424
Documenta Praehistorica XLVI (2019)
Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site
in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
Saeid Bahramiyan
1,2
1 Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Literature and Humanity, University of Tehran, Tehran, IR
2 Laboratoire Archéorient, Maison de l'Orient et de la Méditerranée, Jean Pouilloux,
L'université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon, FR
Bahramiyan.Saeid@gmail.com
ABSTRACT – There is a considerable body of studies regarding the activities of the Pleistocene human
population in the Zagros and Alborz regions of Iran, as well as significant progress in the Palaeo-
lithic studies in other regions, such as the foothills, plains and deserts’ margins. However, some of
these peripheral regions and foothills are still neglected, and the information about the Palaeolithic
period in these areas is limited. Khuzestan province, especially its northern regions, is one of these
unstudied regions, yet the limited information about this region seems very interesting. Khervali,
located on the western foothills of the Zagros Mountains and on the northern heights of Susa, nearby
the western bank of the Karkheh River, is one of the few Palaeolithic sites identified in recent years.
The site was identified in 2012 and was systemically surveyed. Due to the extension of the site and
the distribution of the artefacts, sampling all the site was not feasible, therefore, four sections of the
site were chosen for taking the samples and a total of 330 stone artefacts were collected. The results
of the techno-typology analyses, as well as the frequency of the flakes, the Levallois samples and dif-
ferent types of scrapers, revealed that the artefacts date to the middle Palaeolithic period, with consi-
derable access to the local raw materials.
IZVLE∞EK – πtevilne ∏tudije se ukvarjajo z vpra∏anjem aktivnosti ljudi v ≠asu paleolitika v gorovju
Zagros in regiji Alborz v Iranu, velik pa je tudi napredek pri paleolitskih ∏tudijah na drugih obmo≠-
jih kot so predgorja, ravnine in obronki pu∏≠av. Ne glede na to ∏e vedno ostajajo obrobna obmo≠ja
in predgorja, ki so manj raziskana in imamo o njih le malo podatkov iz ≠asa paleolitika. Tak∏no ob-
mo≠je je tudi severni del Kuzestana, ≠eprav so ti podatki zelo zanimivi. Eno redkih prepoznanih pa-
leolitskih najdi∏≠ je Kervali, ki se nahaja v zahodnem predgorju Zagrosa in na severnih vi∏avjih Suse.
Najdi∏≠e je bilo odkrito in sistemati≠no raziskano leta 2012. Je zelo veliko in ima veliko povr∏inskih
artefaktov, kar pomeni, da ni bilo mo≠ izvesti vzor≠enja na celotni povr∏ini, ampak smo le-to razde-
lili na ∏tiri dele in pobrali 330 kamnitih artefaktov. Na podlagi rezultatov tehnolo∏ko-tipolo∏ke ana-
lize, pogostnosti kamnitih odlomkov, vzorcev orodij, izdelanih z Levallois tehniko in razli≠nih pras-
kal, smo lahko najdbe datirali v ≠as srednjega paleolitika in sklepamo, da so imeli takratni ljudje do-
ber dostop do lokalnih surovin.
KEY WORDS – Khervali; Middle Palaeolithic; north of Susiana Plain; conglomerate formation; acces-
sibility; raw material
KLJU∞NE BESEDE – Kervali; srednji paleolitik; severni del ravnine Susiana; formacija konglomerata;
dostopnost; surovina
Verjeten dokaz o srednje paleolitskem najdi[;u
v severnem delu ravnine Susiana, Kuzestan, Iran
DOI> 10.4312\dp.46.27

Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
425
Introduction
Despite one century of studies of the Palaeolithic pe-
riod in Iran, there are still many regions which have
remained less known compared to the Zagros and
Alborz mountainous areas. Khuzestan province is
one of these unknown areas, specially its northern
and north-western regions, with the exception of the
Pabdeh cave excavation (Girshman 1949; 1951;
1993.10). There have been several reports about the
Palaeolithic finds in recent years (Dinarvand et al.
2012; Dinarvand, Mehranpour 2015; Ahmadzadeh
Shouhani 2014; Sheykh no date; Alipour 2012;
2014; Alipour, Nadali Kahish 2014), although most
of the archaeological research in southwestern Iran
and Khuzestan province is focused on the more re-
cent prehistoric and historical periods, and only few
archaeological studies are dedicated to the Palaeoli-
thic. As a result, our knowledge about the Palaeoli-
thic period compared to the more recent periods of
this region is incomplete, while Palaeolithic studies
of areas such as Zagros and Albourz tend to be more
advanced compared to those of Khuzestan province.
