An Archaeological GIS of theSurkhan Darya Province(Southern Uzbekistan)Sebastian StrideBarcelona University

This article presents some of theresults of a long-term projectundertaken by the author withinthe framework of the MAFOuz deBactriane.1 It will be focused onthe use of GIS for dataorganisation2 and the potentialthat this offers for developingand testing new models andtheories.

The Surkhan Darya province(20,800 km2) is situated in thesouth of Uzbekistan and bordersAfghanistan, Turkmenistan andTajikistan; most specialistsconsider that it forms part of theancient region known as Bactria.In simplified terms, the provincecan be described as an alluvial

valley, limited by the Amu Daryariver to the South andsurrounded by mountains on allthree other sides. The mainmountain passes are the “IronGates,” on the roadto Samarkand, andthe low foothills,which separate itfrom the Kafirniganvalley and Dushan-be to the north-east. The climate iscontinental withmild winters, littlerainfall (just over100 mm./year in thesouth, but more in the north) anda long summer drought. Agri-culture therefore depends to a

large extent on artificial irrigationin the alluvial plain, although dryfarming is practiced in thefoothills. The mountains, es-pecially to the north and west,provide excellent summerpastures and pastoralism hastherefore probably always playedan important role in the humanecology of the region.

For nearly 70 years, archae-ological work was undertaken inthe Surkhan Darya provinceexclusively by Soviet teams. Theyproduced a wealth of quality data

including over 2500 publicationsdescribing the excavations ofsites such as Dzharkutan and

Sapalli Tepe (BronzeAge), Kuchuk Tepe andKyzyl Tepe (Iron Age),Dal’verzin Tepe, Khal-chaian and Termez(Kushan period), BalalykTepe and Kujov Kurgan(early Middle Ages) orBudrach and Termez(Pre-Mongol period).3

Foreign archaeologicalteams started working inthe province in the early1990’s and since thenseven foreign teamshave undertaken exca-vations in collaborationwith Uzbek teams (twoJapanese, two French,one German, one Rus-sian and one Czech)(Fig. 3). Archaeologicallyspeaking, the SurkhanDarya province is thusone of the mostthoroughly studiedareas in Central Asia. Itis therefore obviousthat a systematic

Fig. 2. The upper Surkhan Darya plain with theHissar Mountains in the background.

Fig. 1. A view of Bactria in GIS, with the archaeological sites of the SurkhanDarya province.

30

regional survey would bemeaningless had the vastamount of data from the Sovietperiod not been taken intoaccount.4

A large number of geo-graphical studies of the areahave also been undertaken,many of which are directlyrelevant to landscape archae-ologists. This is particularly trueof landscape studies, which, inthe former Soviet Union, wereconsidered to be importantenough to form an autonomousdiscipline (landshaftovedenie).The most useful publication forthe Surkhan Darya province is

that of Ergeshov1974, which dividesthe province intofifty-six different landunits, each of whichis analyzed in detailby taking intoaccount featuressuch as the types ofsoil, vegetation,water availabil ity,relief and climate inorder to definepotential humanuses (Fig. 4).

Finally, a number of ethno-graphic studies of the area exist

[e.g. Karmysheva1976]. They in-clude descrip-tions of the dif-ferent types ofexploitation ofthe landscapeand of the inter-action betweenethnic groups. Assuch they pro-vide useful ma-terial which canbe compared tothe geographicaland archaeo-logical data.

Any seriousstudy of the Sur-khan Darya re-quires this vastamount of datato be organized.I have alluded tothe problems as-sociated withdata manage-ment, but it isuseful to under-

line these problems with a fewexamples. Most archaeologicalsites documented during theSoviet period were not preciselylocalized (for example, the onlydata we have for Gurgak Tepe isthat it is situated “1 km. to thesouth of the beautiful plane treeof the kolkhoz Zhdanov,”according to Pugachenkova1966, p.29; cf. Fig. 5), and inmany cases, the samearchaeological site is published

with different names andlocalizations in different articles.No complete bibliography of theprovince existed and mostpublications did not include anindex. In addition to this, duringthe last five years, the results ofnew excavations have beenpublished in various differentjournals and languages.

