Administrative Level List

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, POST, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "count": 451,
    "next": "https://seshatdata.com/api/sc/administrative-levels/?page=2",
    "previous": null,
    "results": [
        {
            "id": 112,
            "year_from": -3700,
            "year_to": -3700,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 3,
            "administrative_level_to": 3,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 113,
            "year_from": -3600,
            "year_to": -3600,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 3,
            "administrative_level_to": 3,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 114,
            "year_from": -3500,
            "year_to": -3500,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 3,
            "administrative_level_to": 4,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 115,
            "year_from": -3400,
            "year_to": -3400,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 4,
            "administrative_level_to": 4,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 116,
            "year_from": -3300,
            "year_to": -3300,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 4,
            "administrative_level_to": 4,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 117,
            "year_from": -3200,
            "year_to": -3200,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 4,
            "administrative_level_to": 4,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 118,
            "year_from": -3100,
            "year_to": -3100,
            "description": " levels.<br>Early Uruk<br>\"Given the lack of evidence for resident administration at settlements smaller than centers, the foregoing analysis would indicate the operation of a two-level administrative hierarchy within a three-level settlement system.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§ - <i>central government line gives us more than 2 levels. also, if there were assistant scribes at regional centers these would count as a third level.</i><br>Middle Uruk (perhaps from c3500 BCE)§REF§(Johnson 1987, 115) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>\"was one of economic and political reorganization. By Middle Uruk (ca. 3500 B.C.), the Susiana settlement system consisted of a four-tier settlement size hierarchy with direct evidence of resident administrative activity at its top and bottom levels. The presence of administrative function at the intervening levels of hierarchy, and of an overall four-level administrative organization seemed likely. In combination with evidence for the centralization of craft production as part of an administered local exchange system, these features suggested the operation of a Middle Uruk state.\"§REF§(Johnson 1987, 108) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C.§REF§<br>1. King§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King was the head of the palace which was \"managed like a large organisation.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§ - note that \"In the Uruk phase, the palace as the exclusive residence of the king did not yet exist.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>King also high-priest \"the human administrator of the city on behalf of the god, the latter being the ideological head of the city.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 80) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>2. Chief accountants at the temple3. Scribes<br>3. Teachers at scribal schools<br>3. Specialized workers e.g. Shepherds or postal service worker<br>Uruk phase c3800-3000 BCE: \"Bureaucracy, managed by the scribes and hierarchically subdivided, took care of the economic administration of the city-state. It managed and recorded the movement of surplus from the villages to the city. It also determined the redistribution of resources to its workers, and managed the State's land. Finally, the bureaucracy sent orders to specialised workmen, planned and constructed key infrastructures (such as canals, temples, or walls), and engaged in long-distance trade.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Uruk phase \"Urban Revolution\": \"Early state formation therefore featured both the rise of a ruling class, making decisions and benefiting from a privilaged position, and the development of a political and religious ideology. The latter was able to ensure stability and cohesion in this pyramid of inequality.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 79) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"Alongside the traditional animal representations a new repertory of scenes was elaborated on the seals, inspired by the daily activities of a population that was apparently proud of its new status. Thus there appears a 'priest-king,' possibly representative of a type of monarchy that is known from later Sumerian literature.\"§REF§(Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art.§REF§<br>\"Temple complexes, such as the temple of the goddess Inanna at Eana in Uruk (3200 BC), were large-scale enterprises, dealing in considerable quantities of goods and labor. A new system of recording and accounting needed to be devised. The accountants at the temple adapted a long-used system of accounting with clay tokens by impressing stylized outlines of tokens to denote numbers, with pictograms and other symbols to denote the objects that were being counted. A number of different numeration and metrological systems were used depending on the objects counted.\"§REF§(Joseph 2011, 135) Joseph, George Gheverghese. The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics (Third Edition). Princeton University Press.§REF§<br>\"the Sumerian civilisation which flourished before 3500 BC. This was an advanced civilisation building cities and supporting the people with irrigation systems, a legal system, administration, and even a postal service. Writing developed and counting was based on a sexagesimal system, that is to say base 60.\"§REF§J J O'Connor, J J. Robertson, E F. December 2000.  <a class=\"external free\" href=\"http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Babylonian_mathematics.html</a>§REF§<br>Lower Mesopotamia at this time - city-states as inscriptions suggests unity from time of Ur III (Shu-Sin): \"the celebratory tone was not directed against Mesopotamian cities or other urbanised centres (such as the ones in Elam and Syria) anymore. The inscriptions rather focused on those turbulent 'barbarian' groups from the steppes and mountains, considered to be uncivilised and inhuman.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 159) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Before Ur III there were no provinces just tributary city-states: \"The economy of earlier empires was predominantly based on commercial activities and political relations with states that were controlled by the centre and were dependent on it. However, the empires themselves did not directly control these resources. The direct management of resources was an innovation of the kings of Ur, who applied in throughout the centre of the empire, which was itself no longer divided into several tributary city-states, but into provinces governed by functionaries (the ensi) appointed by the kings of Ur.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 161) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>Writing developed \"as a response to the administrative needs (commodities, quantities, people, operations successfully accomplished or to accomplish) of the urban societies of the time.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>\"With these new instruments, administration became the most specialised work within the great organisations. The functionary became a 'scribe', who after a highly specialised training was able to write, calculate and perform various administrative tasks. Trainees in workshops learned the secrets of their craft within the first years of apprenticeship. On the contrary, scribes had to train in bona fide schools, where teachers taught their students to master a repertoire of hundreds of signs. This training was reserved to the members of the cultural and political elite of the State.\"§REF§(Leverani 2014, 76) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London.§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 4,
            "administrative_level_to": 4,
            "polity": {
                "id": 493,
                "name": "IrSusa2",
                "start_year": -3800,
                "end_year": -3100,
                "long_name": "Susa II",
                "new_name": "ir_susa_2",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": " §REF§ (Johnson 1987, 131) Johnson, Gregory A. in Hole, Frank ed. 1987. The Archaeology of Western Iran. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. §REF§ <br>Uruk (IrSusa1)\"Sometime during the fourth millennium, in the urban center of Uruk (for which the archaeological period is named), southern Mesopotamia acquired a specifically Sumerian historical identity. With the introduction of a system of writing, a gradual development from an earlier accounting system, a radical change occurred in the social organization and in the very foundations of thought. ... Susa, in its earliest period (Susa I) attached to the world of the Iranian plateau, was now (in Susa II) integrated into the early Sumerian civilization of Mesopotamia, which it interpreted with originality. Precise stratigraphic excavations conducted in recent decades have allowed us to trace developments at Susa in the Uruk phase, notably of an accounting system that preceded the slightly later appearance of writing.\" §REF§ (Amiet, Chevalier and Carter 1992, 4) Amiet, Pierre. Chevalier, Nicole. Carter, Elizabeth. in Harper, Prudence O. Aruz, Joan. Tallon, Francoise. eds. 1992. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. Metropolitan Museum of Art. §REF§ <br><br/>Chronology for Iran §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 513) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>Uruk colonies<br>Proto-Elamite period 3100-2700 BCE<br>Awan 2350-2200 BCE (contemporaneous with Akkad in Lower Mesopotamia)<br>Simash 2050-1950 BCE<br>Sukkalmah 1900-1750 BCE<br>Middle Elamite kingdom c1300-1100 BCE<br>Neo-Elamite kingdom 750-650 BCE<br>Media 650-550 BCE<br>Susa - Tal-i Malyan (Anshan, Anzan) [450-550] KM2.<br><br/>Liverani 2014 chronology for Isin-Larsa period 2000-1750 BCE §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 192-193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§  Elam §REF§ (Leverani 2014, 193) Liverani, Mario. Tabatabai, Soraia trans. 2014. The Ancient Near East. History, society and economy. Routledge. London. §REF§ <br>2000 BCE Shimashki dynasty, Kindattu c2000 BCE ... Indattu II c1925 BCE (last or last known)<br>1900 BCE Sukkalmah dynasty, Ebarat c1900 BCE ... Kuduzulush c1765 BCE (last or last known)<br><br/><br>\"Susa ... began its political life around 6000 BC, first as a city-state, then as an empire rivaling Sumer in Mesopotamia, and subsequently as the capital of one of the oldest empires of antiquity, Elam, around 3000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Thus the earliest experience of state tradition and administrative functions on a massive scale in Iran began around 6000 BC.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The main instrument of public administration and governance under the long history of the federal state of Elam was the bureaucracy, which also played a powerful role under the Median and the Persian empires.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Unlike the small city-state of Sumer, the Elamite empire was formed and administered on a massive scale and governed a large territory comprising present Iran and a major part of the Near East, at times including Babylonia and Assyria, for over 2500 years.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"Their bureaucratic contacts with the Assyrians and Babylonians gave them useful insights. However, being a rival to Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, the Elamite federal government developed the first Iranian tradition of public administration on a massive scale, though that tradition originated much earlier in the great city-state of Susa.