Late Pleistocene hominin settlement patterns and population dynamics in the Zagros Mountains: Kermanshah region

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Archaeological Research in Asia journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ara

Full length article

Late Pleistocene hominin settlement patterns and population dynamics in the Zagros Mountains: Kermanshah region

T

Saman Heydari-Gurana,b, , Elham Ghasidianb,c ⁎

a

Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, UK Diyar Mehr Centre for Palaeolithic Research, Kermanshah, Iran c Stiftung Neanderthal Museum, Germany b

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Zagros Middle Palaeolithic Upper Palaeolithic Kermanshah Hominin dispersal Settlement patterns Population dynamics

The Middle and Upper Palaeolithic artifacts of the Zagros Mountains are relatively better understood than those in other parts of the Iranian Plateau. However, settlement systems, land use and Palaeolithic population dynamics for this region have received less attention. Here we present research on the study of human behavior that contributes to a better understanding of the early human colonization of Eurasia. Specifically, we focus on the Kermanshah region of the west-central Zagros to evaluate hominin dispersal and adaptation by investigating hominin settlement patterns and behavioral responses to the new and diverse environments and topography of this part of the Zagros region. Our survey in Kermanshah documented over 260 new Palaeolithic localities, enabled us to draw Middle and Upper Palaeolithic site distribution patterns and population dynamics which reveal that this part of the Zagros was intensively populated in both the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic. This research demonstrates that the Zagros in general, and the Kermanshah area in particular, were by no means impassable but include intermountain plains connected to each other by valleys associated with permanent water and raw material sources. Middle Palaeolithic settlements are most abundant in areas with high topographic contrast that contain high mountains, flat plains, and diverse resources. Eventually, the Zagros was one of a handful of important interglacial refugia in south-western Asia for hominins during the Upper Pleistocene and may have served as a core area from which colonizations and recolonizations of Eurasia occurred during multiple dispersals.

1. Introduction

encountered on the African continent nor in the adjacent regions. The Zagros region has been somewhat neglected by paleoanthropologists and has, so far, played little role in the story of hominin evolution. This situation partly results from the lack of extensive and purposeful Palaeolithic research in the region due to challenging political and logistical conditions (Heydari-Guran, 2014:1). The dispersed and unequal distribution of Palaeolithic sites across the region, as well as the size of the area, make it difficult to put the missing parts of the puzzle of human evolution together for this region. Consequently, the role of the Zagros is often absent from archaeological theories concerning the hominin dispersal to Eurasia and the evidence of hominin presence underestimated or ignored, or alternatively considered as a mountainous barrier region during late MIS 5, MIS 4 and beginning of MIS 3 the harsh climatic conditions of the Late Pleistocene (i.e. Dennell, 2009, 2010, 2017; Field and Lahr, 2006). Moreover, theorists argue that the strong presence of Neanderthals in the Zagros region (e.g. Shanidar; Trinkaus, 1983) prevented early anatomically modern

The Zagros region transcends the borders of modern-day Iran, Iraq and Turkey, and is the largest geological zone of south-western Asia (Fig. 1). Its position, size and orientation places the Zagros at the centre of a human migration ‘crossroad’ between east-west and south-north. It provides critical information for understanding the Palaeolithic settlement of the Iranian Plateau and beyond and is of pivotal importance for models of hominin evolution in south-western Asia. Existing archaeological records for this region indicate a rich record of hominin activity that can elucidate patterns of early hominin migration out of Africa towards Europe and Eurasia. Geographically, the Zagros Mountains are an area of elevated topography, with climatically, geologically and biogeographically variable habitats and ecozones. Hominins would have encountered this area almost immediately upon leaving East Africa, and its complex topography and humid microclimate (Oberlander, 1965) offered a habitat that early hominins had not

⁎

Corresponding author at: Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, UK. E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected] (S. Heydari-Guran).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ara.2019.100161 Received 21 March 2019; Received in revised form 29 August 2019; Accepted 12 September 2019 2352-2267/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 1. Map shows the topographic and geological structure of the Zagros Mountains within the Iranian Plateau and MP/UP sites associated with absolute dated: 1Shanidar, 2- Mar Tarik, 3- Houmian, 4-Yafteh, 5- Kaldar, 6- Ghār-e Boof, 7- Eshkaft-e Gavi. The rectangular area shows the Kermanshah Region.

humans (AMHs) from entering and establishing populations in the area (e.g. see Boivin et al., 2013). Although questions surrounding the origin of Upper Pleistocene hominins, their dispersal into Eurasia, and their potential relationships with other populations outside of Africa have received much attention (e.g. Boivin et al., 2013; Pagani et al., 2016; Bae et al., 2017), the issue of subsistence strategies and how they evolved in novel environmental contexts with variable habitats remains less explored (Hublin and Richards, 2009). An array of studies has examined the strong and direct relationship between the natural landscape and the distribution and behaviour of terrestrial organisms, including humans (Bailey and King, 2011). Organisms respond to environmental heterogeneity at different scales and in different ways, and spatial heterogeneity, such as that found in the Zagros region, can influence the movement patterns of organisms (Pickett and Cadenasso, 1995), and thus affect dispersal rates and foraging behaviours even among humans. The mechanics of human movement through a biogeographical landscape can provide a record of how a group searches for, interacts with, and uses heterogeneous resources in response to landscape structure (Romero et al., 2008). Therefore, the different patterns of human movement, activities, and procurement strategies should be considered as a response to different types of landscapes (Heydari-Guran, 2014:4). To date, the west-central Zagros Mountains includes two hot-spots of Palaeolithic research: the Khorramabad (e.g. Hole and Flannery, 1967; Roustaei et al., 2004; Bazgir et al., 2017) and Kermanshah (e.g. Coon, 1957; Biglari and Taheri, 2000; Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001; Biglari, 2001; Biglari and Shidrang, 2016; Shidrang et al., 2016;

Mohammadi Ghasiran et al., 2017; Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2017) regions of the Iranian Plateau. In this paper, we focus on the Kermanshah region. Based on the geology, and topographical and climatological conditions, we divided the Zagros into four ecozones of northern, west-central, central and southern. Each ecozone yields several home-range zones. The characteristics of these ecozone and homerange zones are described elsewhere (Heydari-Guran, 2014). The Palaeolithic occupation areas are normally superimposed on the valleys and plains and formed between mountain ranges where major streams course through. Earlier sporadic studies concerning the Palaeolithic in Kermanshah (e.g. see Smith, 1986, Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001, Biglari and Abdi, 1999, Biglari and Taheri, 2000, Jaubert et al., 2006, HeydariGuran, 2014, Shidrang et al., 2016, Biglari and Shidrang, 2016, Mohammadi Ghasiran et al., 2017) had already putatively revealed that this region could be key in the reconstruction of hominin behaviour and migration. Yet, despite its potential importance, no extensive or research-oriented work, such as that conducted in Khorramabad (Hole and Flannery, 1967; Otte et al., 2007; Bazgir et al., 2017), has been carried out in Kermanshah. Since 2009, the authors have conducted a project to track early hominin migrations and occupation, and the associated cultural and behavioural attributes in the Kermanshah region (Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2017). Physio-geographically, Kermanshah is an ideal candidate for tackling some of the major outstanding questions for hominin evolution that surround this region, of which three major issues are addressed here: 2

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

A) The first, and perhaps most intriguing issue, is the nature and timing of the initial dispersal of hominins from Africa (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen, 2001; Dennell, 2010). Evidence of Palaeolithic occupation in the area, namely the Gakia hand axe site, dated the earliest occupation at Kermanshah to the Lower Palaeolithic (LP) (Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001). This evidence, despite being limited, is related to the Acheulean and could be related to Homo erectus and demonstrates that the Kermanshah region was an attractive habitat for hominins from the early Pleistocene onwards. The evidence of LP in the adjacent area of Mehran Plain (Biglari et al., 2000) further implies that there is a high probability of colonization of the Zagros during the earlier Palaeolithic periods, further supported by evidence of numerous hand axes from the foothills of the northern Zagros Mountains (Heydari-Guran, 2015). To date, no research has been carried out to address the temporal gap between the LP and the beginning of the Middle Palaeolithic (MP). This project, therefore, targets this issue as a period for a major contribution to our understanding of hominin dispersal and evolution in this area, and documents the behavioural and subsistence changes from LP to the Upper Palaeolithic (UP), as well as any evidence of MP industries that predate the Zagros Mousterian. B) The second issue revolves around hominin evolution during the MP period in the study region. All researchers unanimously dealt with the MP of the Zagros, referred to its cultural tradition as the Zagros Mousterian (Dibble, 1984; Dibble and Holdaway, 1993; Biglari, 2001). Using this term not only limited the industry to the Zagros region but also, inversely, meant that every MP lithic industry of the Central Plateau of Iran was automatically and arbitrarily assigned to this cultural entity (Biglari et al., 2009). Adopting this approach has meant that much of the variability within these MP cultures has been overlooked. It seems that the main obstacle to a comprehensive view of MP diversity, as well as to UP diversity, is the archaeologists' bias. Most of the detailed lithic artefact studies have been performed by specialists who were trained in a European school of thought (Smith, 1986) and were under the influence of the high-quality Palaeolithic research on the European techno-complexes of the Mousterian and Aurignacian. However, we now know that technological diversity and complex dynamics within the MP, no matter how well researched, cannot necessarily be generalized to other parts of the world, especially the Middle East (Kuhn and Hovers, 2006:4). Research on the MP industries of the other parts of the country (i.e. Central Plateau of Iran) has revealed considerable variability among the MP lithic assemblages, not just in the Zagros Mousterian, but across all MP techno-complexes (Heydari-Guran et al., 2015). The MP variability in the Iranian Plateau is of great importance while it is likely that the Neanderthals occupied highlands of Zagros during MIS 5 and 4, the rest of the plateau could be colonized by other hominins including early modern human. C) The third issue is the chronology of the MP/UP occupation of the Zagros region. Despite Smith's (1986) emphasis on this problem, so far our knowledge of the actual age of the MP and UP in this region has not improved over the past four decades. Absolute dates for the MP of the Zagros come from the high altitude shelter site of Houmian (ca. 2000 m asl) in Kuhdasht region of the west-central Zagros (Bewley, 1984) dating to 123 kya +3400/−3200 years ago based on thorium‑uranium on a bone fragment, and Mar Tarik Cave in Bisetun (Jaubert et al., 2006) dating to 148 ± 35 kya years ago (see map 1 for the location of the sites in the Zagros and Table 1). However, the latter comes from a stalagmite at the base of the archaeological sequence and is not directly related to the material culture in the cave. Nevertheless, in light of the new data on the MP of the Zagros, these dates appear to be inconsistent with the actual reality of MP in Zagros. Compared to the MP, the UP dates provide a more complete timeframe of activity across the Zagros Mountains. These dates are available from Shanidar Cave in the northern (Solecki, 1963), Yafteh and Kaldar Caves in the west-central (Hole and Flannery, 1967, Otte et al., 2011, Bazgir et al., 2017), and Ghār-e Boof in the southern Zagros (Ghasidian, 2014). The Bayesian modeling for the UP occupation of the Zagros

Table 1 Table shows age determination of the MP and UP sites in the Zagros Mountains. Site

Palaeolithic period

Date BP

Calibrated date

1- Shanidar

UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian MP/Zagros Mousterian MP/Zagros Mousterian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Baradostian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Baradostian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Zagros Aurignacian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Rostamian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian UP/Baradostian

28,700 ± 700 29,500 ± 1500 < 34,000 34,000 ± 420 33,900 ± 900 33,300 ± 1000 34,540 ± 500 35,440 ± 600 148,000 ± 35,000

32,148-29,353 35,908-29,048 – 37,600-35,218 38,566-34,256 38,196-33,476 38,390-36,079 39,386-36,856 –