In a situation such as this,there is no miracle solution. Eitheryou ignore the data, or youinclude only the most famoussites and a handful of majorpublications, or else, as in thiscase, you sort through the datasystematically. A site gazetteer(based on Arshavskaia et al.1982) was therefore developedin close collaboration with Uzbekscholars, and the 2500+ pub-lications that concerned the areawere systematically indexed.

The site database includes680 sites, nearly all of which werelocalized in the field either usinga GPS or by calculating thecoordinates on 1:10,000 scale

Fig.3. Archaeological work underway on the southeast angle of the citadel ofof Termez. The various fortifications visible in the photo are dated from theKushan period up to the beginning of the 13th c. (photo: MAFOuz de Bactriane).

Fig. 4. The land units of the Surkhan Darya provinceaccording to Ergeshov 1974.

Fig. 5. The remains of a typical archaeologicalsite in the Upper Surkhan Darya plain.

31

maps of the early 1950’s (theprecision of these maps is suchthat they include topographicalanomalies less than 30 cen-timeters high and 5 metersacross) [Fig. 6].5 Ironically,localizing previously known sitesproved much harder than findingnew sites, since it was necessaryto verify all the available data.Thus, in one case, the same sitewas visited three times with threedifferent archaeologists each ofwhom had published the siteunder a different name withoutanyone realizing that it was thesame site.

The bibliography includes allthe publications concerning thearchaeology of the SurkhanDarya province and a list of thearchives of archaeologicalexcavations. They are sys-tematically indexed by site, bytheme and by period, withcommentary. For example, thebibliography of the Kushanperiod site of Dal’verzin Tepeincludes over 350 references with

c o m m e n t a r y ,classified accordingto the area ofexcavation and/orthe theme.

Once all thesedata were organi-zed, the next logicalstep was to includethem in a GIS, whichcontains not only allarchaeological databut also:

— S c a n n e d ,g e o r e f e r e n c e dtopographical maps,some of the mostinteresting of whichare tsarist maps fromthe end of the 19thcentury (scale ofabout 1:50,000), German copiesof Soviet maps of the 1930’s(1:200,000) and Soviet topo-graphical maps of the early1950’s (1:10,000).

— So far, vectorized data includeVMap1 (basedprimarily on 1:250,000 scalemaps) and “headsup” digitization ofvarious features ofthe Upper SurkhanDarya plain basedon the 1:10,000scale maps.

— G e o l o g i c a l ,geomorphologicaland hydrologicalmaps have beenadded, along withvarious tables ofaverage temper-atures, propertiesof the main watercourses, etc. Finallyeach of the 56 landunits defined byErgeshov has beendigitized and theird e s c r i p t i o n ssystematized.

— The ethnic distri-bution maps pro-

duced by Karmysheva have alsobeen vectorized; however theassociated data are not yet in-cluded.

Apart from giving researchersdirect access to geographical,ethnographical, archaeologicaland historical data, the GIS thuscreated can be used as apowerful analytical tool in its ownright. For example, Fig. 7 showsthe most productive pasturesduring the months of July andAugust, along with information onthe main transhumant routes andthe localization of the mainarchaeological sites in the UpperSurkhan Darya plain. Thesuperposition of these differentlayers underlines the potentialimportance of transhumantpastoralism within the humanecology of the Upper SurkhanDarya plain and the bias of thearchaeological record towardssites associated with irrigatedagriculture.

Figs. 8a and 8b give a goodidea of how the GIS can be usedto combine data of variablequality. In Fig. 8a the underlyingraster geomorphological mapand the vectorized land unit typesare based on data of poorcartographic quality; howeverthe rest of the data is taken from

Fig. 6. Map of the archaeological sites aroundDenau, in the center of the Upper Surkhan Daryaplain. No. 222 is Khalchaian.

Fig. 7. Transhumant routes, pastures andarchaeological sites in the northern half of theSurkhan Darya province.

32

1:10,000 scale maps. Bycombining the precision of thesemaps with the detailed de-scriptions made by Sovietgeographers it is possible tocreate a new map, which can beused to define territories andcalculate their potential forhuman use. The archaeologicalsites can thus be repre-sented on a map thatcombines cartographicprecision with the detailedgeomorphological andlandscape studies under-taken during the Sovietperiod (Fig. 8b).

Fig. 9 highlights thedifferences in settlementpattern between the IronAge and the Kushan period.Whereas the Iron Age sitesare concentrated along thesmall valleys of the peri-pheral zone of the alluvialcones, the Kushan periodsites are centered on theSurkhan Darya alluvial plainaround the two towns ofDal’verzin Tepe and Khal-chaian.

