باستان‌شناسی منظر و تحلیل الگوهای سکونتگاهی در ایران: رویکردی میان‌رشته‌ای با استفاده از فناوری‌های نوین
محورهای موضوعی : باستان‌شناسی
روناک تاسا
1
,
محمد رضا سعیدی
2
*
,
احمد چایچی امیرخیز
3
,
حسن درخشی
4
1 - دانشجوی دکتری باستان‌شناسی، گروه تاریخ و باستان‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 - دانشیار پژوهشکده تحقیق و توسعه علوم انسانی(سمت)
3 - استادیار، پژوهشگاه میراث فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران
4 - استادیار گروه باستان‌شناسی، واحد شوشتر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شوشتر، ایران
کلید واژه: باستان‌شناسی منظر, الگوهای سکونتگاهی, GIS, تغییرات محیطی, ایران باستان, سنجش از دور, تعامل انسان و محیط.,
چکیده مقاله :
باستان‌شناسی منظر به‌عنوان یک رویکرد میان‌رشته‌ای، به بررسی تعاملات انسان و محیط در طول تاریخ می‌پردازد. این پژوهش با استفاده از فناوری‌های پیشرفته مانند سامانه‌های اطلاعات جغرافیایی (GIS) و سنجش از دور، به تحلیل الگوهای سکونتگاهی و تعاملات محیطی جوامع باستانی ایران می‌پردازد. مطالعه موردی مناطق زاگرس، دشت خوزستان و فلات مرکزی نشان می‌دهد که عوامل محیطی مانند منابع آب، تغییرات اقلیمی و ویژگی‌های توپوگرافی نقش کلیدی در شکل‌گیری و پراکنش سکونتگاه‌های باستانی داشته‌اند. نتایج این پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که جوامع باستانی با استفاده از راهبردهای سازگاری متنوع، توانسته‌اند با چالش‌های محیطی مقابله کنند. همچنین، استفاده از فناوری‌های نوین مانند GIS و سنجش از دور، امکان تحلیل دقیق‌تر و جامع‌تری از داده‌های باستان‌شناسی را فراهم کرده است. چالش‌هایی مانند کمبود داده‌های باستان‌شناسی و تهدیدات زیست‌محیطی نیز مورد بررسی قرار گرفته‌اند. این پژوهش بر اهمیت مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای و به‌کارگیری فناوری‌های جدید برای درک بهتر روابط انسان و محیط در گذشته تأکید دارد و بینش‌هایی را برای مدیریت منابع فرهنگی و توسعه پایدار ارائه می‌دهد.
Landscape archaeology, as an interdisciplinary approach, examines the interactions between humans and their environment throughout history. This study utilizes advanced technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and remote sensing to analyze settlement patterns and environmental interactions of ancient communities in Iran. Case studies from the Zagros region, Khuzestan Plain, and Central Plateau reveal that environmental factors such as water resources, climatic changes, and topographic features played a crucial role in the formation and distribution of ancient settlements. The findings demonstrate that ancient communities employed diverse adaptation strategies to cope with environmental challenges. Furthermore, the use of modern technologies like GIS and remote sensing has enabled more precise and comprehensive analysis of archaeological data. Challenges such as the lack of archaeological data and environmental threats are also addressed. This research highlights the importance of interdisciplinary studies and the application of new technologies for a better understanding of past human-environment relationships. It provides valuable insights for cultural resource management and sustainable development, emphasizing the relevance of landscape archaeology in addressing contemporary environmental and cultural heritage issues. The study underscores the potential of integrating traditional archaeological methods with cutting-edge technologies to enhance our understanding of ancient societies and their adaptive strategies.
Introduction
Landscape archaeology, as a branch of archaeology, examines the reciprocal relationship between human societies and their natural and cultural environments (Gordillo, 2014). Unlike traditional approaches that focus on field excavations and identifying archaeological sites, this perspective utilizes advanced technologies such as GIS, remote sensing, and environmental data analysis to reconstruct past human living spaces (Orejas Saco del Valle, 2018). This approach allows the study of cultural landscapes on different scales, demonstrating the effects of climatic changes, settlement patterns, and socio-economic transformations on the formation of ancient landscapes (Fairclough, 2012).
Iran, as one of the major centers of ancient civilizations, exhibits significant diversity in settlement patterns and environmental adaptations. From the vast plains of Khuzestan to the highlands of the Zagros and the arid regions of the central plateau, ancient communities encountered various ecological challenges and adopted different strategies to interact with their environment (Niknami et al., 2009). Analyzing these settlement patterns and their environmental adaptations is crucial not only for understanding the cultural history of this region but also for contributing to contemporary environmental studies (Brouwer Burg, 2018).