123,600 + 3400/−3200

–

24,470 ± 280

29,252 ± 374

29,410 ± 1150 30,860 ± 3000 32,500 + 2400/−3400 32,190 ± 290

– – – 36,755 ± 384

33,160 ± 240

37,879 ± 450

32,900 ± 290

37,584 ± 501

33,260 ± 300

37,957 ± 473

33,430 ± 310

38,118 ± 471

33,400 ± 840

38,300 ± 1049

33,330 ± 310

38,020 ± 474

21,000 ± 800 31,120 ± 240

– 35,696 ± 388

33,800 ± 330

38,629 ± 528

32,770 ± 290

37,435 ± 491

33,520 ± 330

38,212 ± 495

34,800 + 2900/−4500 34,360 ± 340

– 39,437 ± 479

34,160 ± 31,760 ± > 36,000 34,300 ± 35,450 ±

39,220 ± 518 – – – 40,510 ± 672

2-Mar Tarik 3- Houmian 4-Yafteh Cave

5-Kaldar Cave 6-Ghār-e Boof Cave

7-Eshkaft-e Gavi

360 3000 2100/−3500 600

38,000 + 3400/−7500 > 35,600 > 40,000 33,480 ± 320 39,300 ± 550 49,200 ± 1800 31,150 + 250/−240 33,060 + 270/−260 33,850 ± 650 34,900 ± 600 36,030 + 390/−370 31,620 ± 180 35,950 ± 800 18,150 ± 1500 19,230 + 4310/−1340 24,240 + 3110/−2180 27,640 28,000 27,300

– – – 38,650–36,750 44,200–42,350 54,400–46,050 35,152 ± 368 37,529 ± 682 38,994 ± 1419 39,949 ± 921 41,355 ± 326 36,000–35,000 42,050–38,950 – – – – – –

indicates the UP occupation of the region began approximately 45,000 years ago (Beccera-Valdivia, 2017). In the lack of absolute dating on important sites like Warwasi Rockshelter (Olszewski, 1999), 3

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

lithic techno-typological analysis evaluates the periods of occupations in the site. The UP occupation at Ghār-e Boof and Shanidar was slightly older than the west-central Zagros Mountains namely at Yaftehat Yafteh Cave (Ghasidian et al., 2019) (Table 1). D) The last issue addresses the fascinating and complicated matter of the MP to UP transition. This issue is specifically important since it addresses the questions related to MP diversity (i.e. Rolland and Dibble, 1990; Shea, 2003), human replacement and admixture events between anatomically modern humans and other hominin groups during Late Pleistocene in Eurasia (Prüfer et al., 2014. Bae et al., 2017), and the “UP revolution” (Bar Yosef, 2002). During the early Upper Pleistocene, the west-central Zagros ecozone sites are characterized by the presence of rich Levallois/Mousterian artefacts of the MP (probably made by Neanderthals, ca. 60 kya; Solecki, 1963) and burin and blade industries of Baradostian (probably made by AHMs, ca. 40 kya; Solecki, 1958) in the UP period. But among these sites, just two - Ghar-e Khar Cave (Shidrang et al., 2016) and Warwasi Rockshelter (Braidwood and Howe, 1960) - yielded complete sequences spanning from the MP to the Epipalaeolithic. Other sites such as Mar Tarik (Jaubert et al., 2006) and Kobeh Cave (Marean and Kim, 1998) are both associated with a single occupation layer attributed to the MP. These assemblages have been interpreted as evidence for either cultural exchange between incoming UP people and indigenous MP groups or “transitional” phases of the insitu evolution of local MP culture (Shidrang et al., 2016; Tsanova, 2013). However, researchers have cautioned that the lithic assemblages from these sites may have been artificially mixed through the lumping of distinct strata during excavations. For instance, in Warwasi there was no evidence of a gradual transition from MP to UP visible in the lithic techno-typological traits and the UP characteristics were considered rather intrusive to the region (Ghasidian et al., 2019; Tsanova, 2013; Hole personal communications 2016).

and the primary source of sediments within the catchment areas. The piedmont slopes are a graded surface of alluvial deposits, composed of sediment eroded from the mountains. Normally, there is a sharp break marking the transition from the mountain to the adjacent piedmont slope. The landforms and geomorphic surfaces on the piedmont slope have developed in distinct bands that increase in age with distance from the Mount Pabdeh Formation. The Pabdeh Formation is part of a thick carbonate-siliciclastic succession in the Zagros Basin of southwestern Iran, which includes carbonate reservoirs of Cretaceous and Cenozoic ages (Mohseni and Al-Aasm, 2004). Many caves and rockshelters within the Zagros Mountains are formed in these carbonate sedimentary structures (Heydari [Guran], 2007). 2.1. Kermanshah region in the west-central Zagros Mountains Like other parts of the Zagros Mountains, the geological structure of the west-central Zagros Mountains can be subdivided into different subzones. These sub-zones include the high Zagros belt or crush zone and simple Zagros folded belt, both are separated by the main Zagros Fault (Fig. 1). The high Zagros belt is characterized by tectonic slices that are comprised of Cretaceous to Tertiary limestones, radiolarites and ophiolite remnants, these, in turn, are all thrust into the Zagros folded belt. The region consists of different types of sedimentary rocks of Tertiary and Cretaceous, such as Bangestan and Khami groups and coloured series rocks which are the origin of chert raw materials in the Kermanshah region (Agard et al., 2005:403). Hydrologically, this zone belongs to the Karkheh Basin, which drains south-eastward via several large rivers - the Gamasiab, Qara Su, Seimarreh, and Kashgan Rivers. Almost all of these areas are connected to each other by drainage networks from the Karkheh Basin system, natural passes and narrow gorges (Oberlander, 1965). Some of the most important features of this ecozone are its huge intermountain valleys and plains. The plains are filled with alluvial sediments that are extensively used for cultivation. Based on geological structures and landforms seen here, intermountain valleys fall into two different types: valleys formed along the anticlinal axis, having a northwest-southeast tendency, and ones formed on transverse stream formations, which have northeast-southwest leanings (Heydari-Guran, 2015). Normally, wide plains appear within the anticlinal, while transverse valleys are narrow gorges. The intermountain plains in the zones C and D in this paper are classic examples of anticlinal axis valleys and Tang-e Kenesht (Figs. 2 and 11) is characteristic of a transverse valley. The physiographic characteristics of these valleys directly affect the shape, orientation and, eventually, functional significance of the associated habitat areas. For instance, the transverse valleys are easily accessed passes between habitat areas of different elevations. These topographical features have created significant amounts of both types of valleys along the Zagros. Meanwhile, the largest intermountain valley in the entire Zagros zone, at 4900 km2, is formed in the zone D (Brookes, 1989:1) (Fig. 2). Profile a–b in Fig. 2 shows the intermountain plains in the zones D and C are located roughly 1300 m asl. The elevations to the west dramatically drop towards the zones B and A making high topographical contrast in Kermanshah affecting the climate and vegetation. Climatically, the Kermanshah region can be divided into two parts reflecting different rainfall patterns of arid and wet zones. Today, the dividing line between these zones lies between the western Zagros foothills (zones A and B; Fig. 2) and the eastern folded and highland Zagros (zones C and D; Fig. 2). This climatic differentiation can basically be attributed to the topographic situation and elevation. For instance, we can follow a line at 500 m asl. That divides these two climate zones throughout the Zagros Mountains (Heydari-Guran, 2014).

2. Physiography of the Zagros Mountains Stretching approximately 1800 km, the Zagros Mountains runs from the northwest along the country's western border with Iraq and extends along the western and south-western edge of the Iranian Plateau and ends at the Hormuz Strait. The topographic expression of the geological formations in the Zagros originates from tectonic activity (Fig. 1), erosion, and variable depositional processes. It is strongly affected by a fault system which is oriented approximately NW-SE, extending from the northern part of Hormuz strait towards the southern Anatolian Plateau where it joins the Dead Sea fault system in the south-west of Asia (Fig. 1). Recently, some scholars have suggested that these fault systems have played an essential role on hominin dispersal ‘out of Africa’ to the Levantine corridor (Schattner and Lazar, 2009) providing a natural route to the Middle East (Heydari-Guran, 2015). Elevation in the Zagros region generally increases from the west to east. The uplifted resistant bedrock creates a hilly variable landscape with very steep slopes to the western and eastern sides of the mountains. The elevation reflects this variability ranging from 4000 m in the central Zagros to 300 m in the hilly western areas. The Zagros Mountains are divided into many parallel sub-ranges (up to 10 or 250 km wide) of spectacular relief. Like so many of the world's great mountain chains, limestone is the main lithology, and the crust is essentially made up of non-volcanic sedimentary rocks and well-exposed outcrops. Additionally, these mountains are divided into two main parallel geological zones of highland and folded (Fig. 1). Generally, the highland zone coincides with higher areas above sea level (metres asl) and the folded zone comprises lower elevation regions metres asl. A very common morphology here is the numerous karstic escarpments that exist at the head of the thrust sheets. Steep, stream-cut ravines and gullies are present on nearly all the steeper mountain slopes. At the broadest hierarchical level, the Zagros Mountains are divided into three major topographical units: mountain, piedmont slope, and basin floor (Heydari-Guran, 2014). The mountains are the major source of runoff

3. Climate during Late Pleistocene in Kermanshah Reconstructions of the paleoclimate during the final phases of Pleistocene periods to early Holocene for the central Zagros region are 4

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 2. Upper map shows the topography, hydrography and physiographic zones in the Kermanshah Region associated with survey sites and microhabitat areas mentioned in the text. Lower section indicates the profile between two points of A and B in the upper map.

carried out by the records of lake sediments from Zeribar and Mirabad (Van Zeist and Bottema, 1977), glaciers and glacial deposits studies (Wright, 1962) and alluvial sediments (Vita-Finzi, 1969; Brookes, 1989). Recently, studies on the sediments and pollen of Lake Urmia (Djamali et al., 2008) and speleothem records from the Qale Kord Cave (Mehterian et al., 2017) located at the northwest of the Central Plateau of Iran have improved our understanding of the earlier phases of the Pleistocene such as Last Interglacial and early glacial periods from 73 to 127 kya. These records indicate that the Zagros was covered by an Artemisia steppe (Van Zeist and Wright, 1963) reflecting lower precipitation rates during the Last Glacial Maximum (roughly 30–16 ka years ago). From MIS 5e (Eemian period ca.125–115 ka) to MIS 4 (71 kya) and MIS3, the region has experienced warm/moist and cold/dry phases which are comparable with the glacial/interglacial and stadial/interstadial stages of the northern hemisphere (Djamali et al., 2008). Meanwhile several studies indicate that summer snow lines, which are currently at ca. 4000 m asl, were between 1200 and 1800 m asl. in the northern Zagros during the cold phases of Pleistocene (e.g. Wright, 1962).

4. Materials and methods Considering that the survey region in question encapsulates a vast area, we tried, by generalizing similar areas with similar archaeological data, to obtain an overview of the subject of hominin dispersal and adaptation in the Kermanshah Province. The present research is based on four different methodological approaches which will be presented respectively: biogeographical zones, site distributions, Palaeolithic geographical spaces, and lithic attribute analysis. 4.1. Biogeographical zoning According to varied geological, topographical, and climatological contexts, the Kermanshah region generally exhibits at least four biogeographical zones with strong seasonality named here zones A to D (Figs. 1 and 2). Here we hypothesize that these physiographic zones have been influential on the diversification of hominin occupation and land use.

5

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

4.2. Survey

aspects of lithic artefacts. Lithic attribute analysis is a descriptive method that uses a set of attributes to codify formal morphological variation alongside continuous metric variation (Sacket, 1999:115). Since the lithic artefacts are surface finds and are distributed unevenly across the surface, the application of chaîne opératoire approaches and/ or refitting was not possible. Instead, we used attribute analysis, a quantitative method examining different knapping steps from decision making to preparation, reduction and tool production (Tostevin, 2012). This division of knapping process into ‘behavioural domains’ including ‘knapping steps’ facilitates comparison of the lithic assemblages. We record the dimensions of all lithics and describe technological and typological characteristics of each lithic artefact and then combine these characteristics to define the lithic industry for each site, Palaeolithic era, and biogeographical zone, respectively. To prevent researcher bias and inter-observer non-comparability for different zones, the same attributes used in the re-analysis of the old lithic collections were also used here (e.g. Warwasi rockshelter; Ghasidian, 2019; Ghasidian et al., 2019). We tried to take in to account all technological and typological aspects of a lithic assemblage. Artefact characteristics, like morphological variation and metric dimensions, or the amount of cortex and number of negative scars on the core, are all considered relevant attributes. From all surveyed sites in all biogeographical zones, 3261 lithic artefacts were collected. Other classes of finds including faunal remains were limited, fragmented and very scattered, therefore they are not included in our analysis here and instead our focus is on the technotypological characteristics of the lithic artefacts from all Palaeolithic periods.