An archaeological survey was conducted in 2012 by
Loqman Ahmadzadeh Shouhani (Ahmadzadeh Shou-
hani 2014), on the western bank of Karkheh River
(the city of Susa) with the aim of identifying and re-
gistering archaeological sites in the area. The survey
produced 72 new sites that were identified and re-
corded. One of the identified sites was a valley known
as ‘Khervali’ with a considerable distribution of stone
artefacts, which makes it the first and only known
Palaeolithic site on the western side of Karkheh Ri-
ver and also one of the few Palaeolithic sites of the
northern Susiana plain (Fig. 1).
Regarding the lack of information about the Palaeo-
lithic period of this region and the location of this
site between the western foothills of Zagros and the
plains, this site can be a major source of information
about the Palaeolithic period of this region.
Palaeolithic research background in the Khu-
zestan Province
Despite Palaeolithic studies starting in Iran more
than a century ago by De-Morgan in the north of the
territory (Vahdati Nasab 2011) there is little infor-
mation about the Palaeolithic of the Iranian Plateau,
and until the past few decades Palaeolithic studies in
Iran were focused on the Alborz and Zagros moun-
tainous areas. The Iranian plateau has many geomor-
phological variations, and the foothills, the margins
of the plains and the deserts, in addition to the
mountainous areas, have high value in terms of ar-
chaeological remains and studies, as suggested by
the results of recent Palaeolithic studies (Vahdati
Nasab et al. 2009; 2010; 2013; Vahdati Nasab, Ha-
shemi 2016; Darabi et al. 2012; Biglari et al. 2000;
2009; Alibaigi et al. 2010; Shidrang 2009; Conard
et al. 2009; Heydari Guran, Ghasidian 2011; Hey-
dari Guran et al. 2009; 2015; Bahramiyan, Ahmad-
zadeh Shouhani 2016; Zeynivand 2017; Biglari
2004a; 2004b; Biglari, Shidrang 2016).
Unfortunately, Palaeolithic stu-
dies have not been the priority
of archaeological research in
Khuzestan province, and few
studies have been conducted in
this regard. This is despite the
location of this region on the
west of Zagros mountains and
the accessibility of environmen-
tal resources such as permanent
rivers, plains, mountainous re-
gions, hills and foothills, all of
which can be considered as sig-
nificant factors in attracting Ple-
istocene human populations.
Roman Girshman conducted the
Early Palaeolithic studies in Khu-
zestan in Pebdeh cave, located
in the Lali region (northern Khu-
zestan), and he discovered seve-
Fig. 1. Map showing the geographic location of Khervali site in the
northern Khuzestan Plain.

Saeid Bahramiyan
426
ral simple stone artefacts (Girshman 1949; 1951;
1993.10.465, Fig. 1). The next major study was con-
ducted by Henry T. Wright (1979) in the north-east-
ern region of Khuzestan, in Gol and Iveh plains, as
part of the rescue project of the archeological sites
behind the Shahid Abbadpour (formerly Reza Shah)
dam. As a result of his study a number of Palaeoli-
thic and also more recent prehistoric and historical
periods were discovered.
In 2004, a survey in Izeh was conducted by Cyrus
Barfi and a rock shelter near the Eshkaft-e Kulfarah
was identified with the same name and a total of 27
stone artefacts from The upper Palaeolithic and Epi-
palaeolithic were discovered (Barfi 2010). During
the follow-up surveys conducted by Mozhgan Jayez
in 2007 (Jayez 2007), the Izeh region was surveyed
once again for Palaeolithic remains, and 54 sites in-
cluding caves and rock shelters with stone artefacts
dating back to the Epipalaeolithic and Early Neoli-
thic were discovered, and their distribution patterns
studied (Niknami et al. 2009; Niknami, Jayez 2008).
Jayez conducted another archaeological survey in
2008 on the Pion plain, located in the northwest of
the Izeh plain, in order to identify and register all of
the archaeological sites, and as the result she identi-
fied 19 sites from the upper Palaeolithic to Epipala-
eolithic period (Jayez et al. 2012; 2013).
The northern and north-western regions of Khuze-
stan province (e.g., northern piedmonts of the cities
of Susa and Dezful) have attracted some Palaeoli-
thic researchers in recent years, which has resulted
in the identification of many Palaeolithic sites and
remains. In 2008, Mohammad Sheyk conducted the
first survey with the aim of identifying and studying
the Palaeolithic settlement patterns on the eastern
banks of Karkheh River, and he discovered 5300
stone artefacts from different Palaeolithic periods
(Sheykh, publication year is not available; Vahda-
ti Nasab, pers. comm.), which revealed the signifi-
cance of the region during this time. The results of
the previous Palaeolithic studies in northern Khuze-
stan (north of the Susiana plain) also show the im-
portance of this less known region in this period.
