers of sites Hasanlu, (Plate 5.4 Fig. 1 and 2) Khorvin,

(Plate 5.4, Fig. 3 and 4), Ghaytariyeh Iron Age cemetery, (Plate 5.4 Fig. 5) Kelardasht

(Plate 5.4 Fig. 6) and Ziviyeh (Plate 5.4 Fig. 7) are obtained, which are similar with

artifacts from sites of Iron Age in Jamshid Abad, Marlik and Ammarlo in Gilan.

5-2-3. Comparison of the rhytons or zoomorphic objects:

In this part, two divisions of the rhyton in Iron Age artifacts of Iran (minus Gilan) are

provided. The first group contains objects that are zoomorphic objects where similar

ones are discovered in Gilan. The second group contains objects where similar

examples have not been discovered in Gilan.

Two rhytons in the form of cattle, made of clay have been discovered in the Khorvin

Iron Age cemetery (Vanden berge 1964). Like Gilan, examples of these artifacts have

cylindrical perforations in their back (Plate 5.5 Fig. 1 and 2). Also other examples of

rhytons are found in the form of a bird rhyton from Khorvin. Apart from the existence

of parallel lines on the body highlighting their distinct culture of Gilan Iron Age, in

general, these have some similarities with the finds of Gilan, Maryan and Kalouraz in

the form of Bird-shaped artifacts from the area. The parallel lines are striking on

rhyton found in other areas of Ghaytariyeh and Hasanlu (Plate 5.5 Fig. 4, 5, 6).

Although animal figurines from Iron Age settlement sites like Tepe Kalar and Gohar

Tepe of Mazandaran’s are quite different compared to the works of Gilan in the Iron

Age, this difference may be due to the fact that the other sites have been residential,

while areas in Gilan are cemetery. Sometimes there is some resemblance between the

268

cemeteries of Iron Age Mazandaran and Gilan in the examples of artifacts. For

example, in this respect, one ceramic rhyton belonging to the first millennium BC

artifact in Kelardasht can be pointed under No. 1693 which is now on display at the

National Museum in Tehran (Plate 5. 5 Fig. 7). Rhyton is the same with example that

has been discovered from the Iron Age Astalkh Jan cemetery in Gilan Roudbar. Also

ceramic figurine of an animal (possibly Mule or donkey) carrying two large jars

belonging to the first millennium BC. Have been discovered in the Caspian region of

Nour, which is now under number 4196 kept in the National Museum of Tehran (Plate

5.5 Fig. 3). The subsequent rhyton is largely similar with artifacts from Gilan Marlik

in terms of concept and technique of manufacture, the picture was presented under the

number Fig No. 4.61 in the fourth chapter of this paper.

In Lema, a ceramic rhyton was obtained whose form as a large pot with four legs and

a head attached to it, which in total recalls an animal shape carrying some loads. The

rhyton in terms of the concept is similar to the artifacts from sites like Gilan in Iron

Age. However, in terms of the manufacture technique and the thickness of rhyton,

there is basic differences between the two regions (Plate 5. 5 Fig. 8).

However, in other parts of Iran some of the Rhyton similar to those of Gilan have been

found. For example, in Ghaytariyeh Iron Age site (located in Shemiranat in the north

of Tehran), Khorvin site as well as a particular kind of container (which they consider

to be the function of the rhyton) have been discovered. (Plate 5.6 Fig. 1, 2, 3) The

animal figurine on the edges of objects within the side handle is mounted such that

similar objects have been found so far in the culture of Gilan Iron Age. But other

examples have also been obtained from other sites outside Iron Age Gilan, such as

Hasanlu.

Rhyton of fish form was discovered in Gholi Darvish Iron Age layer. (Plate 5. 6 Fig.

4) The Rhyton is generally similar to that found in Luristan, and now is kept in the

269

National Museum of Tehran under the 1452 numbers. (Plate 5.6 Fig. 5) Fish rhytons

are not like the form discovered from sites in Gilan, but some objects with fish-shaped

designs are found from Marlik.