The Palaeolithic survey in Kermanshah (during two seasons of 2009 and 2010) covers an area approximately 150 km long by 100 km wide within the four biogeographical zones A to D, from the eastern hilly land of the Mesopotamian lowlands to the highlands of the Zagros Mountains.1 The survey method relied upon identifying potential areas of hominin activity and preservation of such activities and included checking all visible caves and rockshelters. The survey team consisted of two to three people for filling out the survey forms, recording and photographing. The survey and collection protocol were for observed surface artefacts in approximately 30 min. Two cases of Zeweri and Galaleh Areas are not included in this method due to the large areas with high densities of lithic artefacts and were left for future systematic research. No excavation was carried out as part of the survey collection, therefore sub-surface contexts at cave and rockshelters remain intact. In addition, one of the main focuses of our research was on the stone raw material sources in Kermanshah region, which resulted in the identification of a large number of chert geological exposures during this survey (Fig. 22) and previously known raw material resources (Heydari [Guran], 2004; Biglari, 2007). 4.3. Geographical space classification Due to its complex topography and heterogeneous landscape, the Zagros is a promising region for Palaeolithic research, which has so far resulted in the identification of several Palaeolithic core areas in the Rawanduz (Solecki, 1958), Khorramabad (Hole and Flannery, 1967), Hulalain (Mortensen, 1993), Izeh (Wright, 1979), Marvdasht (Rosenberg, 1988), Arsanjan (Ikeda, 1979), and Dasht-e Rostam-Basht (Heydari-Guran, 2014) regions. These regions are located in specific environmental areas, including a karstic topography associated with many shelters and caves on the southern slopes of the mountain, near ponds, or in strategic view of animal travel corridors that connect two or more flat plains (Heydari-Guran, 2015). Normally these environments are found in geographical spaces separated from each other by steep topography or large rivers. Their geographical sizes depend on the topographical situation and can range from a few km2 to several km2. In fact, the geographical spaces in landscapes with a high concentration of Palaeolithic activity represent hominin subsistence strategies and therefore can be called early human habitat areas. Based on the sizes and environmental limitation of these areas, they can be classified into at least four geographical spaces from small to large scale, including: site, microhabitat area, habitat area, and home range. The smallest geographical space used by humans for daily living activities is a site and a microhabitat area in a relatively small intermountain plain limited by mountains that contain one or more caves and rockshelters where various inhabitants can interact. Habitat areas can be equivalent to a ‘site exploitation territory’ in site catchment analysis (Vita-Finzi and Higgs, 1970) and are usually larger than a microhabitat area where game are seasonally abundant and available for immediate exploitation. When game is not present, the area becomes uninhabitable for hunter-gatherers; this occurs for at least a season. Finally, the home range is a region composed of several habitat areas and intermediate areas that early humans move through during different seasons of the year in an annual subsistence round (Heydari-Guran, 2014).

4.5. Site density analyses Although the locations of the sites are widespread all over the region, the sites themselves may be characterized by high density, low density, and complete absence of the Palaeolithic occupations. Kernel density estimate analysis (Baxter et al., 1997) makes it possible to have several rough models of the levels of site density from the Lower to Upper Palaeolithic. Empty areas are related to the geomorphic setting since very large parts of the region include intermountain plains and mountain slopes filled by recent sediments and covered by alluvialcolluvium deposits (Heydari [Guran], 1999). As a result, the kernel density estimate is limited to the area associated with human occupations. 5. Results Altogether, we identified 262 sites2 associated with artefacts representing the MP through to the historic periods in 24 microhabitat areas and 7 habitat areas and a home range (Table 2) within three physiographic zones of B to D. Caves and rockshelters outnumber the open-air sites and quarries. Most of the shelter sites are located in Zones C and D on the eastern side of the survey region (Fig. 2). The majority of the artefacts are UP in character, followed in frequency by MP and post Palaeolithic materials. 5.1. Zone A Zone A is a transitional area between the lowlands of alluvial plains of the Mesopotamian steppe (Zohary, 1973), below 300 m asl and the Zagros Mountains (Fig. 2). Unlike the other three zones, Zone A lacks the caves and rockshelters due to its geological setting. The Palaeolithic record for this zone relies upon a few open-air sites which are normally

4.4. Lithic attribute analysis Analysing different lithic attributes is one of the most comprehensive approaches for considering both quantitative and qualitative

2 Among these sites, 14 sites were identified in Meywaleh Mountain between 1995 and 1997 by Biglari and Heydari [Guran] (2001) and Biglari (2004, 2007).

1

This incorporates six political districts of the Kermanshah: Eslamabad, Kermanshah, Dalahoo, Sarpol-e Zehab, Gilan-e Gharb, and Qasr-e Shirin. 6

Zone D

Zone C

Qasr-e Shirin Gilan-e Gharb

Zone A Zone B

7

Nawdarwan

Kermanshah

Dalahoo

Eslamabad

Sarpol-e Zehab

Habitat area

Zones

1 2 8 19 11 15 35

26 10 5 4 4 11 10 8 38

Gakia Galaleh 3 2 13 4 6 5 8 12

Homeil Darin Chongar Chowar Zewar Guwawer Kerend Banawan Asiaw Tanourah MaywalehGhazanchi

Gakieh Galaleh Khelek Khayralyas Hashilan Baluch Warmenjeh Yawan Bi Abr Dar Shademan

Site

Soumar Bazideraz Chehelmard Sarpol-e Zehab Golin/Dirah Eslamabad Shiyan

Microhabitat area

– – 1 – 5 2 – – 2 6

1 2 3 – 2 6 4 4 9

2 5 11 3 8 2

Cave

– – 2 2 8 2 6 5 6 6

25 8 2 4 2 4 3 4 28

– – 3 3 6 5 22

Rockshelter

1 1 – – – – – – – –

– – – – – – 1 – 1

1 – – – – 1 11

Open-air

1 1 – – – – – 1 – 1

– – – – – – – – 1

1 – – – – –

MP/UP/ Post Pal

– 1 – – 1 1 – – – 1

– – – – – – – – –

– – – – – – –

MP/UP

– 1 2 – 3 – 1 – – 1

4 1 2 – – 2 5 3 12

7 17

– – 1 4

MP

– 1 – – 3 – – 1 4 7

9 – 1 1 – – 2 1 7

1 – 5 – 1 2

UP

– 1 – 2 6 3 5 3 4 3

13 9 3 3 4 9 3 2 17

– – 4 8 11 5 16

UP-PostPal

– – 1 1 1 – – – – –

– – – – 1 1 – 1 1

1 –

– – 3 2

Post-Pal

– – Tutan Cave, MP to UP periods (Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2017) – – – – Eshakft-e Razawar, MP to UP periods (Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2017)

Open air site of Cham-e Sran, MP period (Biglari and Abdi, 1999) Wezmeh cave, UP, (Mashkour et al., 2009a, 2009b, Abdi, 2003, Djamali et al., 2011, Trinkaus et al., 2008) – – – – – – – – Do Ashkaft Cave, MP period (Biglari and Heydari [Guran (2001), Warkaini, UP period (Shidrang, 2006). Warwasi, MP to Epip. Periods (Braidwood, 1960, Dibble and Holdaway, 1993, Olszewski, 1993), Kobeh, MP period (excavated by Howe 1959 referenced by Marean and Kim, 1998). Open air site of Gakieh, Lower Palaeolithic (Braidwood, 1960)

– – – Kal-e Daoud, MP period (Hole, 1962)

Previously studied sites, periods and references

Table 2 Table shows the survey areas, number of the sites, site types and their relative human occupational periods in the Kermanshah region.

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 3. Satellite image from the Sarpol-e Zehab microhabitat area and locations mentioned in the text.

Kal-e Daoud-Nawkal and Gharabelagh Ridge and Golin/Dirah. The first Palaeolithic site in this area was recorded by Frank Hole in 1961 and is known as Kal-e-Daoud Cave (Figs. 2 and 3). Hole assigned the lithics, recovered from test pits in the cave, to the MP Mousterian technocomplex (Hole, 1962: 525):

located on the ancient fossilized alluvial/colluvium fans and residual hills that contain a variety of lithic raw materials including cherts, flint, and radiolarite cobbles and pebbles (e.g. the Mehran Area; Biglari and Abdi, 1999). It is difficult to make a close connection between Zones A sites and the Palaeolithic habitat areas of the inner Zagros. It is likely that the formation of sites in this area was due to the extensive presence of raw material sources. The river of Alwan (Figs. 2 and 3) runs through Zone A (as well as Zone B), on the way from its source in Zone C, to its termination where it joins the Tigris River in Mesopotamia. During our survey, we did not cover the flat areas in Zone A due to the possible risk of detonating land mines from the Iran-Iraq war of 1980–1988. Recently however, various Iranian archaeological expeditions reported of several open-air sites associated with MP and later periods in Zone A (e.g. Mansouri et al., 2019).

“… In this valley … we did find a cave. In a brief sounding in the cave, Kal-i-Daoud [Kal-e Daoud], we found a good Mousterian deposit, but nothing earlier or later.” However, upon revisiting the site, we collected 88 lithic artefacts including platform bladelet cores, end and carinated scrapers, and retouched bladelets representing UP along with the MP scrapers (Fig. 4: no. 2, 4 and 5), indicating the site was residence of both MP and UP dwellers. Almost all sites in this area are located on the western slopes of the Kal-e Daoud-Nawkal Ridge (Fig. 3) which stretches from the northwest to the southeast. This wall-shape ridge is actually the southern arm of the synclinal mountains which split the two flat plains of Sarpol-e Zehab and Shivahtow (Fig. 3). Kal-e Daoud ridge has a total length of 18 km and is 200–500 m wide in most places. Several troughs in the ridge, including that of Kal-e Daoud and another made by the Alwan River, make it possible for communication between the two sides of the ridge and therefore it does not form a comprehensive physical barrier. Almost all habitat caves and rockshelters were found on the western slope of Kal-e Daoud ridge which receives more sunlight. The under-represented MP evidence from Sarpol-e Zehab includes instances of Levallois flakes, which mostly come from a cluster of sites around Gharabelagh Ridge (Figs. 3 and 4: no. 11). However, these flakes, despite being Levallois, are by no means related to the Mousterian techno-complex, as observed in other zones, especially Zone D. Gharabelagh comprises a cluster of four caves and rockshelters located next to a spring head (Fig. 3). The density of lithic artefacts here is higher than in other parts of the Sarpol-e Zehab region. Several lithic artefacts including an obsidian platform bladelet core with evidence of pressure flaking, as well as bladelets with sickle sheen indicating post

5.2. Zone B Zone B, can be considered as the beginning of the Zagros Mountains and includes the lower Zagrosian steppe-forest vegetation (Fig. 2). The area consists of small and narrow intermountain valleys with elevation ranges from ca. 500 m asl at the lowest point, 1200 m asl in the surrounding mountains. Limestone formations and the developed karstic topography of this region house numerous caves and rockshelters. Climatically, Zone B falls into an area classified as semi-desert and across the lowlands of this region precipitation is < 500 mm per annum. However, in the highlands, particularly over the mountainous regions, this increases to a maximum of 800 mm yearly. This zone is divided into two large intermountain valleys proposed as habitat areas of Sarpol-e Zehab and Gilan-e Gharb (Fig. 2) for the purposes of discussion. 5.2.1. Sarpol-e Zehab habitat area This area is a natural crossroad of the intertwined rivers and fertile plains including three microhabitat areas Sarpol-e Zehab located on the 8

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 4. Selection of lithic artefacts from Zone B: 1. Retouched Levallois flake, 2. Bladelet core, 3. Blade and flake core; 4. Convergent scraper, 5. Scraper; 6. End scraper; 7. Retouched burin spall, 8. Retouched blade; 9. Double end scraper, 10. Burin; 11. Scraper; 12. End scraper on flake; 13. Truncated-facetted; 14. Borer; 15. Retouched blade; 16. Retouched blade with sickle sheen (1, 8: Eshkaft-e Cham; 2, 4, 5: Kal-e Davoud; 3: Pol-e Shah 3; 6: Garti; 7, 10: Pol-e Shah 1; 11: Sarab-e Gharabolagh 1, 12–16: Gareh).