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 21) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"development of an active intergovernmental management and federalism, perhaps the earliest in history.\" §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"In the cities, thriving activities reigned, where along with the villages, professions of all kinds flourished, showing clear evidence of variety and stratification of professional and, hence, social classes in ancient Elam.\"  §REF§ (Farazmand 2009, 22) Farazmand, Ali. 2009. Bureaucracy and Administration. CRC Press. Boca Raton. §REF§ <br>\"The development of centers on the Susiana plane, beginning with Middle Cha1colithic Chogha Mish and culminating in the rise of Susa during the Late Chalcolithic. suggests a trend towards regional control in some economic and administrative activities (Delougaz and Kantor 1996, Hole 1987b: 89-90). This trend towards centralization may also be suggested by the presence of possible elite or \"Khan's\" houses during this time at several sites (Hole 1987a: 41). In spite of these trends, Chalcolithic society throughout Khuzistan presents a strong egalitarian appearance. During the Middle and Late Chalcolithic, differential access to resources may have involved less archaeological1y visible items such as staples. access to water, and control over labor, as it appears to have done at this time in Mesopotamia (Stein 1994).\"  §REF§ (Peasnall in Peregrine and Ember 2002, 173) §REF§  The Middle Chalcolithic corresponds to 4800-3900 BCE and the Late Chalcolithic corresponds to 3900-3500 BCE in this book.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 9,
                    "name": "Susiana",
                    "subregion": "Levant-Mesopotamia",
                    "longitude": "48.235564000000",
                    "latitude": "32.382851000000",
                    "capital_city": "Susa (Shush)",
                    "nga_code": "IR",
                    "fao_country": "Iran",
                    "world_region": "Southwest Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 45,
                    "name": "Iran",
                    "subregions_list": "Iran",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 11,
                        "name": "Southwest Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 237,
            "year_from": -1200,
            "year_to": -1000,
            "description": " levels.<br>\"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed.\"§REF§R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61, pp. 253-302§REF§<br>_Early in period_<br>1. Chief<br>_Later in period_<br>1. Paramount chief<br>2. Lesser chief<br><br>\"The disparities of scale, design, and materials in megalithic mortuary preparation and associated grave goods demonstrate differential access to labor and a variety of goods and resources that strongly suggest significant differences in social rank within Iron Age settlement communities\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§. However, few sources offers an explicit description of the social and political hierarchy of the time, as \"the study of variation among megalithic cemeteries has been beset by low-sample sizes of well-documented excavated interments and by a remarkable paucity of radiometric dates\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§.<br>\"Among the material changes documented in the Iron Age archaeological record are more complex and labor-intensive settlement designs, new mortuary practices, the production and consumption of a range of new slipped and polished ceramic wares as well as iron tools, weapons, and hardware. Most notably, there was significant transformation in the organization of social relations during the Iron Age that produced tangible social differences and inequalities.\"§REF§(Johansen 2014, 1-28) Johansen, P. 2014. The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India. Journal of Social Archaeology. 0(0).§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 1,
            "administrative_level_to": 1,
            "polity": {
                "id": 86,
                "name": "InDecIA",
                "start_year": -1200,
                "end_year": -300,
                "long_name": "Deccan - Iron Age",
                "new_name": "in_deccan_ia",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": "The South Indian Iron Age lasted, roughly, from 1200 to 300 BCE. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 59) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  The vast majority of Iron Age megalithic structures and associated sites have been found in the modern-day Indian states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 253) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§  As in the preceding Neolithic period, South Indians sustained themselves through bovine and caprine pastoralism as well as the cultivation of millet and pulses - and, increasingly, wheat, barley, and rice. Settlement designs became more complex and labour-intensive, and new social arrangements and mortuary practices emerged. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§ <br><i>Population and political organization</i><br>Differences in the scale, design and materials of mortuary megalithic structures and associated grave goods point to the growing hierarchization of South Indian societies at this time. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  However, there was some variation in terms of the sociopolitical organization of individual communities: for example, it is likely that some chiefs with limited decision-making powers ruled over single settlements, and that more powerful leaders based in large centres exerted some control over surrounding settlements, and that some polities were made up of several settlements ruled by a hierarchy of leaders who answered to a single paramount chief. The first type of polity probably prevailed at the beginning of the Iron Age, while the second and third type likely became more common towards its end. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 287-91) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§ <br>No population estimates for this period could be found in the specialist literature.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 15,
