ebook img

The Oxus Civilization PDF

44 Pages·7.9 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview The Oxus Civilization

CuPAUAM39,2013,pp.21-63 The Oxus Civilization La Civilización del Oxus 1 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky Recibido:01-07-2013 Aceptado:20-10-2013 Resumen LaCivilizacióndelOxus,tambiénconocidacomolaCivilizacióndeBactria-Margiana,estácentradaeneloasisde Murghab,Turkmenistán, y datada entre el 2200-1700AC. Descubierta por Victor Sarianidi en la década de 1970, continua sus excavaciones en el poblado de +20 hectáreas de Gonur depe. La Civilización del Oxus tiene una arquitectura única, una cultura material excepcionalmente rica, y contactos con Mesopotamia, el Valle del Indo y lallanurairaní. Palabrasclave:CivilizacióndelOxus,BronceInicial,Turkmenistán,Gonurdepe. Abstract The Oxus Civilization, also known as the Bactrian-Margina Civilization, is centere in the Murghab Oasis, Turkmenistan,anddatedto2200-1700BC.DiscoveredbyVictorSarianidiinthe1970s,hecontinueshisexcavations onthe+20hectaresiteofGonurdepe.TheOxusCivilizationhasuniquearchitecture,anexceptionallyrichmaterial culture,andcontactswithMesopotamia,theIndusValleyandtheIranianPlateau. Keywords:OxusCivilization,EarlyBronzeAge,Turkmenistan,Gonurdepe. Thediscoveryofaspectacularartifact,arich lizational status, was uncovered in CentralAsia tomb, a treasured hoard, or an ancient city (Sarianidi, 1976). Its principal discoverer was belonging to the earliest civilizations attracts a Victor Sarianidi, then of Moscow’s Institute of very considerable attention. Thus, one might Archaeology,SovietAcademyofSciences(Fig.1). imagine that the discovery of a completely Hehasspentthepast40yearsexcavatingthe40+ unknown civilization would create a flurry of hectare site of Gonur depe in Turkmenistan. For interest. At the very least, one might expect this archaeological discovery he coined the cum- such a discovery to attend the interest of the bersome term the ‘Bactrian Margiana professional archaeologist. Not entirely so. In Archaeological Complex’, hereafter the BMAC. notable introductory texts on archaeology there Bactria and Margiana were the geographical is hardly mention of its existence (Fagan, 2009; terms by which the Greeks, following Renfrew and Bahn, 2008; Scarre, 2009; Alexander’s conquests referred to this region, of Chazan 2010). In the late 1970s a remarkable CentralAsia. Margiana (Margush), in turn was a archaeological complex, fully worthy of civi- Persian satrapy compromising both regions. 1 Stephen Phillips Professor of Archaeology and Ethnology, University, 11 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138- Department of Anthropology, Peabody Museum, Harvard 2019,[email protected] ISSN0211-1608 22 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 Figure1.VictorSarianidiinthelaboratoryatGonurdepe(Sarianidi,2007:11). Alternatively, and with increasing frequency, English. All are splendidly illustrated with pho- the ‘Oxus Civilization’, is used to denote the tos, plans, and drawings of the architecture and BMAC. The Oxus being the name the Greeks artifacts recovered. All are dominated by used in denoting the greatAmu Darya River, the Sarianidi’s expansive interpretations regarding greatest of Central Asian rivers. The settlement the religious beliefs, ethnicity, and language of density of the BMAC is distributed along the the residents of the BMAC (more on this below). smaller Murghab River which originates in the A series of radiocarbon dates from a number of Paropamisus Mountains of Afghanistan and BMACsettlementsplacethecivilizationbetween debauches into the Karakorum desert (Masimov, 2200-1700 B.C. (but see H. Junger’s article for 1975;Salvatori,2008).Overthepasttwodecades radiocarbondatesof2500-1700B.C.inKozhinet this region has been subject to intensive settle- alii, 2010) (Fig. 2). ment survey (Salvatori and Tosi, eds., 2008; The quest for origins, though often said to be Gubaev et alii, 1998) and the excavation of at a secondary consideration, remains a primary leastahalfdozensites.Todateseveralbookshave focus of archaeological concern. The conceit of been written byVictor Sarianidi (see bibliography the archaeologist is to focus upon an ethno- andLamberg-Karlovsky,2003forreview),largely graphicreconstructionofthepast,aconcernthat basedonhisownexcavationsatthesiteofGonur depe. His books are published in Turkmenistan transcends the ephemera of ‘origins’. The ques- and Russia, thus very difficult of access and are tion remains: When, Where and How did this laudably tri-lingual: Turkman, Russian and archaeological entity originate? Within the con- ISSN0211-1608 CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 