9

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 5. General view to the Zeweri area.

Palaeolithic periods in the region (Fig. 4: no. 16). The UP cores are normally platform blade and bladelet cores (Fig. 4: no. 3). The flakes associated with the cores are usually core preparation and rejuvenation flakes and contain important technological data on core preparation (e.g. cresting). The UP tools from Sarpol-e Zehab region mainly include end scrapers, notches and denticulates, carinated scrapers, different types of retouched bladelets, and backed bladelets (Fig. 4). Based on the techno-typological characteristics of the lithic artefacts, the region was more intensively occupied during the late Pleistocene, since evidence for MP activities is scattered and sparse.

appear also to have been used as tool blanks. The characteristic tools include awls and perforators, notches and end scrapers as well as retouched blades and bladelets, and the backed bladelets. The technotypological characteristics of the lithic artefacts suggest a late UP age for the sites in Gilan-e Gharb. The absolute lack of MP is noteworthy in this region; however, we do not necessarily interpret this absence of evidence as evidence of absence of an MP occupation in this region or in Zone B generally. However, so far we have no evidence to reconstruct the MP settlement pattern in this zone. Our survey documented only two cave sites in the Bazideraz microhabitat area, which are the western most caves of the Iranian Plateau, of which, one of them, namely Eshkaft-e Cham Cave (Fig. 2) has a great potential for further investigation owing to the size of the archaeological deposit. It is located at the piedmont of Bazideraz heights and is easily accessible from the valley floor. The cave consists of a relatively large area, ca. 30 m deep. On the slopes in front of the cave lay the ruins of a Chalcolithic village. During the survey, we found a looter's trench (approximately 1 m deep) in the middle of the cave. MP Lithics, mostly Levallois flakes (Fig. 4: no. 1) were exposed in the section and on top of the disturbed sediments, as well as faunal remains and charcoal. The slope in front of the cave yielded UP and post Palaeolithic artefacts including blades and bladelets.

5.2.2. Gilan-e Gharb habitat area The survey areas within the habitat area of Gilan-e Gharb state fall broadly across two parallel, fertile intermountain valleys known as Gilan-e Gharb (800 m asl.) and Bazideraz (700 m asl) (Fig. 2). The latter valley transcends the states of Gilan-e Gharb and Sarpol-e Zehab, but for the purpose of this study is discussed under Gilan-e Gharb. Most of the sites in Gilan-e Gharb are clustered in two areas including firstly, a deep karstic gully in front of the Chehelmard Mountain overlooking a plain to the northwest and secondly, a series of shelter sites at the beginning of the Golin-Direh valley. A single cave site of Eshkaft-e Shakh on the northern margin of the Chehelmard Mountain is located in isolation outside of these two clusters. Due to the activity of looters, the Gilan-e Gharb sites yielded faunal remains (mostly Bovidae) which would otherwise only be found below the surface, in addition to the lithic artefacts. Some of the sites listed here contain bedrock mortars without any other lithic artefacts. The cores in the other sites are generally platform cores for blade and bladelet production. Evidence of preparation and rejuvenation flakes, as well as crested blades, supports the laminar orientation of the assemblages (Fig. 4: no. 2). These pieces

5.3. Zone C Zone C includes two large habitat areas of Eslamabad-e Gharb and Dalahoo (Fig. 2). The Eslamabad Plain (Fig. 2) covers roughly 1500 km2 of the folded zone of the west-central Zagros Mountains (Heydari [Guran], 2001). It is about 60 km to the west of Kermanshah and was formed from a number of smaller plains and valleys that are somewhat 10

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 6. A satellite image from Zeweri area. The black circle shows the Asmari bedded limestone associated with nodular cherts and orange circle shows the concentration of the lithic scatters.

Eslamabad Area. This region covers an area > 35 km long and up to 15 km wide and incorporates the two intermountain plains of Bivanij (13–5 km and 1600 m asl. on average) and Kerned (24–5 km and 1500 m asl. on average) (Fig. 2). The remainder of this area has an elevation above 1800 m asl. and consists of one of the most developed karstic topographies in the west-central Zagros Mountains. The permanent river of Zemkan runs across Zone C, from Bivanij Basin through the narrow valley of Zemkan (Fig. 2). Numerous springs also present as permanent water sources that form the permanent river of Zemkan (Fig. 2). 5.3.1. Eslamabad-e Gharb habitat area Eslamabad-e Gharb includes several proximate flat and wide plains, which are separated mostly by high hill ranges (Heydari [Guran], 2001). The permanent river of the Barfabad (Fig. 2) runs through the main plain of the Eslamabad, where many Holocene archaeological sites are found (Abdi, 2003, Heydari [Guran], 2001). Before this study, sporadic Palaeolithic research in this region yielded a late Pleistocene human tooth from Wezmeh cave (Trinkaus et al., 2008). The latest research on this tooth has revealed that it is a right maxillary premolar, from an 8 ± 2-year-old Neanderthal child (Zanolli et al., 2019). However, there were no Palaeolithic artefacts associated with the tooth or found in the cave and the researchers concluded that it was most likely a hyena den not occupied by Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers (Mashkour et al., 2009a, 2009b). In addition, an MP open-air site was reported along the Souran tributary (Biglari and Abdi, 1999). The Eslamabad region contains 7 Palaeolithic microhabitat areas which were all associated with caves, rockshelters, and workshops or mine sites (Fig. 2, Table 2). A total of 1115 lithic artefacts were collected from 99 sites. The cores from Eslamabad are mostly platform blade and bladelet cores. The preparation and rejuvenation flakes as well as crested blades indicate similar technological patterns. The assemblages match what would be expected technologically and

Fig. 7. A large Levallois Core from Zeweri Area.

separated from each other by rocky ridges (Heydari [Guran], 2001; Abdi, 2003). It also embraces a folded geological mountainous region between the Zagros highland and western lowland (Figs. 1 and 2). The high-altitude region of Dalahoo is located on the northern region of the 11

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 8. Zone C Eslamabad: 1. Scraper; 2. Bifacial pick; 3. Levallois core; 4. Alternately retouched blade; 5, 7, 10. retouched Levallois flake; 6. Retouched Levallois blade; 8,9. Bladelet core; 11,15. End scraper; 12, 13. Levallois core; 14. Convergent scraper (1,2. Shahini; 3,9. Domghaleh; 4. Vashah; 5,6,8. Ghar-e Rouzan; 7. Cheshmeh Sangi 2; 10, 14. Ghabrestan-e Shian; 11, 13. Charmi Savar 4; 12. Charmi Savar 2; 15. Vashah 3).

typologically with such a microhabitat and includes end scrapers, notches, retouched blades and bladelets that all indicate a later Palaeolithic age for the sites. There are several MP artefacts including

Levallois flakes among the assemblages, as well as blades and bladelets with sickle sheen indicating post Palaeolithic occupation in the region. Our survey documented a large chert and dolomite outcrop called 12

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 9. The cave of Mar Gaura in Dalahoo habitat area.

Zeweri, in zone C (Figs. 2, 5, 6 and 24) and several MP workshops have been documented within the vicinity. Other sites in this area suggest the same techno-complex as those observed in the other microhabitat areas in Eslamabad. The MP artefacts are reminiscent of the Zagros Mousterian including foliates and scrapers on Levallois flakes. The characteristic UP tools are end scrapers, notches and denticulates, different types of retouched blades and bladelets, backed bladelets, borers, and retouched pieces made on rejuvenated bladelet cores. In some sites both MP and UP artefacts appear together on the surfaces indicating the sites were occupied during both periods. However, most sites exhibit only a single occupation period (Table 2). The same pattern was observed among the sites in the Chongor Area (Fig. 2). Here, MP Levallois artefacts were found along with the characteristic UP artefacts and post Palaeolithic arrow heads and lithics made of obsidian. However, no LP artefacts were observed at any of the caves and rockshelters visited in Eslamabad. The region appears to have been intensively occupied during the MP and especially during the UP and post Palaeolithic periods. Previous Palaeolithic investigations in Kermanshah and adjacent areas (Heydari-Guran, 2014) reveal that the LP population used open air sites and we should therefore focus more on this site type in searching for the LP; the absence of LP sites in a region dominated by caves and rockshelters is therefore not unexpected.

focus on the shelter sites, Zeweri was recognized as a site due to the huge number of characteristic artefacts and their visibility on the surface. The area has steppe type vegetation and has coverage of around 20% short trees, including wild almond and Zagrosian hawthorn. We recorded a large distribution of lithic artefacts on the surface of the slope of the rolling hills, which span 8 km width varying from c. 100 m to as much as 1 km. Geologically, the area is of Asmari bedded limestone associated with nodular grey cherts. In steeper areas, where erosion is greater, nodular cherts are exposed and the surface is covered by small cobbles and large pebbles of chert. The plain of Zeweri is formed from fine deposits which, nowadays, are used to cultivate wheat and barley despite no permanent rivers or springs nearby (Figs. 5 and 6). The slope where Zeweri is formed faces to the north with an incline between 10 and 30 degrees. The transection made from east to west across the slope has resulted in the exposure of the bedrock where most of the chipped stone scatters were visible. During 2009 and 2010 we visited this open-air site and collected over 100 lithic artefacts. However, this number presents only a handful of lithics out of the thousands scattered on the surface. In order to make a representative collection in an area of such artefact density, we selected an area of 20 m by 5 m and collected all visible lithics, whose distribution was recorded in a grid of 1x1m sections. This prevented random and selective collection, which would bias the results of any analysis. The lithic techno-typological analysis of the lithic artefacts from these workshops document the strong MP characteristics of the assemblages. The tool assemblages are dominated by different kinds of scrapers,

5.3.1.1. The Zeweri area. Zeweri is a large lithic artefact scatter area ca.1300 m asl, located c. 5 km northeast of the town of Eslamabad-e Gharb and at the centre of Zone C (Figs. 2, 5, 6 and 24). Despite our 13

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

(caption on next page)

14

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 10. A selection of lithic artefacts from zone C Dalahoo microhabitat area: 1. Bladelet core; 2. Bladelet and flake core; 3, 5. Retouched bladelet; 4. Retouched blade; 6. Denticulated blade; 7, 15, 16. Plain bladelet; 8. Retouched cress; 9. Crested bladet; 10. Burin; 11. Retouched crested blade; 12. Retouched flake; 13. Notch; 14. Plain flake; 17. Retouched flake; 18. Retouched flake indirectly; 19, 20. Retouched Levallois flake; 21. Levallois core; 22. Flake core; 23, 24, 25. Levallois flake; 26. Retouched flake with facetted butt (1, 2, 4-7, 9, 10, 12-14, 16, 17: Mar Gaura; 3, 11: Gool; 18, 21: Khoratau; 8, 15: Pay-e Mar Gaura; 19, 20: Gool; 22: Gaura; 23, 24: Baba Zakaria; 25: charoupar; 26: Gool 4).

Fig. 11. Satellite image of Meiywaleh microhabitat area.

mostly side and convergent scrapers. The cores are mostly Levallois recurrent cores (e.g. Fig. 7) which are in the last stages of reduction. The Zeweri collections reveal a high reliance on the Levallois technique. The cores are both recurrent and preferential Levallois for flake and blade production. However, no point cores have been documented. The tools include mostly Levallois flakes and blades with random and informal retouch. The large collection from Zeweri locality revealed that the MP in the Zagros is not always the Zagros Mousterian, and for the first time shows the variability among the Zagros MP collections (Fig. 8). Without any absolute dates it is not possible to evaluate the age of these collections or to test hypotheses of the diachronic or synchronic relationship between the Zagros Mousterian and the Zeweri MP collections. However, what we certainly can now evaluate is the high variability among the MP assemblages of the Zagros. This issue has been already raised in the study of the MP collections from the Central Plateau (Heydari-Guran et al., 2015) and now we have documented it among the relatively limited area of the Kermanshah region in the westcentral Zagros Mountains. The results certainly stand in stark contrast to the MP homogeneity model of the Zagros Mousterian in this region and adjacent areas (i.e. Khorramabad valley) (Dibble and Holdaway, 1993; Biglari, 2001).