In Ziviyeh (located in Saghez township in the province of Kurdistan), rhyton made of

ivory in the form of a cow sitting in front of a large container that has been discovered

(Plate 5.6 Fig. 6). Rhytons like it made of ivory and depicting a cow has, so far, has

not been seen in any of the other Iron Age sites in Iran. A rhyton in the form of a ram's

head was discovered in Ziviyeh (Plate 5.6 Fig. 7, 8, 9) is the same as in Gilan and only

one other example was discovered Iron Age of Hasanlu, which are on display under

the numbers 4499 and 7200 at the National Museum of Tehran.

5.2.4 Comparison of animal figurines:

Unlike rhytons, animal figurine usually cannot be used for containing fluids. Figurines

from Iron Age cultural artifacts are comparable in the two divisions, ceramic and stone

figurines on one hand and metal figurine on the other:

A) Ceramic and stone figurine: in Sagz Abad, like the culture of Gilan Iron Age, the

impact of the presence of animal objects in the form of animal figurine is visible (Plate

5.7 Fig. 1, 2, 3). This suggests the existence of some animals or at least thoughts about

some of the animals having a special place for people living in Sagz Abad. However,

differences can be seen in the form and material objects, and especially animal

figurine of this place with objects discovered in the Gilan Iron Age sites. It should be

noted that the position of the Tepe Sagz Abad compared to Iron Age sites in Roudbar

Gilan (Marlik, Kalouraz, Jamshid Abad, etc) is at a distance of only about 150 km

along the latitude line. And Sagz Abad is located in semi-arid region south of Alborz

Mountains, while Gilan is located in humid areas of the mountain ranges.

270

Animal figurines are also found in Gholi Darvish (Plate 5.7 Fig. 4 to 8), and in general

it can be said that the cemeteries in this area, as well as the manufacture technique of

the animal figurine, are somewhat similar to those of Gilan. However, the differences

between these three aspects with examples of Iron Age figurines of Gilan are:

First, their frequency compared with animal figurine artifacts from Iron Age sites in

Gilan is far less.

Secondly, form, materials, manufacture techniques of the figurines found in the

cemetery artifacts from different sites of Gilan show abstract forms of animal, and all

of them are made of ceramic or stone, while this figurine is made of metal, especially

bronze.

Third, unlike many areas of Iron Age Gilan (especially areas that are located in the

area of Sefidrood), in which figurine cow has ranked first in terms of provenance, the

most common form in Gholi Darvish seems to be the goat.

Aside from the discovery at Gohar Tepe of works that directly indicate the presence of

an animal, artifacts indicating the indirect influence of animals on material culture

objects have been discovered. They found that the number of ceramic and stone

animal figurines is notable. Interestingly, these animal figurines are similar to those of

Gilan, most of the artifacts from the site match Iron Age figurines from central Plateau

of Iran, comparable to Sagz Abad, Gholi Darvish (Plate 5.7 Fig. 9).

Animal figurines are found from Tepe Kalar which are made in metallic form and

parts such as horns, tail and legs are recognizable in some cases and animals are not

known (Plate 5.7 Fig. 12, 13). Unlike the tradition and culture that remnants in Gilan

Iron Age cemeteries show, where figurines representing the objects are made with

271

great care and precision, that is not the case here in the Tepe Kalar (Mousavi and

Abbasnejad 2006).

B) Animal figurine made of metal: these figurines are mostly made of bronze, but in

some cases, metals such as copper, iron, silver, gold, etc are also used. The contrast

between the animal figurine of Iron Age Gilan, and elsewhere in Iran suggests that

only region of Luristan, Iran, is comparable to Gilan, while in the remaining areas of

Iran, in terms of form and quantity, these figurines are inferior to Gilan and Luristan

areas.

Perhaps no two regions of Iran have such similar cultures in Iron Age like Luristan

and Gilan. And the most similarity belongs to the objects of bronze from the two

regions. Objects in Luristan are known as Luristan bronze.

Scientific excavations carried out in Luristan at sites such as Sorkhdam have yielded

figurines that are now on display at Tehran museum under numbers 1136. (Plate 5.8

Fig. 1) But on the whole most of the objects that are attributable to the Luristan on

display in museums cannot be traced to individual sites in Luristan.