                    "name": "Deccan",
                    "subregion": "Central India",
                    "longitude": "76.625407000000",
                    "latitude": "15.386856000000",
                    "capital_city": "Kampli",
                    "nga_code": "DEC",
                    "fao_country": "India",
                    "world_region": "South Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 36,
                    "name": "Central India",
                    "subregions_list": "Deccan, etc",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 9,
                        "name": "South Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 333,
            "year_from": -999,
            "year_to": -600,
            "description": " levels.<br>\"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed.\"§REF§R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61, pp. 253-302§REF§<br>_Early in period_<br>1. Chief<br>_Later in period_<br>1. Paramount chief<br>2. Lesser chief<br><br>\"The disparities of scale, design, and materials in megalithic mortuary preparation and associated grave goods demonstrate differential access to labor and a variety of goods and resources that strongly suggest significant differences in social rank within Iron Age settlement communities\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§. However, few sources offers an explicit description of the social and political hierarchy of the time, as \"the study of variation among megalithic cemeteries has been beset by low-sample sizes of well-documented excavated interments and by a remarkable paucity of radiometric dates\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§.<br>\"Among the material changes documented in the Iron Age archaeological record are more complex and labor-intensive settlement designs, new mortuary practices, the production and consumption of a range of new slipped and polished ceramic wares as well as iron tools, weapons, and hardware. Most notably, there was significant transformation in the organization of social relations during the Iron Age that produced tangible social differences and inequalities.\"§REF§(Johansen 2014, 1-28) Johansen, P. 2014. The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India. Journal of Social Archaeology. 0(0).§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 1,
            "administrative_level_to": 2,
            "polity": {
                "id": 86,
                "name": "InDecIA",
                "start_year": -1200,
                "end_year": -300,
                "long_name": "Deccan - Iron Age",
                "new_name": "in_deccan_ia",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": "The South Indian Iron Age lasted, roughly, from 1200 to 300 BCE. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 59) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  The vast majority of Iron Age megalithic structures and associated sites have been found in the modern-day Indian states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 253) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§  As in the preceding Neolithic period, South Indians sustained themselves through bovine and caprine pastoralism as well as the cultivation of millet and pulses - and, increasingly, wheat, barley, and rice. Settlement designs became more complex and labour-intensive, and new social arrangements and mortuary practices emerged. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§ <br><i>Population and political organization</i><br>Differences in the scale, design and materials of mortuary megalithic structures and associated grave goods point to the growing hierarchization of South Indian societies at this time. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  However, there was some variation in terms of the sociopolitical organization of individual communities: for example, it is likely that some chiefs with limited decision-making powers ruled over single settlements, and that more powerful leaders based in large centres exerted some control over surrounding settlements, and that some polities were made up of several settlements ruled by a hierarchy of leaders who answered to a single paramount chief. The first type of polity probably prevailed at the beginning of the Iron Age, while the second and third type likely became more common towards its end. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 287-91) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§ <br>No population estimates for this period could be found in the specialist literature.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 15,
                    "name": "Deccan",
                    "subregion": "Central India",
                    "longitude": "76.625407000000",
                    "latitude": "15.386856000000",
                    "capital_city": "Kampli",
                    "nga_code": "DEC",
                    "fao_country": "India",
                    "world_region": "South Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 36,
                    "name": "Central India",
                    "subregions_list": "Deccan, etc",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 9,
                        "name": "South Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        },
        {
            "id": 338,
            "year_from": -599,
            "year_to": -300,