Another survey was conducted in 2010 by Yusef Di-
narvand on the eastern banks of the Dez River, on
the northern heights of Dezful, in the Shahyun re-
gion, and two lower and middle Palaeolithic sites,
with stone artefacts such as cores, flakes, denticulate
and Levallois pieces being discovered (Dinarvand et
al. 2012; Dinarvand, Mehranpour 2015).
Despite the recent Palaeolithic surveys and excava-
tions in Khuzestan plain, there are still many un-
known and unstudied regions in the area that need
to be examined, such as the western banks of the
Karkheh River. In the intense study project of “The
archaeological study of the western banks of Kar-
kheh River” conducted by Loqhman Ahmadzadeh
Shouhani in 2012, a number of artefacts and archa-
eological sites from the Palaeolithic, Chalcolithic and
other recent periods were discovered (Ahmadzadeh
Shouhani 2014). Of all the 72 identified sites, only
the site at the Khervali Valley was attributed to the
Palaeolithic period, due to the considerable distribu-
tion of stone artefacts. This valley is located to the
north of the city of Susa and on the west of the Kar-
kheh regulatory dam, which is the main subject of
the present paper.
Fig. 2. The geographical position of the Khervali site in the Northern Susiana Plain.

Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
427
Alireza Sardari Zarchi also
conducted another archaeolo-
gical survey in October 2012,
in the cities of Masjed Solei-
man and Andika located in
north-eastern Khuzestan pro-
vince. This survey was part
of the project of the archaeo-
logical map of Iran and re-
sulted in discovering several
Middle and Upper Palaeolithic
and Epipalaeolithic sites (Sar-
dari Zarchi 2013.68–86;
2014). Mehdi Alipour conduc-
ted another survey in 2013,
with the objective of identify-
ing and studying the settle-
ment patterns of the Palaeoli-
thic period in northern Khu-
zestan, Sardasht district, and
on the north-eastern Dezful
(Alipour 2012). He decided to conduct his survey in
circular areas of 200m diameter and managed to dis-
cover 1450 stone artefacts from 55 areas, and fur-
ther studies showed the utilization of the Levallois
technique in their production, dated back to the Mid-
dle Palaeolithic.
As mentioned above, the western bank of Karkheh
River (in Susiana plain) is less known than the east-
ern bank of the river, and the few archaeological
studies which have been conducted on this area are
mostly focused on the more recent prehistoric and
historical periods (e.g., Mecquenem 1943.141, Fig.
106; Adams 1962; Wenke 1975–76.13–221), the
only study with relevant finds to the Palaeolithic pe-
riod was conducted by Ahmadzadeh Shouhani,
which resulted in the identification of the Khervali
site and its Palaeolithic artefacts.
The geographical location of Khervali
The Khervali site with the geographical coordinates
of N: 32°25’49.5529”, E: 48°07’33.6804”, and the di-
mensions of 2320x630m is located 130 to 160m
a.s.l. The site is situated to the north of the city of
Susa, on the way of the connecting road between
Andimeshk to Deh Luran, after the Naderi Bridge
and 950m from the western gate of the regulatory
dam of Karkheh River (Fig. 2). The site is an open
valley in terms of topographical characteristics and
has a relatively flat surface with a slight north-west-
ern – south-eastern slope that forms several hills
which are known as Khervali hills based on the geo-
logical maps of Iranian Oil Company (Iranian Oil
Operating Companies DEZFUL 1967).
Based on the geological evidence, the high elevation
of the site has preserved it from the sedimentation
processes of the Khuzestan plain and sedimentary
deposits of the Holocene period. Besides, the site is
formed on the Bakhtyari Conglomerate Formation
(Fig. 3), covered in round pieces of sandstone and
chert stones. A seasonal river originates from the
northern heights of the valley and flows through the
centre of the site and finally joins the Karkheh River.
The construction of the asphalt road at the middle
of the valley in order to access the Karkheh dam and
also the construction of a military barracks in the
southern parts, as well as the extensive excavation
operations by the dam’s construction machinery,
have done irreversible damage and destroyed the
major sections of the site (Fig. 4).