TheOxusCivilization 23 Figure2.TheriverineoasesandmajorsettlementsoftheOxusCivilization(Sarianidi,1998:34fig.9). text of the BMAC this is a vexing and much due to the lack of excavation but to the research debated topic. Two hypotheses, their foreign vs. strategy pursued. localorigin,contendforattention–givenpresent As to the origin of the Oxus Civilization the evidence neither can be conclusively affirmed or first hypothesis argues for a distant and foreign negated. Chronological distinctions, settlement source. This view is championed by Sarianidi sizeandpattern,relationshiptoirrigation,subsis- who believes their origin is to be sought in tence economy, and socio-political structure Anatolia. In his view a great migration of the remain almost entirely unexamined. This is not future residents of the BMAC traversed ISSN0211-1608 24 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 Figure3. Sarianidi’shypothesisconcerningtheeastwardmigrationsoftheOxusCivilizationfromAnatolia (Sarianidi,1998:163fig.75). Mesopotamia where they “could not find free Inthelasthalfofthethirdmillennium,andfor land”, crossed the Iranian Plateau, and finally millennia before that, the Iranian Plateau was found their “free land” in the deltaic fan of the inhabited by a mosaic of distinctive cultures – all Murghab River (Fig. 3). Other tribes are alleged reasonably defined by the archaeological record to have continued their migration to (Petrie, 2013). Toward the last centuries of the Northwestern China (Sarianidi, 2009: 42-43). thirdmillenniumarestrictedinventoryofBMAC Central to Sarianidi’s imagination is his belief artifacts appear on a number of sites on the thatthemigrantswereAryans,specificallyIndo- Iranian Plateau and in the Indus Valley and the Iranians,whofollowedproto-Zoroastrianbeliefs Persian Gulf: i.e.: Susa, Tepe Yahya, Shahdad, and rituals. Tentative support for the foreign Khinaman, Hissar, Jiroft, Harappa, Mohenjodaro, emergence comes from Pierre Amiet (2004). and Tell Abraq. The archaeologist refers to the Both entertain notions of BMAC affiliations findsofBMACmaterialsonsitesofanindigenous (origins) with an Elamite world pointing to a culture as “site intrusion”, that is, artifacts number of archaeological sites on the Iranian restrictedinnumberandtyperecoveredfroman Plateau that contain BMAC materials. Amiet indigenous culture. There can be little doubt identifies the BMAC as having a “Trans- that the BMAC influenced the indigenous cul- Elamite” identity, a culture of artisan nomads tures of the Iranian Plateau and the Indus distributed across the Iranian Plateau to Central Civilization, while in complimentary fashion Asia. Steinkeller (see n.d. in bibliography) simi- numerous artifacts of the Indus and Iranian larly entertains a diffuse origin from the Iranian Plateau are known from Gonur depe (Sarianidi, Plateau. 2009) (Fig. 4a, 4d, 4e). Note, however, that not ISSN0211-1608 CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 TheOxusCivilization 25 Figures4a.CeramicparallelsbetweentheOxusandShahdad,Iran(Sarianidi,1998:139fig.71). a single BMAC artifact has been recovered from Iranian Plateau: Malyan (ancientAnshan), Godin Mesopotamia while an inscribed Akkadian seal TepeandonallsitesofNWIran(ontheKhorasan wasrecoveredfromGonurdepe(Sarianidi,2002; Road), while present at Susa they are absent on 2005) (Fig. 4b). The view for a foreign, migrato- neighboringChogaMishinKhorasan,andabsent ry origin of the BMAC simply lacks sufficient at Shahr-i Sokhta; while present at Shahdad they credible evidence. The distribution of a diffuse are absent at Yahya, Konar Sandal, and Bampur. inventoryofBMACartifactsoveravastlandscape OntheIranianPlateauwhereBMACartifactsare offerslittlegeographicalfocusforapointoforigin. recovered they are intrusive, a limited number of Amiet(1986)and to a certain extent Steinkeller’s artifacts, found in the context of an indigenous (n.d.) promotion of a trans-Elamite Culture (con- local culture. One cannot demonstrate the exis- sisting according to Amiet of pastoral nomads) tence of a shared trans-Elamite Culture on the that identifies BMAC origins within the context Iranian Plateau only a limited inventory of intru- ofindigenousculturesoftheIranianPlateausim- sive BMAC artifacts recovered from distinctive ply does not stand up to the archaeological evi- cultures on the Iranian Plateau! dence.The BMAC is a wholly distinctive culture Hypothesis two argues for a local oases/pied- whoseoriginsaretobesoughtinCentralAsianot mont origin.Arich post Paleolithic settlement of within the context of the cultures of the Iranian CentralAsia begins with a mid-seventh millenni- Plateau! um Neolithic (Dani and