The sites yielded 356 lithic artefacts of which 218 pieces come from a single site of Mar Gaura (Fig. 9) in the Banawan microhabitat area. This collection represents one of the most homogenous UP lithic industries. The cores are all small platform bladelet cores accompanied by a variety of different types of retouched bladelets (Fig. 10: no. 3 and 11). The tools, including end scrapers, carinated scrapers, notch and denticulates from Mar Gaura and other sites in Dalahoo confirm a strong UP occupation in the region. The MP evidence from Dalahoo is less pronounced than it is in other areas and indicates spatially and temporally discontinuous occupation of caves and rockshelters during this era. 5.4. Zone D Zone D contains upper Zagrosian steppe-forest vegetation (Zohary, 1973). The general elevation of the wide and flat part of the plain is between 1300 and 1350 m asl and the elevation of the upper part of the mountains begins around 1500 m asl rising to 3300 m asl. at the peak of Paraw Mountain. This zone (Heydari-Guran, 2014) occupies an elongated area running northwest to southeast, between the margins of the Bisetun-Nawdarwan block in the north and the Qaléh Ghazi-Chouar Zebar Mountains in the south and southwest. The latter is separated by the Eslamabad-Hulailan areas (Fig. 2) The later yielded several Palaeolithic sites (Mortensen, 1993). Geomorphological studies demonstrate that the Bisetun-Nawdarwan block are among the best-developed karst topographic terrains in western Iran (Waltham and Ede, 1973). Dinevar in the east and Kamyaran in the west are two strategic gorges/ corridors that connect the northern and western areas of this region (Fig. 2). Zone D is connected to the Hulailan area via the steep gorges of

5.3.2. Dalahoo habitat area Dalahoo is one of the most remote and highly elevated (on average 1600 m asl) areas in the Kermanshah region for Palaeolithic investigations. Our survey, as the first Palaeolithic expedition into the region, documented > 30 Pleistocene occupations in caves and rockshelters of four areas dated to the MP, UP, and post Palaeolithic eras. 15

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 12. A selection of lithic artefacts from Malawerd Rockshelter in zone A: 1. bladelet core; 2. Flake and bladelet core; 3. Retouched flake; 4, 6, 7. Retouched blade; 5. End scraper; 8. Retouched bladelet, 9. End scraper on bladelet.

Fig. 13. General view to Nawdarwan habitat area.

the Seymareh River in the southern part. This zone can be seen as a broad corridor with several permanent rivers and their tributaries, including Qara Su and Razawar (Fig. 2), which run through the valley from the northwest towards the southeast; additionally, the Gamasyab flows westward to the Bisetun area. South of this zone, these rivers join

together and form the Seymareh River. Waltham and Ede (1973) recorded at least 25 large springs, which constitute the other main water resources in the Kermanshah zone. Zone D is found in the high Zagros belt and zones C and B are situated in the simply folded belt (Fig. 2). Since the northern highlands of 16

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 14. Satellite image of Nawdarwan habitat area.

are high numbers of the caves and rockshelters in the developed karstic topography.

this area are vertical, the eastern side of the zone D shows one of the “sharp contrasting topographies” of the Zagros Mountains. It is located centrally in the zone D home-range zone, between the two habitat areas of Rawansar (Biglari and Taheri, 2000) in the west and Bisitun in the east (Fig. 2). In fact, this habitat area is a broad corridor that connects east and west of zone D. The general elevation of the valley is 1300 m asl. But the mountains can reach a height of ca. 3300 m metres asl. The diverse environmental and palaeoenvironmental features of the zone D habitat, including rich local raw material resources (Heydari [Guran], 2004; Biglari, 2004, 2007), permanent water sources, fertile soil, and natural shelters would have made it an attractive habitat for animals and hominins, including AMH, throughout the Pleistocene (Fig. 12). Including the Kermanshah district, Zone D covers one of the most heterogeneous landscapes in the study region and even in the wider area of the west-central Zagros Mountains, as a result of sharp contrasts in the topography. The landscape incorporates areas of flat intermountain plains abutting very steep rugged and high mountains set close together. Survey in Zone D was carried out along the MeywalehGhazanchi Mountains to the end of Nawdarwan Valley, covering a distance of approximately 50 km in length and 10 km wide. Eighty caves and rockshelters were recorded in Zone D and previously documented sites were revisited (Braidwood, 1960, Heydari [Guran], 1999, Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001; Biglari, 2007) across the eight different areas of this zone. The sites in Zone D are distributed alongside the two main areas of the Meywaleh-Ghazanchi range and on both sides of the mountain slopes of the Nawdarwan Valley (Figs. 2, 13 and 14). These areas form the northern part of the large Mahidasht Plain (Brookes, 1989) and embrace several significant environmental characteristics which distinguish them from the rest of the Kermanshah region because: (a) almost all water sources in Zone D (including the lakes, marshes, springs and permanent rivers) originate in these areas; (b) these areas exhibit the highest quality soils that support highly productive agricultural areas in the Kermanshah Province; and (c) there

5.4.1. Kermanshah habitat area The Kermanshah habitat area is in the Meywaleh-Ghazanchi Mountains. Meywaleh is a small but elevated area (up to 2400 m asl.) belonging to the middle part of the mountain system of Bisetun-Shahu in the Kermanshah region. Except for a few cases, almost all caves and rockshelters are formed on the northern slopes of this mountain where they overlook the flat plain of Kermanshah. A few shelter sites are located within the small cul-de-sac valleys of Tang-e Kenesht and Malawerd natural corridors (Figs. 2 and 11), where the most important yet-known sites of Warwasi (Braidwood and Howe, 1960), Kobeh (ibid), and Do-Ashkaft (Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001) are located. The Qara Su River runs parallel to this mountain north to south, at a distance of ca. 4 km. Besides this water source, there are several other permanent springs adjacent to this mountain. Total number of thirtytwo caves and rockshelters associated with archaeological remains were documented, including the revisited sites of Warwasi, Kobeh, Do-Ashkaft and Warkaini (Shidrang, 2006). From the sites of the Meiywaleh microhabitat area, 437 lithic artefacts have been collected indicating MP and UP occupations. The UP cores are platform blade and bladelet cores, associated with rejuvenation flakes and crested blades. Some flake cores were also found among the collections. The characteristic tools include different kinds of retouched blades and bladelets, borers, carinated scrapers, notched and backed bladelets. Convergent scrapers, Levallois flakes and a large parallel core from this microhabitat area suggest there was also a strong MP occupation in the area as well. Some sites contain both MP and UP artefacts indicating the continued usage during both Palaeolithic eras. However, most of the sites exhibit a single period of either MP or UP occupation (Table 2).

17

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 15. A selection of lithic artefacts from Eshkaft-e Biabr in Nawdarwan Valley: 1, 3. Truncated blade; 2, 6. Truncated flake; 4. Retouched blade; 5. retouched flake with laminar removals on the sides; 7. Retouched flake.

5.4.2. Nawdarwan Valley habitat area The Nawdarwan Valley, with 53 shelter sites, forms one of the richest habitat areas in the Kermanshah survey. The sites are distributed along both sides of the 32 km long valley of Nawdarwan (Figs. 2, 13 and 14). The majority of the sites indicate a single period occupation (Table 2). Levallois cores, retouched Levallois flakes and points as well as retouched bladelets strongly indicate two periods of occupation for this microhabitat area during MP and UP. Most of the lithic artefacts are characteristic of the UP, and include platform bladelet cores, crested blades and rejuvenation flakes with the bladelet negatives on their dorsal side. Blades and bladelets among the débitage and as tool blanks in the collections confirm the laminar orientated UP industry in the Nawdarwan Valley (Figs. 17 and 20). Different types of retouched bladelets, some with twisted profile reminiscent of Dufour bladelets, carinated scrapers, notched and denticulated pieces, borers and end scrapers are also among the UP toolkit (Figs. 15 and 17). Some of the tools including the truncated pieces and thumbnail scrapers indicate the later phases of the UP. The survey yielded no evidence of LP sites from Zone D. During the MP, UP and post Palaeolithic, namely Epipalaeolithic, it appears that the caves and rockshelters in this area were extensively occupied by hunter-gatherers.

radiolarite hills of the Galaleh, about 40 km north west of Gakia, are the continuum of the Kermanshah Radiolarite system, emerging in the middle of the Zone D plain (Figs. 2, 21 and 22). The hills are at about 50–100 m higher than the flat surrounding plains and on their surfaces mostly covered by cubic boulders and cobbles of cherts (Brookes, 1989:16). During a short visit to the area, a large scatter of lithic MP and UP artefacts including Levallois cores and flakes, laminar production and centripetal flakes were observed (Figs. 22 and 23). In addition, the presence of several elements including pressure and indirect percussion technique blade cores suggests that Galaleh was used during later periods, presumably during the Neolithic. Galaleh and Zeweri are promising Palaeolithic localities, and will be the subject of detailed lithic spatial and techno-typological analyses in future research. 6. Stone raw material components Our raw material study shows the extreme dependence of the Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers on local raw materials. Several main groups of stone raw material outcrops and some smaller subgroups have been recognized in the study region (Fig. 24): A) Zone B flint and white/greyish cherts.

5.4.2.1. The Galaleh area. Similar to the open area of Zeweri, the Galaleh area is a large lithic workshop (Figs. 18–20). The rich 18

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 16. Balouch Cave in the Nawdarwan habitat area.

The black flint and white/greyish cherts have been used predominately in most of the microhabitat areas of Zone B (Fig. 24). However, at the present the source of these raw materials is unknown. Both the flints and cherts here are finely textured. The cortex on the surface of some of the artefacts indicates that these raw materials are embedded in the geological formation.

formation which is known as the Kermanshah radiolarite belt. The Gakia chert, exposed in patches along a 40 km region in Kermanshah, was extensively used by the inhabitants of the areas close to this source (e.g. see Biglari, 2007). As soon as the sites occur at a greater distance from the source, the use of this raw material drops dramatically. Its presence and use are eventually abandoned completely in Zones A and B. D) Reddish fractured chert on the Bisetun-Nawdarwan range slopes on the north east of the Zone D. A variety of raw materials exist in the lithic collections collected during this survey, however, red local chert (Kermanshah radiolarite; Heydari [Guran], 2004; Biglari, 2004, 2007) dominates the artefacts of both the MP and UP groups (Fig. 24). This chert is mostly available in the form of fractured nodules from the mountain slopes. Our recent survey shows that this outcrop is exposed mostly in a belt from eastern Eslamabad towards northwest of Kermanshah, with a cluster of sites in the Eslamabad habitat area. The outcrop is approximately 30 km long and 5 km wide. Other minor sources of raw materials include the dark red cherts with cracks and impurities in the texture are formed as nodules inside the massive limestone boulders in the mountains. Some of these nodular cherts are found in secondary contexts in rivers and tributaries across the region.

B) Zeweri greyish chert nodules belt. Another major source of raw material was discovered in the eastern part of the Eslamabad microhabitat area (Fig. 24). This material is medium in texture when compared to the Gakia radiolarite, and occurs in grey to light brown colour (Heydari [Guran], 2004). The outcrop is embedded in limestone formations and is exposed in the Zeweri area throughout eastern Eslamabad in a northwest to southwest orientation. This raw material is formed as chert nodules among the dolomite layers. In exposed areas, it is easily eroded and would therefore be easily extracted and procured. C) The first one is known as Gakia chert (Broud, 1987; Heydari [Guran], 2004; Biglari, 2004, 2007; Mohamadi-Ghasrian and BaikMohamadi, 2017; Mohammadi Ghasiran et al., 2017). The outcrops of Kermanshah radiolarite (Broud, 1989) includes the Gakia/Galaleh chert belt with a southeast-northeast trend in the middle of the Zone D (Fig. 24). In some areas the exposed Gakia/Galaleh differs in texture and colour, however all belong to the same geological 19

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 17. A selection of lithic artefacts from Balouch Cave in Narwdarwan habitat area: 1. xLevallois core; 2. Retouched Levallois flake; 3. Truncated-facetted; 4. Levallois flake; 5. End scraper; 6. Burin; 7, 11. Retouched flake; 8, 9. Flake core; 10. Retouched blade; 12. Kombewa flake; 13. Kombewa core.

Fig. 18. Satellite image of the Hashilan microhabitatarea in Zone A.