This study aims to explore the role of landscape archaeology in analyzing settlement patterns and environmental interactions of ancient Iranian societies. The key research questions include: (1) How have environmental factors influenced the distribution of ancient settlements in Iran? (2) What methods have been employed in landscape archaeology to analyze Iranian archaeological sites? (3) How do modern technologies enhance the accuracy of spatial and environmental studies? In addition to discussing the general framework of this approach, the study incorporates case studies from various regions of Iran.
Methodology
This study employs a descriptive-analytical method, incorporating case studies, spatial analyses, and a review of published sources. The research primarily emphasizes the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and remote sensing to highlight the significance of these analytical techniques in archaeological studies. Data were sourced from environmental, geographical, and climatic records and compared with archaeological findings. Additionally, settlement modeling and spatial analysis methods were utilized to assess settlement trends. The study also aims to address the challenges and limitations associated with this approach in Iranian archaeology.
Discussion
1. Historical Background and Theoretical Approaches in Landscape Archaeology
Landscape archaeology is an interdisciplinary field that examines the dynamic relationship between human societies and their environments over time. This approach, influenced by cultural geography and human ecology, has expanded significantly with the advancement of technologies such as GIS and remote sensing (Gordillo, 2014). Theoretical frameworks in landscape archaeology can be categorized into three primary perspectives: those emphasizing human experience and perception, quantitative spatial analysis, and integrative models that incorporate both approaches (Fairclough, 2012; Tilley,
1.1. Early Foundations of Landscape Archaeology
The concept of ‘landscape’ was first introduced in the early 20th century by geographers like Carl Sauer, who emphasized the role of culture in shaping environments (Sauer, 1925). This perspective gradually influenced social sciences and archaeology. In the 1970s, with the rise of post-processualism, there was a growing focus on human agency in environmental transformations and settlement patterns, leading to the formalization of landscape archaeology (Preucel, 2018).
1.2. Key Theoretical Approaches
Quantitative and Spatial Analysis: Developed in the 1980s, this approach relies on geospatial data, GIS, and spatial modeling to examine settlement distribution and environmental interactions (Conolly & Lake, 2006). These methods have been instrumental in analyzing landscape transformations and climate impacts on ancient societies.
Phenomenological Perspectives: Emerging in the 1990s, this approach highlights human perception and cultural engagement with landscapes (Tilley, 1994). Researchers such as Christopher Tilley have explored how ancient communities experienced and imbued landscapes with symbolic meanings (Thomas, 2000).
Ecological and Environmental Analyses: This perspective focuses on reconstructing past environments using paleoecological data, palynology, and soil analysis to assess human-environment interactions (Butzer, 1982; Dincauze, 2000).
2. Research Methods in Landscape Archaeology
Landscape archaeology incorporates various methodologies to examine human-environment interactions. This study discusses the following key techniques:
2.1. Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
GIS is a crucial tool in landscape archaeology, allowing researchers to integrate, manage, and analyze spatial and temporal data. It facilitates spatial analysis and predictive modeling to identify settlement patterns, trade routes, and agricultural land use (Conolly & Lake, 2006). One of the major advantages of GIS is its ability to visualize and analyze data in both 2D and 3D formats, aiding in the interpretation of topography, landscape features, and site distributions (Bachad et al., 2013).
2.2. Remote Sensing
Remote sensing has revolutionized archaeological research, particularly in inaccessible regions. Satellite imagery enables archaeologists to identify settlement sites, land-use patterns, and environmental features across vast areas (Lasaponara & Masini, 2011). Technologies such as LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) have proven invaluable in detecting buried structures, ancient roads, and water management systems that remain hidden beneath vegetation and soil (Chase et al., 2017).
2.3. Environmental and Ecological Analyses
Reconstructing past environments is a crucial aspect of landscape archaeology. Methods such as paleoecology, palynology, and soil analysis provide insights into climate change, vegetation patterns, and human adaptation strategies (Dincauze, 2000). The study of ancient pollen records can reveal past agricultural practices and cultural landscape formations (Mercuri et al., 2010).
3. Case Studies from Iran
Iran’s diverse geography and rich history provide numerous examples of ancient settlements that illustrate complex human-environment interactions. This section examines case studies from the Zagros region, the Khuzestan Plain, and the Iranian Plateau.