The survey methodology and the results
The process of mapping and preparing a cross-sector
plan of the site with mapping cameras was not pos-
sible due to the size of the site as well as the previ-
ously mentioned damage and destruction, with a
lack of time also being an issue. Therefore, after an
intensive and overall survey on the site and study-
ing the concentration and distribution of the arte-
facts, four different sections were chosen for further
studies and sampling. The selected sections were
higher than the dried bed of the river and they were
consequently preserved from the natural sedimenta-
Fig. 3. Geological map of the city of Susa; the yellow part is the Bakhtya-
ri Conglomerate Formation (BK).

Saeid Bahramiyan
428
tion processes or human construction on the site.
A circle with a diameter of 20m was designated as
the boundary of each section, their coordinates were
registered via GPS devices and they were named
Locus 1, 3, 4 and 5
1 1
. The sampling was done by four
different people in order to avoid personal bias or
preconception in choosing the artefacts. Finally, a
total number of 330 stone artefacts, including cores,
core fragments, blank debitages, tools and debris
were collected from the four selected sections (lo-
cus). Table 1 shows the number and the percentages
of the collected artefacts.
Palaeolithic artefacts
As indicated in Table 1, among the 155 pieces of
cores and core fragments, 37 pieces are the core,
and 20 pieces are the core/chopper
2 2
, which are
mainly made of rubble, and based on their frequen-
cy are divided into the three groups of flake cores
(53 pieces), blade cores (two pieces) and bladelet
cores (two pieces) that have been reduced by unidi-
rectional and irregular techniques (Figs. 7–8). The
abundance of fragment cores (98 pieces) among the
assemblage was an interesting point in the artefacts
of the site, which indicated that the core reduction
and tool making process had been done on the site
(Shen 1997.11).
Another 76 pieces of tools (23.03%
of the collected artefacts) included
retouched pieces, notch/denticulate
and some kinds of the scraper (Dé-
jéte, single side scraper, heavy duty
scraper and transverses) (Fig. 5).
The flake tools, with a total number
of 73, or 96.05% of the tools, are the
most abundant blank types of the
collection, and then the two blades
(2.63%), and one bladelet (1.32%),
are the next most frequent collect-
ed tools. The limited number of the
blades and bladelets is relevant to
the rare frequency of blade cores
(3.51%) and bladelet cores (3.51%)
on the site (Fig. 6).
Besides the tools collected from the
site that are produced by flaking
techniques from the core, a total of 73 blank debi-
tages were also collected among the artefacts, and
71 pieces of these (97.26% of the collected blank
debitages) were produced by flaking techniques (ex-
cept for several cases of the Lovallois technique)
and two pieces (2.74%) were produced by a blade
removing technique from the core, and had been
made with a similar technique to that seen with
other tools and cores (Fig. 6).
Relative chronology of Khervali
Based on the collected artefacts, and the lack of low-
er Palaeolithic indicating elements such as the Acheu-
lean hand-axes or bifaces and picks, with the excep-
tion of existing core choppers and cores, and the
abundant evidence of using the flaking and Lovallois
techniques, as well as the frequency of scrappers
and notch/denticulate in the collected items, and
also the lack of upper Palaeolithic elements such as
Typology Number %
Core\Core Frag. 155 46.97
Debitage 73 22.12
Tools 76 23.03
Debris 26 7.88
Total 330 100
Tab. 1. Number and percent of Khervali artefacts.
Fig. 4. Location of the Khervali Valley near the Karkheh River (left
bottom), and a view of the middle part of the Khervali Valley (con-
glomerate landscape).
1 The section of Locus 2 is attributed to a collection of artefacts scattered on the dried river bed which passes through the Kherva-
li Valley. Regarding the unsystematic nature of the survey and sampling, this collection was not mixed with other systematically
collected artefacts.
2 Since the choppers are one of the major forms of cores (Shea 2013.50), the choppers are categorized as cores in the collected ar-
tefacts of this site.

Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
429
end scrapers, burin, high amount of retouched bla-
des and Dufour
3 3
(Olszewski, Dibble 2006.367), we
believe that this site dates back to the middle Palae-
olithic.
The raw material resources
The accessibility of the raw material resources was
one of the key factors in choosing the location of
prehistoric settlements (Heydari 2004). Therefore,
studying the material and structure of the raw ma-
terials (stone) utilized to produce the tools and ar-
tefacts in the site, as well as the geological features
of each region, play major roles in finding out where
the resources originated and also speculating about
the exploitation methods in the prehistoric sites,
specially Palaeolithic ones. Examining the collected
stone artefacts in the present study revealed that the
raw materials utilized in the Khervali Valley are
mostly flint (pieces of chert, Jasper, Opal) and rarely
river rubble like sandstone or quartz. Most of the ar-
tefacts are made of light brown or crimson flints, and
in some cases green and red or grey and cream ones.