In areas of Luristan Iron Age many animal figurines are obtained. One example is of

figurines that have rings on the back, allowing them to be hung (Plate 5.8 Fig. 3, 4, 8,

10, 11). These ringed figurines also existed in Gilan Iron Age culture, which were

discovered from Marlik and Kalouraz sites. (Refer to: Fig No. 4.89, 4.90, 4.96, 4.129)

The many similarities between metal animal findings in Luristan Iron Age do not

mean that other objects are not similar at all. In fact the similarities between Gilan and

Luristan Provinces include a wider range of works such as architecture of the graves.

However, since these aspects are not the subject of this present thesis, only a few

things that suggest the presence of animals directly or indirectly at these sites are

given.

272

5.2.5 Comparison of objects decorated with animal motifs:

Some artifacts from the site of ancient cylinder seals Hasanlu show hunting scenes and

animals of the chase. This scene is similar to that used on the face of such seals in

Gilan Marlik. For example, on a cylindrical seal of stone from Hasanlu shows a man

with bows and arrows on his knees, similar to artifacts discovered in Marlik. Its

features are shown as Fig No. 4.193. Hunting scenes depicted on a cylinder seal is

similar to the seals in Gholi Darvish (Plate 5.9 Fig. 2).

In Hasanlu site a Golden Goblet was discovered. In addition to being made from the

same material, the form and decoration method is similar to the Golden Cup from

Marlik in terms of motifs used in it. Cup designs and motifs of human and animal

subject in Hasanlu are the lion and the eagle. Some of these animals are seen on

Marlik Cup (Plate 5.9 Fig. 3).

In another example, on a silver bowl on artifacts from Hasanlu, images are shown in

two parallel rows above and below associated with display of the soldiers and horses

(Plate 5.9 Fig. 4). This method of segmentation and use of animal motifs exist in

examples of artifacts from Marlik. In fact, forms of animals and horses placed in front

are distinct with examples of artifacts from Marlik.

Also on a Plaque discovered from Hasanlu, the image of a stout man wearing his hat

in the middle of two calves is seen (Plate 5.9 Fig. 5). This image is in many ways

similar to a stout man in a hat seen on a silver bowl from Marlik. The two figures are

almost identical, as introduced earlier in the chapter 4 under No. 4.190.

In Golestan Tepe (located in the South Plains region Robatkarim, Tehran) a ceramic

container related to Iron Age have been found with the stamped designs (Ali Baigi and

273

Khosravi 2008: 142- 143).These designs display the ploughing of land by cattle (Plate.

9.5 Fig. 6).

The design of this ceramic, in technical terms is similar with artifacts from four areas

"Tepe Mamurin", "Gholi Dervish", "Sagz Abad" and "Sialk" in the central Iranian

Plateau. But the subject matter is different from the ceramic artifacts from the Tepe

Mamurin (Plate 5.9 Fig. 7) and is similar with the figurine of the ox ploughs in Marlik

in Gilan (Fig No 4.87).

Snakes have not been depicted on objects in Iron Age artifacts of Gilan, but the motif

is seen on a number of objects from the area of Gholi Darvish (Plate 5.9 Fig. 8 -11).

Apart from the pottery found in Gilan Iron Age of Astara region, where the abstract

design of animals is painted, No other case of painted pottery has been found. Also, in

most Iron Age cemetery sites, painted pottery is usually absent except for certain

areas, such as the sites of Sagz Abad, Godin Tepe, Giyan, Sorkhdam, Haftvan Tepe

and Lema, where painted ceramics are visible along with simple ones. (Plate 5.9 Fig.

12) But almost no pottery in the cemetery of Sialk Iron Age is seen without paintings

of horses (Plate 5.9 Fig. 13).

5-2-6 comparison of miscellaneous objects used for animals in Gilan with

with those from other parts of Iran:

In "Gouy Tepe", another area of the Iron Age located in North West Iran, a bronze

horse harness was found to indicate that the animal has been used by people in the

area at the time (Plate 5.10, Fig. 1). This object in terms of material and form is similar

with Marlik artifacts in Gilan.