3.1. The Zagros Region
The mountainous terrain of the Zagros has preserved significant evidence of early agricultural societies transitioning from hunting-gathering to farming. Sites such as Ganj Dareh, Tepe Sarab, and Sheikh-e Abad provide insights into the domestication of plants and animals during the Neolithic period (Hole, 1976). Studies indicate that early communities cultivated wild barley and lentils while relying on pastoralism (van Zeist et al., 2015).
3.2. The Khuzestan Plain
Khuzestan has played a pivotal role in the development of early irrigation systems and agricultural societies. During the Sasanian period (224–651 CE), extensive hydraulic infrastructures, such as the Shushtar Historical Hydraulic System, were constructed to optimize water resources for agricultural sustainability (Kleiss, 1987). These engineering feats enabled the maintenance of dense populations in arid regions.
3.3. The Iranian Plateau
The arid and semi-arid regions of central Iran have influenced settlement patterns, with oases such as Yazd serving as critical trade hubs. These settlements functioned as nodes along ancient trade routes, including the Silk Road, facilitating cultural and economic exchanges (Alizadeh, 2010). The presence of qanat irrigation systems in these regions highlights innovative water management strategies that sustained communities in harsh environments (Potts, 2016).
4. Environmental Factors and Settlement Distribution
Environmental variables such as water resources, climate fluctuations, and topography have played a crucial role in the distribution of ancient settlements in Iran.
Water Resources: Permanent rivers like the Karun and Karkheh shaped settlement patterns, supporting agriculture and domestic needs (Dastenaei & Niknami, 2020).
Climatic Variability: Paleoclimatic data suggests that climate shifts during the Holocene significantly impacted population distribution and resource availability (Shaikh Baikloo Islam & Chaychi Amirkhiz, 2020).
Topographical Constraints: Mountainous and desert regions required adaptive strategies such as terraced farming and oasis settlements (Azadi et al., 2024).
5. Research Challenges and Future Directions in Landscape Archaeology in Iran
One of the main challenges in landscape archaeology in Iran is the lack of comprehensive archaeological data and systematic surveys in many regions. Many sites remain unexplored, leading to gaps in understanding settlement patterns and human-environment interactions. Additionally, methodological limitations, particularly in integrating GIS, remote sensing, and environmental data, pose difficulties in conducting large-scale spatial analyses. Preservation issues also threaten archaeological sites, as rapid urbanization, agricultural expansion, and climate change contribute to their degradation. Despite these challenges, advancements in digital archaeology, including AI-driven predictive modeling and enhanced remote sensing applications, provide new opportunities for archaeological research. Furthermore, interdisciplinary collaborations involving environmental scientists, geographers, and local communities can help overcome data limitations and offer a more holistic approach to studying past landscapes. Moving forward, the future of landscape archaeology in Iran relies on adopting innovative methodologies, conducting extensive field surveys, and integrating advanced technologies. These efforts will not only enhance the understanding of Iran’s rich archaeological heritage but also contribute to the conservation and sustainable management of cultural landscapes in the region.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated that landscape archaeology is an effective approach for analyzing settlement patterns and environmental interactions of ancient societies in Iran. The use of advanced technologies such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and remote sensing has enabled a more precise examination of environmental changes and their impact on human settlements. Case studies from the Zagros region, the Khuzestan Plain, and the Iranian Plateau indicate that water resources, climate changes, and topographical features have played a crucial role in the formation and distribution of archaeological sites. On the other hand, research challenges, such as the lack of comprehensive archaeological data, methodological limitations, and environmental threats, have hindered a thorough analysis of certain areas. However, advancements in remote sensing technologies and spatial modeling, along with interdisciplinary collaborations, have created new opportunities for the expansion of this field. Ultimately, the findings of this study highlight the importance of interdisciplinary research and the integration of new technologies to gain a better understanding of human-environment relationships in the past. These insights are not only valuable for archaeological studies but also contribute to the management of cultural resources and sustainable development, supporting the preservation of Iran’s cultural heritage.
1. Alizadeh, A. (2010). The Origins of State Organizations in Prehistoric Highland Fars, Southern Iran: Excavations at Tall-e Bakun. Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.
2. Adams, R. M. (1981). Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Floodplain of the Euphrates. University of Chicago Press.
3. Alvarez-Mon, J. (2005). Elamite funerary clay heads. Near Eastern Archaeology, 68(3), 114-122. https://doi.org/10.1086/NEA25067610
4. Atalay, S. (2006). Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice. American Indian Quarterly, 30(3), 280-310.