7. Discussion: MP and UP settlement systems and population dynamic in the Kermanshah region

zones. Tables 3 and 4 show the technological and typological aspects of all assemblages from all four zones. Although the sites are distributed throughout the entire survey area, there are several biogeographical locations with higher concentrations. These are the areas associated with marshes, and strategic corridors connecting intermountain valleys

The results from intensive survey and lithic attribute analysis confirm that Palaeolithic sites are closely linked to the biogeographical 20

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 19. Mar Sheykh Wazi in Hashilan microhabitat area.

Fig. 20. A selection of lithic artefacts from Mar Sheykh Wazi: 1. Convergent scraper; 2, 5. Truncated-facetted; 3. Truncated blade; 4. Convergent scraper; 6. Denticulated blade; 7. End scraper; 8–10. Retouched bladelet.

(Fig. 25). The settlement pattern studies on the MP and UP in the Zagros documents that most of the Palaeolithic sites, especially MP associated with Mousterian technology, are located on the eastern areas of Zone D (Fig. 26B). While distributed across eastern Zone D, UP sites are present in the western lowland areas as well. This distribution pattern shows that Palaeolithic caves and rockshelters are largely confined to the

Bisetun-Nawdarwan range which overlooks the intermountain plain of Kermanshah (Fig. 26). This pattern confirms the hypothesis of “a close relationship of sharp contrast topography and settlement patterns among the Pleistocene hunter gatherers” (Heydari-Guran, 2014). Seemingly, the Middle Palaeolithic groups that operated on a smaller spatial scale preferred to occupy areas of sharp topography. They had 21

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 21. A view to the Galaleh hills and the surface covered by cubic small chert boulders and large pebbles.

including Khorramabad (Roustaei et al., 2004) and some areas with similar topographic context within the Central Plateau of Iran as well (Heydari-Guran et al., 2015). Kernel density analyses (Baxter et al., 1997) of the MP sites reveals clustering in three areas with sharp contrast topography including (a) the cluster of MP caves in the Bisetun microhabitat area (including Bisetun Cave; Coon, 1957, Ghar-e Khar Cave; Smith, 1967, Mar Tarik Cave; Jaubert et al., 2006 and a number of other cave sites; Biglari, 2001), (b) the Meywaleh area (including Warwasi Rockshelter; Dibble and Holdaway, 1993, Kobe, and Do-Ashkaft; Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001), and (c) the Nawdarwan habitat area, stretches 80 km (Figs. 2 and 26B) and contains a cluster of MP (and also UP) sites yielded MP Zagros Mousterian techno-complexes (Fig. 26B). These habitat areas embrace developed karstic topography with the sharpest contrast in elevation. The MP sites are located at the elevation of 1300–1350 m asl with the same overlook to the Kermanshah plain and easy access to the permanent water sources in this plain within a few minutes. We observed that the MP sites are mostly located at the edge of corridor systems connected high mountains to the plain canalizing the movements of medium sized games such as gazelle, deer and onager (Hesse, 1989) from the different biogeographical patches (HeydariGuran, 2014). Among the four zones presented here, the sharp contrast topographies were mostly revealed in Zone D. Here, the ecotones of flat plains immediately close to steep rugged mountains, where the shelter sites in these steep slopes have been used by Pleistocene hunter-gatherers. The kernel analysis shows that this type of landscape is limited to the small-scale local areas within the west-central Zagros. The sites of Kobeh, Do-Ashkaft, Warwasi, Bisetun and Ghar-e Khar in the homerange zone of Kermanshah, which are formed in the Bisetun-Nawdarwan block, are the best examples of this distribution pattern. High mountains in zone D, the fairly bright and luminous colour of the steep mountains reflect the bright sunlight resulted in a relatively higher temperature on the lower slopes and plains. The Meywaleh to Nawdarwan habitat areas (Fig. 13) (in general, the plains next to the Bisetun-Nawdarwan Mountains in zone D, Fig. 2) are associated with

Fig. 22. A large Middle Palaeolithic flake in the Galaleh Area.

smaller annual territories, probably reflecting the more diverse resource-based available in this type of landscape. Such preferences are seen in Zone D of this study and other regions in the Zagros Mountains 22

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 23. Several examples from the Middle Palaeolithic artefacts of Galaleh.

incorporates a vast diversity of habitats and microhabitat areas imposing more moderate climatic conditions, which are not as harsh as the surrounding high elevated areas.

permanent water sources, high quality raw materials and abundant games moving across different microhabitats. These are the most important geoecological factors crucial for MP hunter-gatherers' settlement. Such land use patterns have been observed and described in several parts of the world, especially in Iberia, southwestern France, and the southern edge of Russian Plain, which include small areas with topographically heterogeneous landscapes resulted in diverse habitats (Finlayson, 2004:106). Contrary to MP evidences, the number of UP sites in Kermanshah increased. They are almost evenly distributed on the landscape throughout all zones. The increasing number of sites during the UP probably indicates the increasing population (Pullar, 1977; Smith, 1986). Therefore, it is expected that diverse UP hunter-gatherer groups adopted various subsistence and adaptation strategies in different habitat areas (Ghasidian et al., 2019). The site distribution patterns in all four zones show that during the UP, hunter-gatherers were more flexible in selecting areas with immediate access to water and raw material resources, while MP populations were more dependent on specific landforms and structural landscapes (Fig. 26C). The data from Dasht-e Rostam Basht region in the southern Zagros Mountains shows that the narrow corridors strongly attracted early humans to take advantage of the topography for controlling game movement across the landscape (Heydari-Guran, 2014) (Fig. 26). The Nawdarwan habitat area with several long and relatively narrow corridors is a suitable place in the west-central Zagros to test the behavioural and subsistence strategy model presented in the southern Zagros. This valley is the highest promising area among the other occupational areas of Kermanshah for the study of early human activities (Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2017). It has been argued that MP population (i.e. Neanderthals) densities were severely affected by a reduction in available biomass, and because of their reliance on high energy nourishment, they may have been driven to abandon territories that modern humans colonized (Dusseldorp, 2009:160 and Finlayson, 2004) or during climatic deterioration (MIS 4). The mobility strategy pattern of the Neanderthals in the eastern edge of Zone D and the evidence of the Zagros Mousterian industry, reveals a linear movement between the Bisetun-Nawdarwan Mountains within an altitudinal band of 1200–1600 m asl. This area

8. Conclusions Our research documented no LP occupation, and therefore, the first arrival of hominins into the Zagros still remains unattested and limited to the Gakia Acheulean hand axe that probably dates to the Middle Pleistocene (Braidwood, 1960; Biglari and Heydari [Guran], 2001) (Fig. 21A). However, at the western foot hills of the Zagros Mountains, hand axes and other Acheulean artefacts were observed extensively (Howe, 2014; Heydari-Guran, 2019 personal observations and manuscript under preparation). Therefore, we hypothesize that the earliest hominins chose open-air residences, as opposed to the closed cave and rockshelters used by later MP and UP hominins that were the focus of this study. Another possibility is that Middle Pleistocene caves have been eroded away and those with MP and UP occupation are more recent. Testing this hypothesis requires more targeted survey and systematic excavation of Plio-Pleistocene deposits in the region in order to recover the oldest traces of hominin dispersals. Due to the geomorphological settings of the study region including erosional activities and landscape dynamics, a large part of the areas lacks the early human evidences. These areas mostly include the mountain slopes, intermountain plains and river terraces, therefore, we ought to rely mostly on the shelter sites. This survey, by no means, includes all evidence on the presence of MP hominins. But, based on these data from > 262 surveyed sites, it is evident that around 90% of the Zagros Mousterian material cultures are found on the north-eastern edge of biogeographical Zone D (BisetunNawdarwan range). The classical Zagros Mousterian technology (Lindly, 2005; Dibble, 1984) identified in this survey, is only present in the Kermanshah area and not over the entire region. However, geological explanations for this distribution cannot be excluded, since the archaeological deposits in the caves and rockshelters of Zone C are better preserved than elsewhere and this may have led to a bias in the data (Heydari [Guran], 2007). The division of the four zones of the Kermanshah Palaeolithic core 23

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 24. Map shows the location of different main stone raw material sources in Kermanshah region with example of the stone tools made from these raw materials. Table 3 Technological aspects of the lithic artefacts from the four zones. Zone

A B

Habitat area

Qasr-e Shirin Gilan-e Gharb Sar Pol-e Zehab C Eslamabad Dalahoo D Kermanshah Nawdarwan Sum no.

MP technological groups

UP technological groups

Levallois flake core

Levallois Blade core

Platform flake core

Flake

Blade

Levallois flake

Levallois blade

Platform blade/ bladelet core

Platform flake core

Blade

Bladelet

Flake

0 0 0 8 1 2 2 13

0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2

0 0 4 14 2 1 4 25

0 0 0 94 8 37 41 180

0 0 0 3 0 3 0 6

4 0 1 77 5 4 15 106

0 0 0 11 0 0 1 12

1 10 60 35 21 11 36 174

0 0 1 10 1 6 6 24

8 20 51 69 20 24 38 230

3 14 47 19 15 11 17 126

18 63 323 433 141 145 274 1397

area is mostly applicable to the UP population. The strong presence of the UP in all four zones indicates the use of different biogeographical zones throughout the year and that high seasonality resulted in a very mobile UP population. The relatively large annual home range of UP populations is strongly considered as evidence of behavioural modernity illustrating UP social structure, future planning ability and complex subsistence strategies. Evidence of UP groups in all four zones shows a

Unidentified debris

sum

0 2 56 97 40 63 101 359

34 109 543 872 254 307 535 2654

clear route of this annual migration from high elevated zones of C and D with 1300 m metres asl. to the lower elevations of zones A and B at around 300 m asl. The 1000 m topographic contrast between these regions indicates a diverse environment in a relatively small region of Kermanshah. Generally, the UP collections mirror the previously defined UP industry described in Warwasi (Olszewski, 1993). Whereas the MP collections are predominantly flake oriented, further detailed 24

25

Sum no.

D

C

A B

Zone

Sum no.

D

0 3 8 1 5 2 8 27

Scraper

UP tools

Qasr-e Shirin Gilan-e Gharb Sar Pol-e Zehab Eslamabad Dalahoo Kermanshah Nawdarwan

A B

C

Habitat area

Zone

0 0 0 0 0 5 12 17

Truncated flake

0 0 0 0 0 3 4 7

Point

Retouched flake

Levallois point

Retouched Levallois blade

Foliate

0 1 2 0 0 1 3 7

Backed bladelet

0 0 0 1 0 1 9 11

0 1 4 2 0 2 2 11

1 0 2 21 0 5 6 35

0 0 2 3 2 0 2 9

Burin

0 0 0 10 3 10 9 32

0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2

Thumbnail scraper

0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4

2 19 18 17 35 12 26 129

0 1 16 2 7 9 6 41

Retouched blade Retouched bladelet

0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

1 18 96 43 28 18 66 270

retouched flake

0 1 2 2 0 3 4 12

0 5 21 24 12 7 15 84

end scraper

Borer

Retouched Levallois flake

Scraper

Convergent scraper

UP tools

MP tools

Table 4 Typological aspects of the lithic artefacts from the four zones.

0 6 8 12 5 4 8 43

0 1 3 1 2 6 5 18

carinated scraper

Notch

4 56 182 144 104 91 189 770

sum

0 0 0 0 3 3 0 6

Denticulate

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Fig. 25. Site density in the different areas within the Kermanshah Region.