These are the main lithological features of the Bakh-
tyari Conglomerate Formation
4 4
, dating back to the
Cretaceous, Eocene and Oligocene geological peri-
Fig. 5. Typology of the Khervali stone tools.
Fig. 6. The used techniques for core reduction
and knapping in the Khervali site.
3 It should be mentioned that the existence of blades and bladelets is not very surprising in the lower and middle Paleolithic pe-
riods (Wojtczak 2014.27–33).
4 This formation is named after the Bakhtyari tribe and is characterized by alluvial-foothill sediments derived from altitude erosion,
including conglomerates and calcareous sandstones.
Fig. 7. Some of the collected artefacts from the Khervali site: 1 core/chopper; 2 flake core; 3 heavy duty
scraper; 4–5 Levallois flake; 6–7 denticulate flake; 8 scraper with heavy retouch; 9 déjéte; 10 single-sided
scraper; 11 transverse scraper.

Saeid Bahramiyan
430
ods (Darvishzadeh 1991.660),
and their outcrops have been
reported in the western Zog-
ros mountains and the north-
ern regions of Khuzestan, par-
ticularly in the northern parts
of Susiana (Dinarvand, Meh-
ranpour 2015; Bahramiyan,
Ahmadzadeh Shouhani 2016),
Deh Luran (Zeynivand 2017)
and Mehran plains (Darabi et
al. 2012). Besides the results of
the precise typo-technological
analyses on the stone artefacts
of the Khervali site, which re-
vealed the existence of a work-
shop with great accessibility to
the raw materials (Bahrami-
yan 2015), this site is also lo-
cated on the Bakhtyari Conglo-
merate Formation (Fig. 3),
which obviously demonstrates
the direct access of the settlers
to the raw material resources needed to produce
their artefacts.
Conclusion
Despite one century of Palaeolithic studies in Iran,
Khuzestan province is one of the regions that have
remained in darkness, compared to more studied re-
gions such as Zagros and Alborz. Khuzestan province
in general, and its northern region (Susiana plain)
in particular have in Iranian archaeological studies a
major role, although Palaeolithic in the region, un-
like the more recent periods, is not well studied. The
little knowledge we have comes from recent studies,
yet the results are very interesting and there are
many reports about sites from different Palaeolithic
periods, in Susiana plain and its northern regions
such as the heights between the Susiana plain and
western foothills of Zagros. The main points about
these sites is their location nearby permanent and
seasonal water resources, and on the Bakhtyari Con-
glomerate Formation in this interstitial area, which
shows the relation between these sites and the acces-
sibility to raw material sources, which could be reach-
ed often and easily in order to support tool-making
activities. The recently discovered site of Kherveli is
one of the rare identified Palaeolithic sites in the
northern Susiana plain with two main features: its
exceptional geographical location between the Zag-
ros mountains and the lowlands of Khuzestan, an in-
terstitial area whose Palaeolithic history is still un-
known; second, the direct and definite relation of
the location of the site with the accessibility to the
raw materials on the Bakhtyari Conglomerate For-
mation, with its high density of raw materials. There-
fore, it seems that more specialized and focused stud-
ies in these areas with the aim of the identification
of Palaeolithic sites and analysing their settlement
patterns from a wider perspective (the highlands and
the plains) can result in significant finds on how the
Pleistocene human populations distributed and adapt-
ed to their environment, as well as the patterns uti-
lized in manufacturing stone artefacts, exploiting raw
materials and the probable role of the location of the
sites between the mountains and the plains.
Fig. 8. Some of the collected artefacts from the Khervali site: 1 blade/bla-
delet core; 2 multidirectional bladelet core; 3 heavy duty scraper; 4, 5
and 12 cortical debitage; 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 retouched piece; 8 denticulate.

Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
431
Adams R. M. 1962. Agriculture and Urban Life in Early
Southwestern Iran. Science New series 136(3511): 109–
122.
Aghanabati S. A. 2006. Geology of Iran. Geological Sur-
vey and Mineral Explorations of Iran (GSI) Publication.
