Abstract
Opinion remains divided on the question of the dating of Tepe Hissar III and Dr. C. F. A. Schaeffer's recent work on the comparative stratigraphy of Western Asia provides further backing for the acceptance of a late third millenium dating. This being so, although the writer has already put forward a number of points to support a relatively low dating, it is felt that a more thorough examination of the material available, and a clearer appreciation of its implications are necessary. It has been recognised that there are definite and undeniable links between Luristan, Giyan I, Sialk V and VI, and the whole Caucasian region from Persian Talish to Koban, and that this association must lie between 1800 and 1200. The question that has to be decided is—did the period Hissar III B and C also lie between these dates, or had it come to an end three hundred or more years prior to 1800?
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