            "description": " levels.<br>\"At the smallest and least complex (in terms of population, geographic scale and decision-making arrangements) end of this continuum, chiefs with limited decision-making prerogatives probably presided over single settlements. In larger examples, more powerful leaders based in larger centers likely exerted varying degrees of control over multiple and varying numbers of settlements. Finally, at the most complex end of this continuum, paramount chiefs ruling from large regional centers with lesser chiefs as political subordinates dominated even larger polities containing numerous settlements and substantial populations. In the present context it seems most likely that chiefdoms of the first type were prevalent during the earlier phases of the Iron Age, with those of the latter two types developing with increasing frequency as time passed.\"§REF§R. Brubaker, Aspects of mortuary variability in the South Indian Iron Age, in <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61, pp. 253-302§REF§<br>_Early in period_<br>1. Chief<br>_Later in period_<br>1. Paramount chief<br>2. Lesser chief<br><br>\"The disparities of scale, design, and materials in megalithic mortuary preparation and associated grave goods demonstrate differential access to labor and a variety of goods and resources that strongly suggest significant differences in social rank within Iron Age settlement communities\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§. However, few sources offers an explicit description of the social and political hierarchy of the time, as \"the study of variation among megalithic cemeteries has been beset by low-sample sizes of well-documented excavated interments and by a remarkable paucity of radiometric dates\" §REF§P. Johansen, The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India (2014), Journal of Social Archaeology 0(0): 1-28§REF§.<br>\"Among the material changes documented in the Iron Age archaeological record are more complex and labor-intensive settlement designs, new mortuary practices, the production and consumption of a range of new slipped and polished ceramic wares as well as iron tools, weapons, and hardware. Most notably, there was significant transformation in the organization of social relations during the Iron Age that produced tangible social differences and inequalities.\"§REF§(Johansen 2014, 1-28) Johansen, P. 2014. The politics of spatial renovation: Reconfiguring ritual practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India. Journal of Social Archaeology. 0(0).§REF§<br>",
            "note": null,
            "finalized": true,
            "created_date": null,
            "modified_date": null,
            "tag": "TRS",
            "is_disputed": false,
            "is_uncertain": false,
            "expert_reviewed": true,
            "drb_reviewed": null,
            "name": "administrative_level",
            "administrative_level_from": 2,
            "administrative_level_to": 2,
            "polity": {
                "id": 86,
                "name": "InDecIA",
                "start_year": -1200,
                "end_year": -300,
                "long_name": "Deccan - Iron Age",
                "new_name": "in_deccan_ia",
                "polity_tag": "LEGACY",
                "general_description": "The South Indian Iron Age lasted, roughly, from 1200 to 300 BCE. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 59) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  The vast majority of Iron Age megalithic structures and associated sites have been found in the modern-day Indian states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 253) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§  As in the preceding Neolithic period, South Indians sustained themselves through bovine and caprine pastoralism as well as the cultivation of millet and pulses - and, increasingly, wheat, barley, and rice. Settlement designs became more complex and labour-intensive, and new social arrangements and mortuary practices emerged. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§ <br><i>Population and political organization</i><br>Differences in the scale, design and materials of mortuary megalithic structures and associated grave goods point to the growing hierarchization of South Indian societies at this time. §REF§ (Johansen 2014, 65) Peter G. Johansen. 2014. 'The Politics of Spatial Renovation: Reconfiguring Ritual Practices in Iron Age and Early Historic South India'. <i>Journal of Social Archaeology</i> 14 (1): 59-86. §REF§  However, there was some variation in terms of the sociopolitical organization of individual communities: for example, it is likely that some chiefs with limited decision-making powers ruled over single settlements, and that more powerful leaders based in large centres exerted some control over surrounding settlements, and that some polities were made up of several settlements ruled by a hierarchy of leaders who answered to a single paramount chief. The first type of polity probably prevailed at the beginning of the Iron Age, while the second and third type likely became more common towards its end. §REF§ (Brubaker 2001-2002, 287-91) Robert Brubaker. 2001-2002. 'Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age'. <i>Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate &amp; Research Institute</i> 60-61: 253-302. §REF§ <br>No population estimates for this period could be found in the specialist literature.",
                "shapefile_name": null,
                "private_comment": null,
                "created_date": null,
                "modified_date": null,
                "home_nga": {
                    "id": 15,
                    "name": "Deccan",
                    "subregion": "Central India",
                    "longitude": "76.625407000000",
                    "latitude": "15.386856000000",
                    "capital_city": "Kampli",
                    "nga_code": "DEC",
                    "fao_country": "India",
                    "world_region": "South Asia"
                },
                "home_seshat_region": {
                    "id": 36,
                    "name": "Central India",
                    "subregions_list": "Deccan, etc",
                    "mac_region": {
                        "id": 9,
                        "name": "South Asia"
                    }
                },
                "private_comment_n": {
                    "id": 1,
                    "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
                }
            },
            "comment": null,
            "private_comment": {
                "id": 1,
                "text": "NO_PRIVATE_COMMENTS"
            },
            "citations": [],
            "curator": []
        }
    ]
}