Fig. 26. Simulated human population range and density compared with the spatial distribution of archaeological sites of: (A) probable late Lower Palaeolithic and early Middle Palaeolithic occupation areas; (B) Middle Palaeolithic associated with Mousterian technology occupation areas; (C) general Middle Palaeolithic occupations areas; and (D) Upper Palaeolithic occupation areas.

techno-typological analysis suggests that there are two distinct MP techno-complexes namely the Zagros Mousterian and the MP industry of Zeweri characterized by abundant Levallois technique and the lack of

Mousterian retouched scrapers. Although previous research has documented a rich record of Palaeolithic occupations in the Kermanshah region of west-central 26

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian

Zagros, its integration into wider discussions of hominin dispersals out of Africa has been hindered by the lack of well-studied sites. Reconnaissance survey in four biogeographical zones of Kermanshah has identified 260 new Palaeolithic sites, of which 58 sites are promising in terms of in situ preserved occupations (Heydari-Guran and Ghasidian, 2012; Ghasidian and Heydari-Guran, 2012). These results echo suggestions made by earlier Palaeolithic researchers confirming the long settlement history such as Warwasi Rockshelter (Braidwood and Howe, 1960) and Ghar-e Khar (Smith, 1967; Shidrang et al., 2016) from the Kermanshah region. Although in several remote regions of this core area including Dalahoo, Sarpol-e Zehab, Gilan-e Gharb and Qasr-e Shirin, the potential for Palaeolithic sites has been virtually unknown until now. It is now clear that this area will provide novel data on the Palaeolithic adaptations in the region and provide strong links between western and eastern dispersal routes. Our survey reveals that the Zagros is by no means an impassable rocky block but includes intermountain plains which are connected to each other via several valleys (Fig. 1). We conclude that in fact the whole Zagros was one of a handful of important interglacial refugia for hominins during the Upper Pleistocene that may have served as a core area from which colonisations and recolonizations of Eurasia occurred during multiple dispersals (Lahr and Foley, 1994).

57–69. Bewley, R.H., 1984. The Cambridge University archaeological expedition to Iran 1969. Excavations in the Zagros Mountains: Houmian, Mir Malas, Barde Spid. Iran 22, 1–38. Biglari, F., 2001. Report on newly discovered Palaeolithic sites at Bisitun, CentralWestern Iran. J. Archaeol. Hist. 28, 50–60 (In Persian). Biglari, F., 2004. The preliminary observations on Middle Paleolithic raw material procurement and usage in the Kermanshah Plain: the Case of Do-Ashkaft Cave. In: Stöllner, T., Sloa, R., Vatandoust, A. (Eds.), Persiens antike Pracht: Bergbau, Handwerk, Archäologie: Katalog der Ausstellung des Deutschen Bergbau-Museums Bochum vom 28. November 2004 bis 29. Mai 2005. 2 vols. Deutsches BergbauMuseum, Bochum, pp. 130–138. Biglari, F., 2007. Approvisionnement et utilisation des matières premières au Paléolithique moyen dans la plaine de Kermanshah (Iran): le cas de la Grotte DoAshkaft. In: Moncel, M.H., Moigne, A., Arzarello, M., Peretto, C. (Eds.), Aires 'approvisionnement en matières premières et aires d'approvisionnement en ressources alimentaires Approche intégrée des comportements, Workshop 23, XV Congrès UISPP, Lisbonne, 5. Vol. 1725. BAR International Series, pp. 227–239. Biglari, F., Abdi, K., 1999. Paleolithic artifacts from Cham-e Souran, the Islamabad plain, central-western Zagros Mountains, Iran. Archaol. Mitt. Iran Taurus 31, 1–8. Biglari, F., Heydari [Guran], S., 2001. Do-Ashkaft: a recent discovery Mousterian cave site in Kermanshah Plain, Iran. Antiquity 75, 487–488. Biglari, F., Shidrang, S., 2016. New evidence of Paleolithic occupation in the western Zagros foothills. In: Kopanias, K., MacGinnis, J. (Eds.), The Archaeology of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and Adjacent Regions. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 29–38. Biglari, F., Taheri, K., 2000. The discovery of upper Paleolithic remains at Mar Kuliyan and Mar Dalan Cave, Rawansar. In: Taheri, K. (Ed.), Essays on the Archaeology, Geology, Geography, and Culture of Rawansar Area. Taq-e Bostan Publications, Kermanshah, pp. 7–27 (in Persian). Biglari, F., Nokandeh, G., Heydari, S., 2000. A recent find of a Paleolithic assemblage from the foothills of the Zagros Mountains. Antiquity 74, 749–750. Biglari, F., Javeri, M., Mashkour, M., Yazdi, M., Naderi, R., Shidrang, S., Tenberg, M., Taheri, K., Darvish, J., Hashemi, N., 2009. Test excavation at the Middle Paleolithic sites of Qaleh Bozi, southwest of Central Iran, A preliminary report. In: Otte, M., Biglari, F., Jaubert, J. (Eds.), Iran Paleolithic/LePaléolithique d'Iran. BAR International series, pp. 29–38. Boivin, N., Fuller, D.Q., Dennell, R., Allaby, R., Petraglia, M.D., 2013. Human dispersal across diverse environments of Asia during the Upper Pleistocene. Quat. Int. 300, 32–47. Braidwood, R.J., 1960. Seeking the world's first farmers in Persian Kurdistan. Illus. Lond. News 237, 695–697. Braidwood, R.J., Howe, B., 1960. Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, pp. 31. Brookes, I.A., 1989. The Physical Geography, Geomorphology and Late Quaternary History of the Mahidasht Project Area, Qara Su Basin, Central West Zagros. ROM Mahidasht Project. Vol. 1 Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Broud, J., 1987. Paleo-geographique, magmatique et la region Kermanshah, Iran. Tese the etate. Universite de Paris, France. Coon, C.S., 1957. The seven caves. In: Archaeological Exploration in the Middle East. Alfred Knopf, New York. Dennell, R.W., 2009. The Palaeolithic Settlement of Asia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Dennell, R., 2010. 'Out of Africa I': Current problems and future prospects. In: Fleagle, John G. (Ed.), Out of Africa I: The First Hominin Colonization of Eurasia, Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology Series. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 247–274. Dennell, R., 2017. Human colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene: the history of an invasive species. Curr. Anthropol. 58 (Suppl. 17), S383–S396. Dibble, H.L., 1984. The mousterian industry from Bisitun Cave (Iran). Paleorient 10 (2), 23–34. Dibble, H.L., Holdaway, S.J., 1993. The Middle Palaeolithic industries of. In: Olszewski, Warwasi.D.I., Dibble, H.L. (Eds.), The Palaeolithic Prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus. The University Museum, Pennsylvania, pp. 75–100. Djamali, M., de Beaulieu, J.-L., Shah-hosseini, M., Andrieu-Ponel, V., Ponel, P., Amini, A., Akhani, H., Leroy, S.A.G., Stevens, L., Lahijani, H., Brewer, S., 2008. A late Pleistocene long pollen record from Lake Urmia, Iran. Quat. Res. 69, 413–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yqres. Djamali, M., Biglari, F., Abdi, K., Andrieu-Ponel, V., de Beaulieu, J.-L., Mashkour, M., Ponel, P., 2011. Pollen analysis of coprolites from a late Pleistocene-Holocene cave deposit (Wezmeh Cave, west Iran): insights into the late Pleistocene and late Holocene vegetation and flora of the central Zagros Mountains. J. Archaeol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas. Dusseldorp, G.L., 2009. A View to a Kill: Investigating Middle Palaeolithic Subsistence Using an Optimal Foraging Perspective. Sidestone Press, Leiden. Field, J., Lahr, M.M., 2006. Assessment of the southern dispersal: GIS-based analyses of potential routes at oxygen isotopic stage 4. J. World Prehist. 19 (1), 1–45. Finlayson, C., 2004. Neanderthals and Modern Humans: An Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ghasidian, E., 2014. Early Upper Palaeolithic Occupation at the Ghār-e Boof Cave, a Reconstruction of Cultural Traditions in Southern Zagros Mountains of Iran. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen; Germany. Ghasidian, E., 2019. Rethinking the Upper Palaeolithic of the Zagros Mountains. Paleo Anthropol. 2019, 240–310. Ghasidian, E., Heydari-Guran, S., 2012. The Preliminary Results of the Archaeological Research on the Caves and Rockshelters of Kermanshah Province, Western Iran, Three Districts of Islamabad. Gilan-e Gharb and Qasr-e Shirin. Unpublished report to Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation in Kermanshah, (in Persian). Ghasidian, E., Heydari-Guran, S., Mirazón Lahr, M., 2019. Upper Palaeolithic cultural

Declaration of competing interest We have no conflict of interest after publishing this manuscript. Acknowledgments The MUP Zagros project is supported by the Iranian Cultural Heritage and Tourism Organization (ICHTO), and especially by Late Dr. Masoud Azarnoosh. We thank Mr. Beiranwand former head and A. Tahmasebi member of ICHTO of the Kermanshah Province. Special thanks go to Y. Moradi for his support and encouragement to do this project. Thanks to A. Wilshaw and Robin Dennell for their valuable comments. We also would like to thank number of people who assisted us on this project more specifically F. Biglari (the National Museum of Iran), who kindly provided appropriate information on his surveys, R. Naderi, N. Hariri, F. Azizi and the Heydari family. The project is supported by the Eberhard Karls Tübingen and funded by the European Commission H2020 (Marie Sklodowska-Curie, MUP-Trans Zagros project, grant number 702130). References Abdi, K., 2003. The early development of pastoralism in the Central Zagros Mountains. J. World Prehist. 17 (4), 395–448. Agard, P., Omrani, J., Jolivet, L., Mouthereau, F., 2005. Convergence history across Zagros (Iran): constraints from collisional and earlier deformation. Int. J. Earth Sci. 94, 401–419. Bae, Christopher J., Douka, Katerina, Petraglia, Michael D., 2017. On the origin of modern humans: Asian perspectives. Science 358 (6368), eaai9067. https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.aai9067. Bailey, G.N., King, G.C.P., 2011. Dynamic landscapes and human dispersal patterns: tectonic, coastlines, and the reconstruction of human habitats. Quat. Sci. Rev. 30 (11), 1533–1553. Bar Yosef, O., 2002. The Upper paleolithic revolution. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 31, 363–393. Bar-Yosef, O., Belfer-Cohen, A., 2001. From Africa to Eurasia- early dispersals. Quat. Int. 75, 19–28. Baxter, M.cJ., Beardah, C.C., Wright, R.V.S., 1997. Some archaeological applications of kernel density estimates. J. Archaeol. Sci. 24, 347–354. Bazgir, B., Ollé, A., Tumung, L., Becerra-Valdivia, L., Douka, K., Higham, T.F.G., van der Made, J., Picin, A., Saladié, P., López-García, J.M., Blain, H.-A., Allué, E., FernándezGarcía, M., Rey-Rodríguez, I., Arceredillo, D., Bahrololoumi, F., Azimi, M., Otte, M., Carbonell, E., 2017. Understanding the emergence of modern humans and the disappearance of Neanderthals: insights from Kaldar Cave (Khorramabad Valley, Western Iran). Sci. Rep. 7. Becerra-Valdivia, L., Douka, K., Comeskey, D., Bazgir, B., Conard, N.J., Marean, C.W., Ollé, A., Otte, M., Tumung, L., Zeidi, M., Higham, T.F.G, 2017. Chronometric investigations of the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition in the Zagros Mountains using AMS radiocarbon dating and Bayesian age modelling. J. Hum. Evol. 109,