In collaboration withscholars from the Instituteof Archaeology in Samar-kand, the GIS will now serveto integrate further data-bases. Three specific

projects are underway. One is tointegrate databases of all thecoins found during excavations inthe province, the second toinclude published and unpub-lished plans of all the sites andexcavations, and the third todigitalize data from the ongoingexcavations of the sites of

Termez, Khajtabad and PayonKurgan.

GIS is particularly interestingbecause it can evolve so easily,not only by adding new data butalso by correcting mistakes,omissions and lacunae. Thismakes the process of elaborating

hypothesis and testingthem much more fluid,especially because theresults can then beintegrated back into theGIS. A medium-term goalof this project, in relation tothe others described in thissection is to create a seriesof interrelated databases,to which all scholars cancontribute and haveaccess. By doing this, itshould then be possible towork towards a networkingof the different CentralAsian GIS projects.

The dream of a Central-Asia-wide archaeologicaldatabase, which variousscholars formulated longbefore GIS existed,6 is inmany respects nowtechnically possible. Thecontemporary politicaldivisions and the nature ofarchaeological research inthe area (data manage-

Fig. 8a. Part of the Khodzha Ipak alluvial cone showinga raster geomorphological map, land units vectorizedfrom Ergeshov 1974 and water courses and the limitsof terraces based on 1:10,000 scale maps.

Fig. 8b. The same area, this time with redrawn landunits, non-irrigable zones, floodplain, territories, watercourses and archaeological sites.

Fig. 9. Iron Age (square) and Kushan period(round) sites in the Upper Surkhan Darya plain.

33

ment problems, languages, etc.)make it especially necessary.Finally the fact that relatively fewscholars are currently working inCentral Asia may make it easierto reach a consensus on the formthat such a network should take.

Obviously, this can onlysucceed if all archaeologists feelthat their work is correctlyattributed and that it is in theirinterest to integrate their datainto a global system. This can beachieved by clearly indicating theauthor of the original work (andeach of the authors responsiblefor cataloguing and digitizing it)and by networking projects ineach of the institutions thatcollaborates, rather thancentralizing the data in one singlepoint.

It is planned to make the GISof the Surkhan Darya availableon the Internet in the nearfuture. In the meantime, and inline with the concept of creatingan open platform, specific dataconcerning a given site, period ortheme of the Surkhan Daryaprovince are available on requestfrom the author.

References

Arshavskaia et al. 1982Z. A. Arshavskaia, E. V. Rtveladze,Z. A. Khakimov. Srednevekovyepamiatniki Surkhandar’i. Tash-kent: Gos. izd-vo. literatury iiskusstva, 1982.

Ergeshov 1974Shovkat Ergeshov. LandshaftySurkhandar’inskoi oblasti. Tash-kent: Fan, 1974.

Gardin 1985Jean-Claude Gardin. “Pour unegéographie archéologique de laBactriane.” In : L’archéologie de laBactriane ancienne. Paris: CNRS,1985: 39-46.

Karmysheva 1976Balkyz Kh. Karmysheva. Ocherkietnicheskoi istorii iuzhnykh raionovTadzhikistana i Uzbekistana.

Moskva: Nauka, 1976.

Leriche et al. 2001La Bactriane au carrefour desroutes et des civilisations de l’Asiecentrale. Actes du colloque deTermez 1997. P. Leriche, C.Pidaev, M. Gelin, K. Abdoullaev,eds. Paris: Maisonneuve etLarose, 2001.

Litvinskii, B. A. (1959)Boris Anatol’evich Litvinskii. “Ometodike kartografirovaniiaarkheolo-gicheskogo materialadlia atlasa.” In: Materialy vtorogosoveshcha-niia arkheologov ietnografov Srednei Azii. Moskva-Leningrad: Izd-vo. AN SSSR,1959: 242-243.

Pugachenkova 1966Galina Anatol’evna Pugachen-kova. Khalchaian (K problemekhudozhestvennoi kul’tury Sever-noi Baktrii). Tashkent: Fan, 1966.

Pugachenkova and Rtveladze1990G. A. Pugachenkova and E. V.Rtveladze. Severnaia Baktriia-Tokharistan. Tashkent: Fan, 1990.