Tehran. (in Persian)
Ahmadzadeh Shouhani L. 2014. Archaeological Survey of
the Western Side of Karkheh River, Khuzestan, Iran. In
Proceeding of the 12
th
Annual Symposium on the Ira-
nian Archaeology, 19–21 May 2014. Iranian Center for
Archaeological Research (ICAR). Tehran: 32–35. (in Per-
sian)
Alibaigi S., Niknami K., and Khosravi S. 2010. A Prelimi-
nary Report on the Investigations of the Lower Paleolithic
Site of Khaleseh in the Khoram Dareh Valley, Zanjan. Ira-
nian Archaeology 1(1): 8–14.
Alipour M. 2012. Report of Survey and Discovery of Pa-
leolithic Occupations in Northeastern Dezful. Cultural
Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Khuze-
stan Province. (in Persian)
2014. Survey and Discovery of Paleolithic Occupa-
tions in Northeastern Dezful. Thesis Presented for the
Degree of Master of Art (M.A) in Archaeology. Marlik
University. Nowshahr. (in Persian)
Alipour M., Nadali Kahish M. 2014. Report of Survey and
Discovery of Paleolithic Occupations in Northeastern Dez-
ful. In Proceeding of the 12
th
Annual Symposium on the
Iranian Archaeology, 19–21 May 2014. Iranian Center
for Archaeological Research (ICAR). Tehran: 310–312. (in
Persian)
Bahramiyan S. 2015. Techno-typological Analysis of
Stone Artefacts from KS1700 Site (Khervali Hills), West-
ern of the Karkheh River (Khuzestan province). Thesis
of Master of Arts in Archaeology. Tarbiat Modares Univer-
sity. Tehran. (in Persian)
Bahramiyan S., Ahmadzadeh Shouhani L. 2016. Between
Mountain and Plain: New Evidence for the Middle Palaeo-
lithic in the Northern Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran. Anti-
quity 90(354): 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2016.190
Barfi S. 2010. Survey Report of a Rockshelter Containing
Eppipaleolithic Eevidence in Kul Farah, Izeh. Bastanshe-
nasi va Tarikh 46: 10–14. (in Persian)
Biglari F., Nokandeh G., and Heydari Guran S. 2000. A Re-
cent Find of a Possible Lower Paleolithic Assemblage from
the Foothills of the Zagros Mountains. Antiquity 74: 749–
750. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00060257
Biglari F. 2004a. The Discovery of the First Evidence of
Middle Paleolithic Occupation at Nargeh in the Qazvin
Plain in the Northwest Central Plateau of Iran. Archaeo-
logical Reports 2: 165–169. (in Persian)
2004b. The Preliminary Survey of Paleolithic Sites in
the Kashan Region. In S. M. Shahmirzadi (ed.), The Sil-
versmiths of Sialk (Sialk Reconsideration Project).
Report No. 2. Iranian Center for Archaeological Research
(ICAR). Tehran: 151–168. (in Persian)
Biglari F., Javeri M., Mashkour M., Yazdi M., Shidrang S.,
Tengberg M., Taheri K., and Darvish J. 2009. Test Excava-
tions at the Middle Paleolithic Sites of Qaleh Bozi, South-
west of Central Iran, a Preliminary Report. In M. Otte, F.
Biglari and J. Jaubert (eds.), Iran Palaeolithic/Le Paléoli-
thique d’Iran. Actes 15
e
Congrés UISPP, Lisbonne, Sept.
2006, Vol 28, Session C15. British Archaeological Reports
IS 1968. Archaeopress. Oxford: 29–38.
Biglari F., Shidrang S. 2016. New Evidence of Paleolithic
Occupation in the Western Zagros Foothills. In K. Kopa-
nias and J. MacGinnis (eds.), The Archaeology of the Kur-
distan Region of Iraq and Adjacent Regions. Archaeo-
press Archaeology. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd. Oxford:
29–38.
Conard N. J., Ghasidian E., and Heydari Guran S. 2009.
The Open-air Epipaleolithic Site of Bardia and Paleolithic
Occupation of the Qaléh Gusheh Sand Dunes, Esfahan Pro-
vince, Iran. In M. Otte., F. Biglari, and J. Jaubert (eds.), Iran
Palaeolithic/Le Paléolithique d’Iran. Actes 15
e
Congrés
UISPP, Lisbonne, Sept. 2006, Vol 28, Session C15. British
Archaeological Reports IS 1968. Archaeopress. Oxford:
141–154.
Darabi H., Javanmardzadeh A., Beshkani A., and Jami-Al-
ahmadi M. 2012. Paleolithic occupation of the Mehran
Plain in Southwestern of Iran. Documenta Prehistorica
39: 443–451. https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.32
Darvishzadeh A. 1991. Geology of Iran. Danesh-e Emruz.