5. Azadi, A., Moscone, D., Eger, J., & Ricci, A. (2024). The first occupation of the mountains: Neolithic human-environmental interactions in the Kohgiluyeh region (southern Zagros, Iran). Quaternary International, 700, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2023.04.007
6. Bachad, E. W., Majid, Z., Setan, H., Chong, A. K., & Sulaiman, N. S. (2013). GIS application and geodatabase for archaeological site documentation system: Bujang Valley, Malaysia. Developments in Multidimensional Spatial Data Models, 173-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36379-5_11
7. Bourbonnais, M. (2022). Applications of geographic information systems, spatial analysis, and remote sensing in environmental impact assessment. In K. S. Hanna (Ed.), Routledge handbook of environmental impact assessment. London, UK: Routledge, pp. 201-220. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429282492-13
8. Briant, P. (2002). From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire. Eisenbrauns.
9. Brouwer Burg, M. (2018). Paleoenvironmental Reconstruction. The Encyclopedia of Archaeological Sciences, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119188230.saseas0432
10. Butzer, K. W. (1982). Archaeology as Human Ecology: Method and Theory for a Contextual Approach. Cambridge University Press.
11. Chase, A. S., Chase, D. Z., & Chase, A. F. (2017). LiDAR for archaeological research and the study of historical landscapes. In N. Masini & F. Saldovieri, Sensing the Past: From artifact to historical site, Springer Cham, pp. 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50518-3_4
12. Conolly, J., & Lake, M. (2006). Geographical Information Systems in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.
13. Daly, K. G., Mattiangeli, V., Hare, A. J., Davoudi, H., Fathi, H., Doost, S. B., Amiri, S., Khazaeli, R., Decruyenaere, D., Nokandeh, J., & Bradley, D. G. (2021). Herded and hunted goat genomes from the dawn of domestication in the Zagros Mountains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(25), e2100901118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100901118
14. Daryaee, T. (2022). The bones of Khosrow: the sacred topography of Ctesiphon. Electrum. Studia z historii starożytnej, (29), 267-284. https://doi.org/10.4467/20800909el.22.018.15788
15. Dastenaei, M. H., & Niknami, K. A. (2020). An Investigation on the Impact of Physical Environment on the Formation and Continuity of Ancient settlements, Case Study the Merek River Catchment, Central Zagros, Iran. Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology, 7(4).
16. de Groene, D., Bendrey, R., Müldner, G., Coogan, A., & Matthews, R. (2023). Sheep and goat management in the Early Neolithic in the Zagros region (8000–5000 BC): New zooarchaeological and isotopic evidence from Ganj Dareh, Bestansur and Jarmo. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 49, 103936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2023.103936
17. Dincauze, D. F. (2000). Environmental Archaeology: Principles and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
18. Fairclough, G. (2012). 6.2 Look the other way–from a branch of archaeology to a root of landscape studies. In S. J. Kluiving & E. Guttmann-Bond (Eds.), Landscape Archaeology between Art and Science, Amsterdam University Press,, pp. 471-483.
19. Gallego-Llorente, M., Connell, S., Jones, E. R., Merrett, D. C., Jeon, Y., Eriksson, A., Siska, V., Gamba, C., Meiklejohn, C., Beyer, R., & Pinhasi, R. (2016). The genetics of an early Neolithic pastoralist from the Zagros, Iran. Scientific reports, 6(1), 31326. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep31326
20. Gillmore, G. K., Stevens, T., Buylaert, J. P., Coningham, R. A., Batt, C., Fazeli, H., Young, R., & Maghsoudi, M. (2011). Geoarchaeology and the value of multidisciplinary palaeoenvironmental approaches: a case study from the Tehran Plain, Iran. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP352.5
21. Gordillo, I. (2014). La noción de paisaje en arqueología. Formas de estudio y aportes al patrimonio. Jangwa Pana, 13(1), 195-208. https://doi.org/10.21676/16574923.1382
22. Gupta, N., & Devillers, R. (2016). Geographic Visualization in Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 24(3), 852–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-016-9298-7
23. Hole, F. (1976). Studies in the Archaeological History of the Deh Luran Plain: The Excavation of Chogha Sefid. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan.
24. Kleiss, W. (1987). The Hydraulic Systems of the Sasanians in Iran. Proceedings of the Second International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Rome.
25. Knapp, A. B., & Given, M. (2004). Social landscapes and social space: The Sydney Cyprus survey project. In M. Iakōbu (Ed.), Archaeological Field Survey in Cyprus: Past History, Future Potentials, British School at Athens, London, pp. 77-94.