Masson, 1992). In the So we turn to hypothesis two; an indigenous piedmontzoneoftheKopetDaghMountainssites origin. BMAC artifacts are, in fact wholly absent as Ilgynly tepe, dated to the fifth millennium, on important and contemporary sites of the illustrate an elaborate metallurgy, an exceptional Figures4b.AkkadiancylindersealwithinscriptionfromGonur(Sarianidi,2005:258,fig.115). ISSN0211-1608 26 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 Figures4c.SealoftheIndusCivilizationfromGonurdepe(Sarianidi,2005:258fig.114). repertoire of figurines, complex mosaics within rd 3 millennium. Excavations at Altyn depe, elaboratearchitecturalfeatures,allwithinasubstan- recently directed by Liubov Kircho (2008; tial settlement (Solovyova, 2005; Salvatori et alii, Masson, 2001) suggest a local emergence for the 2009) Impressive Chalcolithic and Bronze Age BMAC.Furthermore,theBMACwasnotthefirst settlements, such as Namazga and Altyn depe, tosettleintheMurghabdelta.Recentexcavations th sustain urban populations throughout the 4 and atAdji Kui 1, directed by Gabriele Rossi Osmida (2008; 2011), indicate the presence of a distinc- tive earlier settlement, radiocarbon dated to ca. 2700 B.C. Stratified above that settlement are several fully fortified BMAC communities. The excavator argues for a local development of the BMAC. The indigenous nature of the Oxus Civilization is not, however, a new notion. Years ago Philip Kohl (1984) in an early and enduring reviewofthearchaeologyofCentralAsiaoffered a compelling argument for a local origin. ThesignatureoftheOxusCivilizationrestsin its impressive architecture. More specifically, in Figure4d.Duckweight(?)fromGonurdepe(Rossi the monumentality of the fortification systems Osmida,2002:100). that surround each settlement (Fig. 5). The sites Figure4e.Cylindersealfromthe“TempleofSacrifices”,Gonurdepe(Sarianidi,2005:283fig.137). ISSN0211-1608 CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 TheOxusCivilization 27 of Gonur, Togolok, Adji Kui 1 and 9 serve as Contemporary communities, i.e. Adji Kui 1 exemplary models of the extent to which the and AdjiKui9,arelessthan3kilometersdistant community was fortified. One, two, even three from each other and are both well fortified, perimeter walls, most 2-4 meters in impressive suggesting that even nearest neighbors, likely width,encloseacommunityincorporatinganarea subject to a common authority, were fortified. in excess of 20,000 square meters. Within this Decades ago 12 sites were identified within a 20 area at Gonur, Sarianidi identifies temples, x 20 kilometer region in theAdji Kui Oasis.This palaces, areas of craft production, and ritual does not, however, accurately reflect the settle- activities. Beyond this fortified area the commu- ment regime of the oasis.Ofthe12sitesinitially nityextendeditswalledsettlementto20+hectares. surveyedonlythreesurvivedthepast20yearsof Gubaev et alii (1998) notes that numerous settle- agricultural expansion, principally cotton pro- mentssurroundingGonurwerenotfortified.Such duction. Alluviation and an extensive agricul- an observation becomes dubious in light of the tural development that began in the 1930s factthatfortificationsystemsaroundGonurcould claimed the destruction of an unknown number not be determined prior to excavation. of ancient settlements. Extensive alluviation, Figure5.AerialviewoftheexcavationatGonurdepe(Sarianidi,2007:145). ISSN0211-1608 28 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 deflation, and the destruction of sites resulting remarkable persistence, and last remnants, of the from the reclamation of agricultural land prohibit CentralAsianQalaanditsassociatedsocialstruc- th th the reconstruction of an accurate settlement ture, is readily documented in 19 and 20 cen- regime. An approximation, however, of the turyAfghanistan (Barfield, 2010). In his study of dense settlement regimes within the Murghab theBMACthearchitecturalhistorianMohammed deltaduringtheBronzeandIronAgesishintedat Mamedov (2003: 41, 139) observes that the in the archaeological surveys and maps produced monumentalarchitecturewasbuilton a“definite over the past two decades by the joint Turkman modular plan”, oriented to the cardinal points, and Italian missions (Salvatori and Tosi, 2008; while the size of bricks is the same as that found Gubaev, Koshelenko andTosi, 1998). on earlier sites (“AeneolithicAge”) in the Kopet Dagh,suggestingalocalCentralAsiancontinuity What do the elaborate and uniquely fortified of architectural construction. He further observes communities of the BMAC signify and how do that the architectural features of BMAC fortifica- they address their social world? A cycle of vio- tions, both