Tehran. (in Persian)
Dinarvand Y., Mortazavi M., Mehranpoor H., Yazdanfar A.,
Alipoor M., Khodabakhshi Parizi M., and Ahmadzadeh Sho-
hani L. 2012. A Paleolithic Survey around the Dez River
in Southwestern Iran. In 4
th
International Congress of
the Society of South Asian Archaeology (4SOSSA). 15–
17 April 2012. Society of South Asian Archaeology. Zahe-
dan: 43.
References

432
Saeid Bahramiyan
Dinarvand Y., Mehranpour H. 2015. Paleolithic Open-air
Sites, North of Susiana Plain in South West Iran, Khuze-
stan Province, East of Dez River. Ancient Asia 6(6): 1–4.
Girshman R. 1949. Campagne de Fouilles á Suse en 1948–
1949. Comptes Rendus des Séances de l’Académie des
Inscriptions ET Belles-Lettres 3: 196–199.
1951. L’Iran des Origions a l’Islam. Payot. Paris.
1993. Iran from the Earliest Times to the Islamic Con-
quest. Mohammad Moein, Elmi va Farhangi publication.
Tehran. (in Persian)
Heydari S. 2004. Stone Raw Material Sources in Iran: Some
Case Studies. In T. Stöllner., R. Slotta, and A. Vatandoust
(eds.), Persiens Antike Pracht: Bergbau, Handwerk, Ar-
chäologie: Katalog der Ausstellung des Deutschen Berg-
bau Museums Bochum vom 28. November 2004 bis 29.
Mai 2005. Deutsches Bergbau-Museum. Bochum: 124–129.
Heydari Guran S., Ghasidian E., and Conard N. J. 2009.
Paleolithic Sites on Travertine and Tufa Formations in
Iran. In M. Otte., F. Biglari and J. Jaubert (eds.), Iran Pa-
laeolithic/Le Paléolithique d’Iran. Actes 15
e
Congrés
UISPP, Lisbonne, Sept. 2006, Vol 28, Session C15. British
Archaeological Reports IS 1968. Archaeopress. Oxford:
109–124.
Heydari Guran S., Ghasidian E. 2011. Paleolithic Survey
in Arisman Region: Western Central Iranian Plateau. In A.
Vatandoust., H. Parzinger and B. Helwing (eds.), Early
Mining and Metallurgy on the Western Central Iranian
Plateau. Archäologie in Iran und Touran Band 9. Verlag
Plilip von Zebern. Mainz: 484–498.
Heydari Guran S., Ghasidian E., and Conard N. J. 2015.
Middle Paleolithic Settlement on the Iranian Central Pla-
teau. In N. J. Conard, A. Delagnes (eds.), Settlement Dy-
namics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age.
Volume IV. Tübingen Publications in Prehistory. Kerns
Verlag. Tubingen: 171–203.
Iranian Oil Operating Companies. 1967. Geological and
Exploration Division (DEZFUL). Geological Compilation
Map 1:100,000. Drawing No: 25470 W. Tehran.
Jayez M. 2007. Stone Age Sites of Izeh Plain: Discovery
and Spatial Analysis. Thesis Presented for the Degree of
Master of Art (MA) in Archaeology. University of Tehran.
Tehran. (in Persian)
Jayez M., Niknami K., and Molla Mirzai Kh. 2012. Report
on the Discoveries of New Stone Age Sites in the Plain of
Pion, South Western of Iran. In 4
th
International Con-
gress of the Society of South Asian Archaeology (4SOS-
SA). 15–17 April 2012. Society of South Asian Archaeo-
logy. Zahedan: 46.
Jayez M., Mola Mirzai Kh., and Niknami K. 2013. Report-
ing the Stone Age Sites in Pion Plain. Iran Archaeology 4:
23–40. (in Persian)
Mecquenem R. De. 1943. Fouilles de Suse 1993–1939. Mé-
moires de la Mission Archéologique en Iran XXIX: 140–
142.
Niknami K., Jayez M., and Salahshour N. 2009. New Epi-
palaeolithic- Protoneolithic Sites on the Izeh Plain, South-
western Iran. Antiquity Project Gallery 83(321).
http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/jayez321/
Niknami K., Jayez. M. 2008. Spatial Patterning of Epipa-
laeolithic-Early Neolithic Site Structure of Izeh Plain, South-
western Iran. In M. Ioannides., A. Addison., A. Georgopou-
los., and L. Kalisperis (eds.), Digital Heritage Proceedings
of the 14
th
International Conference on Virtual Systems
and Multimedia, 20–25 October 2008. Limassol. Cyprus:
139–146.