Trifonov and Dolukhanov 1992V. Trifonov and P. Dolukhanov.“Archaeological data in the USSR— collection, storage andexploitation: has IT a role?” In:Archaeology and the InformationAge. One World Archaeology, No.21. P. Reil ly, S. Rahtz, eds.London: Routledge, 1992: 64-65.

Notes

1. The MAFOuz de Bactriane(Franco-Uzbek ArchaeologicalMission in Bactria) is directed byPierre Leriche and Shakir Pidaev[see Leriche et al. 2001]. Theteam has been excavating thesite of Termez since 1993, andhas also worked on the sites ofPayon Kurgan, Khajtabad Tepeand Karabag Tepe. The regionalsurvey has been conducted incollaboration with Pierre Gentelleand with the help of LeonidSverchkov. The data described inthis article form the basis of a

Ph.D. dissertation to be defendedat the University of Paris I inJanuary 2005. A valuableoverview of the joint archae-ological projects involving Frenchteams in Central Asia may befound in Cahiers d’Asie centrale,No. 9 (2001): 236-302.

2. The problem of datamanagement in the former Sovietrepublics of Central Asia canhardly be overstated. Back in theearly 1990’s, two of the foremostRussian archaeologists, ViktorTrifonov and Paul Dolukhanov,published an article in which theywrote that the lack of datamanagement systems wasmaking research in the SovietUnion extremely difficult:

Data collection is a professionin itself and mere possessionof information is seen as amajor scientific achievement[…]. It is no surprise thatforeign researchers arediscouraged by the difficultiesthey encounter when trying tofind their bearings in the mazeof modern Soviet archaeology.The fact that some succeed isthe real surprise. [Trifonov, andDolukhanov 1992, p.65]

The end of the Soviet system, theemergence of the newlyindependent republics and theappearance of foreign archae-ological teams have increasedthe global awareness of CentralAsian archaeology. However thishas not made access to data anyeasier.

3. The best historical andarchaeological overview of theSurkhan Darya province isPugachenkova and Rtveladze1990.

4. A systematic survey wasnecessary, not only becausemost known sites were notprecisely localized, dated orassociated with their environ-ment but because much of theevidence, and in particular thatof the small sites, had not beenincluded.

34

5. The coordinates of some 50sites were calculated using bothmethods with almost identicalresults. The Geographic Posi-tioning System (GPS) ceasedworking in the Surkhan Daryaprovince on the 8th of October2001; it is now apparentlyworking once again.6. In the 1950’s, a number ofleading Soviet specialistsplanned to publish a Historicaland Ethnographical Atlas ofCentral Asia, which would haveincluded maps and catalogues ofarchaeological sites, ethno-graphical groups, specificobjects, etc. [for exampleLitvinskii 1959]. Later Jean-Claude Gardin emphasized theneed for an archaeological atlas[Gardin 1985] and laid atheoretical basis for this work inhis many publications on infor-mation systems and the devel-opment of technical means ofsharing data through informationnetworks (envi-sioned in a timeof punch marked cards!).

Methods and Perspectives forAncient Settlement Studies inthe Middle Zeravshan ValleyBernardo RondelliSimone MantelliniBologna University, Italy

The “Archaeological Map of theMiddle Zeravshan Valley” Project,begun in 2001 [Shirinov and Tosi2003], is a cooperation betweenthe Institute of Archaeology ofSamarkand and the Departmentof Archaeology of the Universityof Bologna. It was created andevolves with two main aims: thestudy of the ancient populationand settlement dynamics of theMiddle Zeravshan Valley (Fig.1),and the recovery, preservationand enhancing of Samarkand andits territory. This brief descriptionwill be concerned with the first.

The area around Samarkandis characterized by the existenceof three “mesopotamias” (locallyknown as doab “two waters” inPersian or jazira “island” inArabic). These are formed by thesplitting of the Zeravshan Riverafter its exit from the TurkestanMountains into the Karadaryaand Akdarya branches, and thetwo main artificial canals, theBulungur Canal to the north andthe Dargom Canal to the south.Together these four parallel trunkcollectors merge their alluvialsediments and form a stretch of

Fig. 1. The Zeravshan Valley from LANDSAT 5. The main irrigated area,corresponding to the oasis of Samarkand and Bukhara, is clearly visible.

35

________