monumental and domestic architec- lence must be entertained. Large urban centers ture, involved “the same planning principles that suchasGonurandTogolokpresidedoversatellite formed the basis of many monumental construc- communities which were also fortified. Within tions of Central Asia from the antique and the restrictive oases of the Murghab deltaic fan medieval periods that subsequently survived in ecological constraints may have exacerbated th folkarchitectureuntilthemiddleofthe20 cen- needs for access to water, agricultural land and tury” pasturage. Contests for the control of water and th accesstoirrigationsystems,amplydocumentedat A19 century description of these qala’s and this time throughout Central Asia (Andrianov, the central role they played in opposing the 1969), fueled conflict for the control of limited Russian annexation of Central Asia is vividly land and water resources. Ethnographic and his- described in the books of Mac Gahan (1874; torical sources offer instruction and ample analo- Schuyler, 1876; O’Donovan, 1882). Schuyler (1876, II: 381) writes: “These forts were in all gies. In the later IronAge and medieval period a probabilityintendedtoprotecttheaqueducts[irri- characteristic feature of the landscape was the gation systems] and the tilled land from incur- Qala – a large fortified community serving as the sions of nomads”. In 1881, between January 12- residence of the local Khan and a defensive th 24 atsaristarmyunderthecommandofGeneral retreat for the community in times of attack MikhailSkobelevlaidsiegetothelargerectangu- (Lamberg-Karlovsky, 1994; Szabo and Barfied, lar fortress of Geok Tepe. It was the last Central 1991: 162-163) in their comprehensive study of Asian territory, defended by the Tekke Turkman, architecture offer the following definition for the to fall to tsarist Russia. The population of the qala: “The dwelling type known as the qala surrounding countryside gathered in a fortress originated as a fortified farm compound with with an uncanny resemblance to those of the thick, massive outer walls in square or oblong BMAC. The Turkman are said to have suffered plan averaging 40-80 m per side of 6-8 m in losses of 14,500 before surrendering to General height. At each corner is a defense tower rising 1 Skobelev. O’Donovan (1882) was an eyewitness approximately1 / timestheheightofthewalls 3 totheGeokTepebattleandoffersavividdescrip- (…) multistoried dwelling and storage spaces are tionofthatconfrontation.Hisobservationsonthe constructedagainsttheouterwallswiththedoors fortifications are of interest (O’Donovan, 1882, and windows facing a central compound (…) II:143)“Thefortificationswereofthekindwhich [with] single entry gate (…) Each qala is a self- the populations of these CentralAsia plains seem contained unit providing shelter and protection to have constructed from time immemorial and for an extended family, their farm animals, and the remnants of which one still sees scattered far the provisions necessary for survival”. and near” and “it was the intention…to concen- Such is a fulsome description of the BMAC trate themselves and their families within the architecturaltemplate.Forcenturiesthelargestof fortress in case of invasion” (O’Donovan, 1882, qala’swasthecenterofpoliticalauthority,afocus II:146)and,finally,“eachmanhavinghismusket of craft production, a facility for the storage of slungonisbackashefollowstheploughorharrow” surplus products, and the residence of the tribal and “on the first alarm of an inroad, the oxen are leader, family and retainers (Tolstov, 1948). The hurriedlydrivenunderthewallsofoneofthefor- ISSN0211-1608 CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 TheOxusCivilization 29 tified towers which dot the country” and “place made to publish materials from distinctive strata. themselveswithintheforttoprotecttheirproper- Regrettably, even after more than thirty years of tybythefireoftheirmuskets(O’Donovan,1882, research and excavation, the chronology and II: 62-63). Of equal interest is his observation on stratigraphy of the BMAC remains deeply the association of forts and irrigation. In dis- problematic. The principle sites excavated cussing the great Dam of Banfi and its nearby Gonur, Togolok and Sapeli, to mention but three, fort,theBabaKabasi,hestates‘withoutthisdam did not attend to stratigraphic distinctions nor are the present cultivated area would be reduced to a thelimitednumberofradiocarbondatesassociated condition as bleak and arid as that of the plains with specific stratigraphic levels or material that surround it (…) the old Sarouk fortress (…) inventory.Gonurdepe,subjectedtoover30years constituted the central stronghold of Merv [the