Olszewski D., Dibble H. L. 2006. To be or not to be Auri-
gnacian: The Zagros Upper Paleolithic. In O. Bar-Yosef and
J. Zilhao (eds.), Towards a Definition of the Aurigna-
cian. Proceedings of the Symposium Held in Lisbon. 25–
30 June 2006. Instituto Portugues de Arqueologia. Portu-
gal: 355–373.
Sardari Zarchi A. 2013. Report on an Archaeological Sur-
vey in Andika Township. Vol 2. Part 1. Cultural Heritage,
Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Khuzestan Pro-
vince. (in Persian)
2014. Archaeological Survey in Masjed Soleyman and
Andika Townships; an Example of Cultural Interactions
between the Highlands of Zagros and Lowlands. In Pro-
ceeding of the 12
th
Annual Symposium on the Iranian
Archaeology, 19–21 May 2014. Iranian Center for Ar-
chaeological Research. Tehran: 267–270. (in Persian)
Shea J. J. 2013. Stone Tools in the Paleolithic and Neoli-
thic Near East. A Guide. Cambridge University Press.
London.
Shen Ch. 1997. Towards A Comprehensive Understand-
ing of the Lithic Production System of the Princess Point
Complex, Southwestern Ontario. Unpublished PhD dis-
sertation. University Of Toronto. Canada.
Sheykh M. publication year is not available. A paleolithic
survey in Susiana Plain, Karkheh River basin. Catalog
published in Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism
Organization of Khuzestan Province. (in Persian)
Shidrang S. 2009. A Typo-Technological Study of an Up-
per Paleolithic Collection from Sefid-Ab, Central Iran. In
M. Otte., F. Biglari, and J. Jaubert (eds.), Iran Palaeoli-
thic/Le Paléolithique d’Iran. Actes 15e Congrés UISPP,

Probable evidence of a Middle Palaeolithic site in the northern parts of the Susiana Plain, Khuzestan, Iran
433
Lisbonne, Sept. 2006, Vol 28, Session C15. British Archa-
eological Reports IS 1968. Archaeopress. Oxford: 47–56.
Vahdati Nasab H., Mollasalehi H., Saeedpour M., and Jam-
shidi J. 2009. Paleolithic Levalloisian Assemblages from
Boeen Zahra in the Qazvin Plain, Iran. Antiquity Project
Gallery 83 (320).
http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/nasab320/
Vahdati Nasab H., Roustaei K., and Rezvani H. 2010. De-
lazian (Mirak I): Evidence of Paleolithic Settlement at the
Northern Edge of the Iranian Central Desert. In P. Mat-
thiae, F. Pinnock, L. Nigro, and N. Marchetti (eds.), Proce-
edings of the 6
th
Archaeology of the Ancient Near East,
Vol. 2. 5–10 May 2008. Università di Roma ‘La Sapienza’.
Roma: 733–742.
Vahdati Nasab H. 2011. Paleolithic Archaeology of Iran.
International Journal of Humianities 18(2): 63–87.
http://journals.modares.ac.ir/article-27-1985-en.html
Vahdati Nasab H., Clark G. A., and Torkamandi S. 2013.
Late Pleistocene Dispersal Corridors across the Iranian Pla-
teau: A Case Study from Mirak, a Middle Paleolithic Site on
the Northern Edge of the Iranian Central Desert (Dasht-e
Kavir). Quaternary International 300: 267–281.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2012.11.028
Vahdati Nasab H., Hashemi M. 2016. Playas and Middle
Paleolithic Settlement of the Iranian Central Desert: The
discovery of the Chah-e Jam Middle Paleolithic Site. Qua-
ternary International 408: 140–152.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2015.11.117
Wenke R. J. 1975–76. Imperial Investment and Agricultu-
ral Developments in Parthian and Sasanian Khuzestan:
150 B.C. to A.D. 640. Mesopotamia 10–11: 31–221.
Wright H. T. (ed.) 1979. Archaeological Investigations
in Northeastern Xuzestan. 1976, Research Reports in
Archaeology: (Research Reports in Archaeology) Contri-
bution 5, Technical Report 10. Museum of Anthropology,
the University of Michigan. Ann Arbor.
Wojtczak D. 2014. The Early Middle Palaeolithic Blade
Industry from Hummal, Central Syria. Unpublished PhD
Dissertation. Basel University. Basel.
Zeynivand M. 2017. An Acheulean Biface from the Deh
Luran Plain, Iran. Antiquity 91(357): 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2017.42