In the site of Hasanlu, in addition to a horse skeleton, a large number of harnesses of

the horses or donkeys were also discovered. Some of them have been found with the

harness bar along which two pieces were made of thick wire (Plate 5.10 Fig. 2) In

274

some respects, these are comparable with such artifacts found in Marlik Iron Age in

Gilan (Refer to: fig No.4.205), or artifacts discovered from Maryan (Refer to: fig No.

4.213).

In Hasanlu, a number of bronze bells, were found, which produced a loud noise. Also

in this area a large number of decorative buttons normally used on the hair of horses

are found (Dyson 2008: 57). The artifacts of bells and decorative buttons that are

similar in some ways to Hasanlu Gilan where the cemetery is the burial of a horse

discovered under the number 4.210 as introduced in the fourth chapter.

In Gholi Darvish site, an iron horseshoe, probably installed under the feet of horses or

donkeys, have been found in the first season of excavations (Sarlak 2006). If the origin

and history of that is confirmed by the laboratory, it can be seen as evidence indicating

the use of horseshoe in the Iron Age (Plate 5.10 Fig. 3).This is important since this

marks the earliest appearance of Horseshoes in the Iron Age of Iran.

In the Iron Age II, many similarities between Marlik site in Gilan and Bourdbal site in

Luristan can be seen which include: structure of graves and especially some bracelets,

where the ends were made to resemble the heads of animals (Poorfaraj 2007: 512).

A large number of tools and accessories related to horse riding in the Iron Age have

been discovered in Luristan, Iran. A few of them are kept in the National Museum in

Tehran (Plate 5.10, Fig. 4-5).The harnesses in some cases have special features which

are probably local influence. But among them, cases similar to artifacts of Gilan Iron

Age site are seen to exist.

Pins which have a zoomorphic design on its head have been found in abundance in

Luristan region (Plate. 5.10 Fig. 6). Similar examples of such pins discovered from

Jamshid Abad sites, and other area of Gilan are presented in Chapter four (Refer to:

Fig. 4.219 to 4.228).

275

Map No. 5.1. Location of Luristan cultural area and 12 Iron Age sites in Iran plateau that are Comparable with Gilan

276

Plate 5. 1 The samples of animal bone remnants in Iron Age sites in Iran, other than Gilan, (first section): (No.1: Hasanlu, Dyson 2008), (numbers 2 and 3: Gohar Tepe, Mahfrouzi 2007), (No. 4 and 6: Ozbaki, MAjidzadeh 2003), (numbers 5 and 7: Sagz Abad, Niknami 2008 and 2009).

2 3 1

4 5

6 7

277

Plate 5.2 The samples of animal bone remnants in Iron Age sites in Iran, other than Gilan, (second section): (numbers 1, 2, 3, 5: Gholi Darvish, Sarlak 2006), (4: Kalar Tape, Mousavi and Abbas nejad 2006), (numbers 6, 7: Ozbaki, MAjidzadeh 2003) and (number 8: Lema, Rezvani et al 2007).

1 2

3

4

5

6 7

8

278

Plate 5.3 Some earthen wares with spout and figurine from Iron Age sites in Iran, which are comparable to Gilan findings: (No. 1: Hasanlu, under number 3090 at the National Museum of Tehran), (No. 2: Ozbaki, Majidzadeh 2003), (No. 3: Gholi Darvish, Sarlak 2006) (No. 4: Khorvin, Vandenberg 1964) (No. 5: Tape Sarom, Porbakhshandeh 2003), (No. 6: Luristan, national Museum of Tehran), (No. 7: Sorkhdam, national Museum of Tehran).

1 2

3

4 5

6 7

279

Plate 5.4 Some of earthen wares with spouts like bird beaks, which were found in other parts of Iran, and are similar with Gilan findings: (No. 1 and 2: Hasanlu, Dyson 1965), (numbers 3 and 4: Khorvin, Vandenberg 1969), (No. 5: Ghaytariyeh, Kambakhsh 1969), (No. 6: Kalardasht, Tehran Museum), (No. 7: Ziviyeh, Motamedi 1997), (numbers 8 to 11: Sialk, Ghrishman 1939).