27

Archaeological Research in Asia 21 (2020) 100161

S. Heydari-Guran and E. Ghasidian diversity in the Zagros Mountains and the expansion of modern humans into Eurasia. J. Hum. Evol. 132, 101–118. Hesse, B., 1989. Paleolithic Faunal Remains from Ghar-I-Khar, Western Iran. University of Alabama, Birmingham (AL). Heydari [Guran], S., 1999. Geoarchaeology of Palaeolithic Sites in the Southwestern Parav Mountains (Kermanshah Region) and a Study of the Paleoclimate at the End of the Quaternary. Unpublished M.A. thesis. Department of Geology, Islamic Azad University at Najaf-Abad, Esfahan, Iran. Heydari [Guran], S., 2001. Geology and geomorphology of the Islamabad survey area: Some preliminary observations. Iran. J. Archaeol. Hist. 26–27, 61–65 (In Persian). Heydari [Guran], S., 2004. In: Stöllner, T., Vatandoust, R. Slottaund A. (Eds.), Rohmaterialvorkommen für Stein in Iran Einige Fallstudien. Persiens antike Pracht, Bochum, pp. 124–129. Heydari [Guran], S., 2007. The impact of geology and geomorphology on cave and rockshelter archaeological site formation, preservation and distribution in the Zagros Mountain of Iran. Geoarchaeology 22 (6), 653–669. Heydari-Guran, S., 2014. Palaeolithic Landscapes of Iran. Vol. 2568 BAR International Series. Heydari-Guran, S., 2015. Tracking upper Pleistocene human dispersals into the Iranian Plateau: A geoarcheological model. In: Sanz, N. (Ed.), HEADS 4 World Heritage Papers. Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Eurasia. Vol. I. UNESCO, Paris & Mexico, D.F, pp. 40–54. Heydari-Guran, S., 2018. In: Acheulean Occupations in the Upper Tigris Corridor: IraqiKurdistan. XVIIIe world UISPP, pp. 179789 Congresssciencesconf.org:uispp. Heydari-Guran, S., Ghasidian, E., 2012. The Preliminary Results of the Archaeological Research on the Caves and Rockshelters of Kermanshah Province, Western Iran, Three Districts of Kermanshah, Dalahoo and Sar Pol-e Zehab. Unpublished Report to Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization in Kermanshah, (in Persian). Heydari-Guran, S., Ghasidian, E., 2017. The MUP Zagros Project: tracking the Middle–Upper Palaeolithic transition in the Kermanshah region, west-central Zagros. Iran. Antiq. 91 (355) page project gallery. Heydari-Guran, S., Ghasidian, E., Conard, N.J., 2015. Middle Paleolithic settlement on the Iranian Central Plateau. In: Conard, Nicholas J., Delagnes, Anne (Eds.), Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. vol. IV Tübingen Publications in Prehistory, Kerns Verlag, Tübingen ISBN: 978-3-935751-22-3. Hole, F., 1962. Archaeological survey and excavation in Iran, 1961. Science 137, 524–526. Hole, F., Flannery, K.V., 1967. The prehistory of southwestern Iran: a preliminary report. Proc. Prehist. Soc. 33, 147–206. Howe, B., 2014. Barda Balka. Oriental Institute 31. Chicago. Hublin, J., Richards, M.P., 2009. The Evolution of Hominin Diets: Integrating Approaches to the Study of Paleolithic Subsistence. Springer. Ikeda, J., 1979. Preliminary Repost of Archaeological Survey in Arsanjan Area, Fars Province, Iran, 1977. Kyoto University, Kyoto. Jaubert, J., Biglari, F., Bordes, J.-G., Bruxelles, L., Mourre, V., Shidrange, S., Naderi, R., Alipour, S., 2006. New research on Paleolithic of Iran: preliminary report of 2004 Iranian-French joint mission. In: Archaeological Reports. Vol. 4. Iranian Center for Archaeological Research, Tehran, pp. 17–26. Kuhn, S.L., Hovers, E., 2006. General introduction. In: Hovers, E., Kuhn, S.L. (Eds.), Transitions before the transition: Evolution and stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Springer, New York, pp. 1–13. Lahr, M.M., Foley, R., 1994. Multiple dispersals and modern human origins. Evol. Anthropol. 3 (2), 48–60. Lindly, J.M., 2005. The Zagros Mousterian: a regional perspective. In: Anthropological Research Papers, No. 56. Arizona State University, Tempe (AZ). Mansouri, S., 2019. Sampling and Analyses of Lithic Artefacts from the Middle Palaeolithic Sites of Talivan. Soumar, Kermanshah in prep. Marean, C.W., Kim, S.Y., 1998. Mousterian large mammal remains from Kobeh Cave: behavioral implications for Neanderthals and early modern humans. Curr. Anthropol. 39, 79–113. Mashkour, M., Monchot, H., Trinkaus, E., Reyss, J.-L., Biglari, F., Bailon, S., Heydari, S., Abdi, K., 2009a. Carnivores and their prey in the Wezmeh Cave (Kermanshah, Iran): a Late Pleistocene refuge in the Zagros. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 19, 678–694. Mashkour, M., Radu, V., Mohaseb, A., Hashemi, N., Otte, M., Shidrang, S., 2009b. The Upper Paleolithic faunal remains from Yafteh cave (central Zagros), 2005 Campaign–a preliminary study. In: Otte, M., Biglari, F., Jaubert, J. (Eds.), Iran Paleolithic/Le Paléolithique d'Iran. BAR International Series, pp. 73–84. Mehterian, S., Pourmand, A., Sharifi, A., Lahijani, H.A.K., Naderi, M., Swart, P.K., 2017. Speleothem records of glacial/interglacial climate from Iran forewarn of future water availability in the interior of the Middle East. Quat. Sci. Rev. 164, 187–198. Mohamadi-Ghasrian, S., Baik-Mohamadi, K.A., 2017. The discovery of a Middle Palaeolithic site close to the Ghal Kamandbag Tepe, Harsin. Parseh J. Archaeol. Stud. 1, 9–19. Mohammadi Ghasiran, S., Beik Mohammadi, K., Mansouri, S., Ghafari Heris, R., 2017. A new Middle Palaeolithic chert quarry and workshop site in Kalkashvand (Harsin, Kermanshah), Iran. ARAMAZDA. Armenian J. Near East. Stud. V, 1–16 XI issue 1-2. Mohseni, H., Al-Aasm, I.S., 2004. Tempestite deposits from a storm influenced carbonate ramp: an example from the Pabdeh Formation, (Paleocene) Zagros basin, SW Iran. J. Pet. Geol. 27 (2), 163–178. Mortensen, P., 1993. Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic sites in the Hulailan Valley, Northern Luristan. In: Olszewski, D., Dibble, H. (Eds.), The Paleolithic Prehistory of the ZagrosTauros. The University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 159–186. Oberlander, T.M., 1965. The Zagros Streams. Syracuse Geographical Series 1 Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY.

Olszewski, D.I., 1993. The late Baradostian occupation at Warwasi rockshelter, Iran. In: Olszewski, D., Dibble, H. (Eds.), The Paleolithic prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia, pp. 187–206. Olszewski, D.I., 1999. The early Upper Paleolithic in the Zagros Mountains. In: Davis, W., Charles, R. (Eds.), Dorothy Garrod and the Progress of the Paleolithic Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 167e180. Otte, M., Biglari, F., Flas, D., Shidrang, S., Zwyns, N., Mashkour, M., Naderi, R., Mohaseb, A., Hashemi, N., Darvish, J., Radu, V., 2007. The Aurignacian in the Zagros region: new research at Yafteh Cave, Lorestan, Iran. Antiquity 81, 82–96. Otte, M., Shidrang, S., Zwyns, N., Flas, D., 2011. New radiocarbon dates for the Zagros Aurignacian from Yafteh cave. Iran. J. Hum. Evol. 61, 340e346. Pagani, L., Lawson, D., Jagoda, E., Morseburg, A., Eriksson, A., Mitt, M., Kivisild, T., Metspalu, M., 2016. Genomic analyses inform on migration events during the peopling of Eurasia. Nature 538, 238–242. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19792. Pickett, S.T.A., Cadenasso, M.L., 1995. Landscape ecology: spatial heterogeneity in ecological systems. Science 269, 331–334. Prüfer, K., Racimo, F., Patterson, N., Jay, F., Sankararaman, S., Sawyer, S., Heinze, A., Renaud, G., Sudmant, P.H., de Filippo, C., Li, H., Mallick, S., Dannemann, M., Fu, Q., Kircher, M., Kuhlwilm, M., Lachmann, M., Meyer, M., Ongyerth, M., Siebauer, M., Theunert, C., Tandon, A., Moorjani, P., Pickrell, J., Mullikin, J.C., Vohr, S.H., Green, R.E., Hellmann, I., Johnson, P.L., Blanche, H., Cann, H., Kitzman, J.O., Shendure, J., Eichler, E.E., Lein, E.S., Bakken, T.E., Golovanova, L.V., Doronichev, V.B., Shunkov, M.V., Derevianko, A.P., Viola, B., Slatkin, M., Reich, D., Kelso, J., Pääbo, S., 2014. The complete genome sequence of a Neanderthal from the Altai Mountains. Nature 505, 43–49. Pullar, J., 1977. Early cultivation in the Zagros. Iran 15, 15–37. Rolland, N., Dibble, H.L., 1990. A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic variability. Am. Antiq. 55, 480–499. Romero, S., Campbell, J.F., Nechols, J.R., With, K.A., 2008. Movement behavior in response to landscape structure: the role of functional grain. Landsc. Ecol. 24 (1), 39–51 Springer. Rosenberg, M., 1988. Paleolithic settlement pattern in the Marv Dasht, Fars Province, Iran. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, USA. Roustaei, K., Vahdati Nasab, H., Biglari, F., Heydari, S., Clark, G.A., Lindly, J.M., 2004. Recent Paleolithic surveys in Lurestan. Curr. Anthropol. 45, 692–707. Sacket, J.R., 1999. The archaeology Solvieux: an Upper Paleolithic open air site in France. In: Monumenta Archaeologica 19. University of California, Institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles. Schattner, U., Lazar, M., 2009. Subduction, collision and initiation of hominin dispersal. Quat. Sci. Rev. 28, 1820–1824. Shea, J.J., 2003. The Middle Paleolithic of the East Mediterranean Levant. J. World Prehist. 17 (4), 313–394. Shidrang, S., 2006. Warkaini: a new Palaeolithic site near Karmanshah in West-central Zagros, Iran. Antiquity 80 310, Project Gallery. Shidrang, S., Biglari, F., Bordes, J.-G., Jaubert, J., 2016. Continuity and change in the Late Pleistocene lithic industries of the central Zagros: a typo-technological analysis of lithic assemblages from Ghare-e Khar Cave, Bisotun, Iran. Archaeol. Ethnol. Anthropol. Eurasia 44, 27–38. Smith, P.E.L., 1967. Ghar-i-Khar and Ganj-i-Dareh. Iran 5, 138–139. Smith, P.E.L., 1986. Paleolithic archaeology in Iran. In: The American Institute of Iranian Studies Monograph 1. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Solecki, R.S., 1958. The Baradostian Industry and the Upper Paleolithic of the Near East. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Columbia University, New York. Solecki, R.S., 1963. Prehistory in Shanidar Valley, Northern Iraq. Science 139, 179–193. Tostevin, G.B., 2012. Seeing Lithics: A Middle-Range Theory for Testing for Cultural Transmission in the Pleistocene. Oxbow, Oakville, CT. Trinkaus, E., 1983. The Shanidar Neandertals. Academic Press, New York. Trinkaus, E., Biglari, F., Mashkour, M., Monchot, H., Reyss, J.-L., Rougier, H., Heydari, S., Abdi, K., 2008. Late Pleistocene human remains from Wezmeh cave, western Iran. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 135, 371–380. Tsanova, T., 2013. The beginning of the Upper Paleolithic in the Iranian Zagros. A taphonomic approach and techno-economic comparison of Early Baradostian assemblages from Warwasi and Yafteh (Iran). J. Hum. Evol. 65, 39–64. Van Zeist, W., Bottema, S., 1977. Palynological investigations in Western Iran. Palaeohistoria 19, 19–86. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.140.3562.65. Van Zeist, W., Wright, H.E., 1963. Preliminary pollen studies at Lake Zeribar, Zagros Mountains, South-Western Iran. Science 140, 65–67. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.140.3562.65. Vita-Finzi, C., 1969. Late quaternary alluvial chronology of Iran. Geol. Rundsch. 58, 951–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01820740. Vita-Finzi, C., Higgs, E.S., 1970. Prehistoric economy in the Mount Carmel area of Plaestine: site catchment analysis. Proc. Prehistorical Soc. 36, 1–37. Waltham, A.C., Ede, D.P., 1973. The karst of Kuh-e-Parau, Iran. Transactions of the Cave Research Group of Great Brita 15, 27–40. Wright, H.E., 1962. Pleistocene glaciation in Kurdistan. Eiszeit. Gegenw. 12, 131–164. Wright, H.T., 1979. Archaeological investigations in Northeastern Xuzestan. In: Research Reports in Archaeology 10. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan. Zanolli, C., Biglari, F., Mashkour, M., Abdi, K., Monchot, H., Debue, K., Mazurier, A., Bayle, P., Le Luyer, M., Rougier, H., Trinkaus, E., Macchiarelli, R., 2019. A Neanderthal from the Central Western Zagros, Iran. Structural reassessment of the Wezmeh 1 maxillary premolar. J. Hum. Evol. 135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol. 2019.102643. Zohary, M., 1973. Geobotanical Foundations of the Middle East. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart.

28