26. Lasaponara, R., & Masini, N. (2016). Living in the golden age of digital archaeology. In Computational Science and Its Applications–ICCSA 2016: 16th International Conference, Beijing, China, July 4-7, 2016, Proceedings, Part II 16. Springer International Publishing, pp. 597-610. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42108-7_47
27. Lasaponara, R., & Masini, N. (2011). Satellite remote sensing in archaeology: Past, present and future perspectives. Journal of archaeological science, 38(9), 1995-2002. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2011JArSc..38.1995L/doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.02.002
28. Mahmoudian, H. (2018). A Study on the Role of the Simre River in the Agricultural Developments of Prehistoric Iran Based on Archaeological Evidence. Journal of Elamite Studies, 3(7), 1-23 (in Persian).
29. Mercuri, A. M., Florenzano, A., Massamba N'siala, I., Olmi, L., Roubis, D., & Sogliani, F. (2010). Pollen from archaeological layers and cultural landscape reconstruction: case studies from the Bradano valley (Basilicata, southern Italy). Plant Biosystems, 144(4), 888-901. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2010.491979
30. Niknami, K. A., Chaychi Amirkhiz, A., & Jalali, F. F. (2009). Spatial pattern of archaeological site distributions on the eastern shores of Lake Urmia, northwestern Iran. Archeologia e calcolatori, (20), 261-276.
31. Opitz, R., & Herrmann, J. (2018). Recent trends and long-standing problems in archaeological remote sensing. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 1(1), 19-41. https://doi.org/10.5334/JCAA.11
32. Orejas Saco del Valle, A. (1991). Arqueología del paisaje: historia, problemas y perspectivas. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (España). https://doi.org/10.3989/AESPA.1991.V64.503
33. Parcak, S. (2009). Satellite Remote Sensing for Archaeology. Routledge.
34. Parcak, S. (2007). Satellite remote sensing methods for monitoring archaeological tells in the Middle East. Journal of Field Archaeology, 32(1), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1179/009346907791071773
35. Potts, D. T. (2016). The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge University Press.
36. Preucel, R. W. (2018). Post-processual Archaeology. obo in Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199766567-0188
37. Schacht, R. M. (1975). A preliminary report on the excavations at Tepe Sharafabad, 1971. Journal of field archaeology, 2(4), 307-329. https://doi.org/10.1179/009346975791490935
38. Shaikh Baikloo Islam, B., & Chaychi Amirkhiz, A. (2020). Human-Climate Connection in North Central Iran Between 6000 and 2700 BCE. Iranian Journal of Archaeological Studies, 10(1), 75-93. https://doi.org/10.22111/ijas.2020.6792
39. Shaikh Baikloo Islam, B., Chaychi Amirkhiz, A., & Valipour, H. (2016). On the Possible Correlation between the Collapse of Sialk IV and Climatological Events during the Middle-Late Holocene. Iranian Journal of Archaeological Studies, 6(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.22111/ijas.2016.3770
40. Shi, X., Kindratenko, V., Yang, C. (2013). Modern Accelerator Technologies for Geographic Information Science. In Shi, X., Kindratenko, V., Yang, C. (eds.), Modern Accelerator Technologies for Geographic Information Science. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8745-6_1
41. Stolper, M W (1982). On the Dynasty of Šimaški and the Early Sukkalmahs. Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie, 72(1), 42-67. https://doi.org/10.1515/ZAVA.1982.72.1.42
42. Sumner, W. M. (2003). Early urban life in the land of Anshan: excavations at Tal-e Malyan in the highlands of Iran (Vol. 3). UPenn Museum of Archaeology.
43. Tilley, C. (1994). A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. Berg Publishers.
44. Thomas, J. (Ed.). (2000). Interpretive archaeology: A reader. A&C Black.
45. van Zeist, W., Smith, P. E., Palfenier-Vegter, R. M., Suwijn, M., & Casparie, W. A. (1984). An archaeobotanical study of Ganj Dareh Tepe, Iran. Palaeohistoria, 201-224.
46. Verhagen, P. (2012). Biting off more than we can chew? The current and future role of digital techniques in landscape archaeology. In S. J. Kluiving & E. Guttmann-Bond (Eds.), Landscape Archaeology between Art and Science, Amsterdam University Press, pp. 309-320. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048516070-023
47. Whitlam, J., Bogaard, A., Matthews, R., Matthews, W., Mohammadifar, Y., Ilkhani, H., & Charles, M. (2018). Pre-agricultural plant management in the uplands of the central Zagros: the archaeobotanical evidence from Sheikh-e Abad. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 27, 817-831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00334-018-0675-x
48. Wilkinson, K., & Stevens, C. (2003). Environmental archaeology: approaches, techniques and applications. Stroud.