1 2

3

5 6 7

11

4

8 9

10

280

Plate 5. 5 Some of Zoomorphic objects (Rhytons), from Iron Age sites in Iran, from outside Gilan, which are almost similar with Gilan findings: (No. 1 and 2: Khorvin, Vandenberg 1969), (No 3: Nour area in Mazanderan, Iran National Museum), (numbers 4 and 5: Khorvin, Vandenberg 1969), (No. 6: Ziviyeh, Motamedi 1997), (No. 7: Kalardasht, Museum number 1693 at the national Museum of Tehran), (No. 8: Lama, Rezvani et al 2007).

1 2 3

4 5 6

7

8

281

Plate 5. 6 Some of Zoomorphic objects (Rhytons), from Iron Age sites in Iran, from outside Gilan, which are not similar with Gilan findings: (No. 1: Ghaytarieh, Kambakhsh 1969), (numbers 2 and 3: Khorvin, Vandenberg 1969), (No. 4: Gholi Darvish, Sarlak 2006) (No. 5: Luristan, Museum number 1452 in the National Museum in Tehran), (Figurine of fish in Gilan undiscovered and just picture the fish has been discovered), (No. 6: Ziviyeh, Museum number 3574 at the national Museum of Tehran), (numbers 7, 8 and 9: Ziviyeh, national Museum of Tehran) (Numbers 10 and 11: Hasanlu, with numbers 4499 and 7200 in the national Museum of Tehran)

1 2 3

4

5

6

7 8

9

10 1

282

Plate 5.7 The number of animal artifacts from Iron Age sites of Iran, from outside Gilan, that are somewhat similar with Gilan discoveries, but they are not as realistic and elegant like Gilan findings: (Numbers 1, 2 , 3: Sagz Abad, Niknami 2008-2009), (Numbers 4 to 8: Gholi Darvish, Sarlak 2003-2005) (No. 9: Gohar Tepe, Mahfruzi 2007), (Numbers 10 , 11: Ozbaki, Majidzadeh 2003) and (numbers 12 and 13: Tape Kalar , Mousavi and Abbas nejad 2007).

1 2 3

4 5

6 7 8

9

10 11

12 13

283

Plate 5.8 some of animal bronze figurine, from the region of Luristan in Iran that are much similar with Gilan findings: (No.1. Site of Sorkhdam, Museum number: 1136 at the National Museum of Tehran), (numbers 2. and 3. discovered from Luristan, that they are similar with Marlik and Kalouraz samples (Refer to: fig. 4.96 and 4.129), (No. 6. to 9. artifacts from Luristan, the national Museum of Tehran), (No. 11 and 12: artifacts from Luristan, the Rasht Museum).

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8

9 10

11

284

Plate 5. 9 Painting and decoration with animal design on the Iron Age objects in Iranian Plateau, from outside Gilan, which are comparable with the findings of Gilan: (No.1. the Cylinder seal, discovered from Hasanlu , and No. 2. discovered from Gholi Darvish, that the shapes of animals are like the discovery from Marlik (Refer to: fig. 4.194) , (No. 6. piece of pottery from site of Golestan Tepe and No. 7. piece of pottery from Mamorin Tepe that they show agricultural operations using cattle to plough, which are comparable with Marlik figurines (Refer to: fig. 4.87) (No. 8. to 11: Gholi Darvish, Sarlak 2005), (No. 12. Lema, Rezvani et al 2007) and (number 13: Sialk, Grishman 1939).

1 2

3 4 5

6 7 8

9 10 11

12 13

285

Plate 5. 10 The number of Iron Age findings which are related to Animals in the Iranian Plateau, (comparable with discoveries of Gilan): (No.1. discovered from Gouy Tepe, Museum No.648 in the National Museum of Tehran), (No. 2. Two horse Harnesses, discovered from Hasanlu, which are comparable with the Marlik and Maryan findings (Refer to: fig. 4.205 and 4.213) in Gilan), (No. 3. horseshoe, Gholi Darvish, is not seen like this discovery in Iron Age of Gilan), (No. 4. and 5. harness and reins, which were discovered in the region of Luristan, there are in National Museum of Tehran) and (No. 6. Head pin from the region of Luristan, the culture is similar, compare to Gilan findings, (Refer to: fig No. 4.219 and 4.222 to 4.228).

1 2 3

4 5

6 7