ofexcavationandwith1000sofsquaremetersof principal city along the Murghab], and protected architectureexposedtovariousdepthsispublished the water-works” (O’Donovan, 1882, II: 175). as a single period site. Its material inventory, different building levels, and cemetery with over The Merv Oasis which constitutes the apex of 2500 burials exposed, is published as a contem- theMurghabdeltaicfanisabout40milesinwidth poraneous inventory. The C-14 dates, often and length and constitutes approximately 1, 600 derived from unspecified contexts, bracket a squaremiles,beingthelargestoftheOaseswithin th th range of 2100-1700 B.C. In his 85 year, Victor the BMAC horizon. In the 19 century Henry Sarianidi, with relentless energy, enthusiasm, and Lansdell (1885: 476-477) gave the width of a vivid imagination, continues to excavate at Murghab around Merv as “80 to 100 paces” and Gonur.To date he has published more than a half up to “23 feet” in depth. The presence of a large dozenbooksonGonur.Hisimaginationpopulates dam“divertsthewateramongthetwosectionsof Gonur with kings, priests, temples and palaces. the oasis by means of two main canals, the TheinhabitantsofGonurareidentifiedasAryans, Otamish and the Tokhtamish (…) each of the specifically undifferentiated Indo-Iranians. two canals distributes water through about 50 Parallelstoarchitectureandmaterialsremainsare leading arteries, and these in turn feed hundreds drawn with Syria, Anatolia, and Greece. The of smaller leats”. inhabitants of Gonur are identified as adhering to Each of the two canals was occupied by “proto-Zoroastrian” beliefs, while architectural different clans of the Tekke tribe, themselves features, ceramics and small finds are taken to be divided into 17 distinct branches. Additionally, evidence for Zoroastrian ritual behavior.Temples the Merv Oasis was inhabited by clans of the abound: ‘the Northern and Southern Water Akhal, Saryks, Salors, Ersaris “and others” Temples’, ‘Fire Temples’ the ‘Solar Temple of totaling “230,000 souls” in a state of continuous Mithra’, the ‘Temple of Sacrifices’, the ‘Temple tribalconflict.Nineteenthcenturytravelliterature of Communal Eating’ and the ‘Temple for describesasettlementregime,apastoralnomadic Soma/Haoma’. The ‘Temple of Mithra’is said to context, an omnipresent irrigation network, and contain a ‘solar altar’(a not unusual hearth with the presence of fortifications protecting settle- ample ashes) and a composite figurine “found ment and waterworks that appear to mirror their nearby’identified asArshtat, Goddess of Justice. BronzeAge counterparts (Fig. 6). Such conjecture is sufficient to reach the conclu- sion that “the origin of Mithraism should be Today the stratified BMAC site of Adji Kui looked for in Bactia and Margiana’ (Sarainidi, (Rossi Osmida, 2002; 2008) offers the best evi- 2008: 121) (Fig. 7). denceforthechronologyoftheOxusCivilization whileGonur,alsoastratifiedsite,offersthemost Sarainidi’sevidenceforthepresenceofSoma- extensivehorizontalexposureandmaterialinven- Haoma in each of these ‘temples’is loosely con- tory. At Gonur the numerous publications of ceived. Soma-hoama is the hallucinogenic (?) Sarianidi (see bibliography) present the site as drink favored by Indra, the God of Battle, men- consisting of a single period, without stratigraphic tioned in the RgVeda as a “god of Gods” (RV or chronological distinctions (Salvatori, 2010; 9.42). The most comprehensive and influential Lamberg-Karlovsky, 2003). Although Sarianidi study involving the much contested identity of (2003:206-208)writesofdifferentbuildinglevels, Soma-Haoma, including a review of the related i.e. as many as four temples built on top of each linguistic, Vedic, historical, and ethnographic other (Sarianidi, 2009: 99, fig. 17-18) no effort is material, is that of Harry Falk (2003). He con- ISSN0211-1608 30 C.C.Lamberg-Karlovsky CuPAUAM39,2013:21-63 Figure6. Medievalirrigationsystemofcanalscontrolledbyspecifictriballineage (Muhammedjanov,1978:130fig.19). cludes that for Soma-Haoma “there is no need to poppy seeds and cannabis.Analysis of both finds look for a plant other than ephedra, the one plant of ephedra could not confirm its identification used to this day by the Parsis”, the present day (see Houben, 2003 for the 1995 analysis and Zoroastrians of Iran and India. In 1995, Sarianidi Bakels, 2003 for the second identification). As claimed to have found ephedra twigs in a vessel with the ‘Temple of Soma-Haoma’the identifica- uncovered at Gonur. In 1998 a second discovery tion of numerous other “temples” rest more on of ephedra was reported as accompanied by allegation than on demonstration. In each and

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.