A petrographic approach to study Dalma pottery at the sites of Seh Gabi, Godin Tepe, and Tepe Siahbid in the Central Zagros of Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Dalma represents the early Middle Chalcolithic pottery in the Central Zagros of Iran. • Petrography is used to examine raw material procurement and provenance of pottery. • Dalma pottery was produced locally at Seh Gabi, Godin Tepe, and Tepe Siahbid. • The clay sources correlate with the geological characteristics of each region. • Knowledge of pottery making was transmitted by people associated with the Dalma tradition. This paper focuses on aspects of pottery production during the “Dalma period”, the earliest phase of the Middle Chalcolithic in the east Central Zagros of Iran, according to Henrickson’s chronology (1985a, 1991). This period is dated to 5200/5100–4600 BCE ( Bahranipoor, 2023 ). Dalma pottery has a wide distribution, not only within modern borders of Iran but also extending into areas of Mesopotamia and the south Caucasus. In this study, a petrographic analysis has been conducted on pottery samples from three sites: Seh Gabi, Godin Tepe, and Tepe Siahbid, to examine raw material procurement and pottery provenance. The first two sites are located close to each other in the east Central Zagros, while Tepe Siahbid is situated in the west Central Zagros. By comparing results from these sites, I examine whether Dalma pottery was locally made or transported between these regions. The results show that, despite their similar appearance, the pottery samples from these regions were all locally produced, as the clay sources used in the east Central Zagros differ from those in the west, and these sources correlate with the geology of each region. The local production of Dalma pottery suggests that the knowledge of making pottery, rather than the pottery itself, was disseminated by people associated with this tradition. Moreover, a degree of variation in the local clay used in pottery making indicates that pottery was produced at the household level in these societies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".