Abstract
Miankouh Area is contractually known as a district of southern part of the Central Zagros in the southwest of Iran. Despite its small area (680 km2), due to its location between highlands there are two distinct micro ecozones with natural resources and an abundance of plant and animal species and has been suitable for the vertical seasonal movements throughout the year in order to access to various resources in the subsistence from the Pleistocene to the present. Our knowledge of its Mousterian cultures is derived from three-season field surveys between 2009 and 2011 years in both Low Altitude (LAZ) and High Altitude Zones (HAZ) with an average altitude of 1510 and 2601 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l). This paper seeks to answer (1) what is the position of Miankouh’s MP cultures among the well-known Mousterian cultures in the Zagros Mountains of Iran? And (2) what is the radius of movement of MP hunter-gatherers of in the landscape of Miankouh through the study of the stone assemblage of both LAZ and HAZ? Totally, 1454 stone artifacts were collected from the Middle Paleolithic Open-air sites of both zones. Preliminary results show that the MP hunter-gatherers of Miankouh exploited both zones with relatively a homogeneous tool kit influenced by the permanent rivers in LAZ and pool resources available in HAZ within the daily radius of movement at a distance of 5 to 20 km, which had often been turned into flakes and various tools using several techniques. They also used the type of tools that are commonly recognizable in the stone industries of other MP cultures of Zagros.
Keywords: Zagros, Bakhtiari Highlands, Stone Industries, Mousterian.

Introduction
One of the largest bodies of research on montane adaptation comes from the Zagros Mountains of Iran and Iraq. Most of the Palaeolithic archaeological researches of Zagros have focused on, north, south (Azadi, 2017; Dashtizadeh & Hosseini, 2008; Conard et al., 2006; Rosenberg, 1985) as well as the north parts of Central Zagros (see Abdi, 1999; Adams, 1954; Biglari & Abdi, 1999; Coon, 1951; Dibble, 1984; Jaubert et al., 2009; Trinkaus & Biglari, 2006; Young & Smith, 1966; Roustaei et al., 2002; Roustaei et al., 2004). Broadly, it can be declared that there is no comprehensive evidence about conditions of the Palaeolithic sites in the Bakhtiari region in Southern part of the central Zagros.
This paper presents an analysis of a group of MP lithic assemblages collected from a set of open-air localities during field surveys conducted in both Lower Altitude (LAZ) and Higher Altitude Zones (HAZ) of Miankouh District with an area of approximately 680 km2 and an average elevation of 1510 and 2601 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l) in Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari (ChB) Province, Iran (Khosrowzadeh, 2011, 2010a, 2009).
For the aims, these assemblages provide insights into mobility, landscape-use, and lithic technological decision-making in high-altitude environments by the MP hunter-gatherers in the Zagros Mountains and beyond.
These data presented in the current paper originates from the area of the Miankouh highlands (Bahraminia et al., 2022) from where MP evidence can help further elucidate the issues identified with the Zagros Mousterian as an explanatory framework for MP seasonal mobility and land-use patterns in the Zagros Mountains (Lindly, 1997; Skinner, 1965).
This paper seeks to answer (1) what is the position of Miankouh’s MP cultures among the well-known Mousterian cultures in the Zagros Mountains of Iran? And (2) what is the radius of movement of MP hunter-gatherers of in the landscape of Miankouh through the study of the stone assemblage of both LAZ and HAZ?

Materials and Methods
To record the surface findings, as soon as the first artefact was found, a radius of 200 meters around the point of this find was evaluated in different directions by a group of five people. By focusing on the MP period, 177 MPO locales in the form of points with XY coordinates incorporating 1454 stone artefact were analyzed. In order to assess the techno-typological aspects of the lithic assemblages in the region we used advanced analytical tools (SPSS tool boxes) at the local landscape level. 

Results
From the surface of both ecozones a low density of lithic artefacts ranging from 1 to 36 pieces was identified for the MP each identified here as a specific “locale”. The area under study provided a large number of cultural materials including lithic artefacts from MP UP and EP as well as a considerable amount of potteries from the Neolithic, Chalcolithic as well as the Late Islamic period. For the purpose of this paper, we only examined stone assemblage of the MP period. 
A total of 1454 lithic artefacts (whole and fragmented) were collected during the Miankouh survey, with 874 pieces from 113 MPO locales coming from LAZ, and 580 pieces from 63 MPO locales from HAZ. We identified four main groups including core, tool, unretouched flake, and debris.
In terms of lithic technology, preferential and recurrent Levallois methods are clearly used in the production of flakes. Recurrent methods of unipolar, bipolar, and centripetal were used to knap the flakes. Moreover, the dorsal scar patterns among the cores, tools and unretouched flakes indicate non-Levallois semi-pyramidal and discoidal methods are other debitage techniques in the MP stone industry of Miankouh.
For 970 artefacts which were categorized as tool, scrapers and blades represent highest frequency of tool types in assemblage which were followed by retouched flakes, points, notch/denticulates, borer/burins, and hand axes. In process of tool-making have generally been used the Plain/flat and faceted platforms more than other types. Points of both LAZ and HAZ are the end products in this group because about 82 % of them do not have any cortex on their dorsal face. Also, 50.88 % of total unretouched whole flakes have cortex on the dorsal face. Geneste has already classified such samples in the early stages of the reduction system in the tool production cycle (Geneste, 1985). 

Conclusion
The use of Levallois technique was initially reported not to be present in the Mousterian Zagros assemblages (Skinner, 1965). Its widespread use within Zagros Middle Palaeolithic assemblages was however eventually confirmed by Dibble (1984) (Bahraminia et al., 2022) (and papers in Olszewski and Dibble, 1993). That the utilization of Levallois technique in the region cannot however be expected to be universal has recently been established through excavations at Qaleh Bozi close to the Miankouh field survey area, where a relative absence of Levallois technique was reported (Biglari et al., 2009).
Unfortunately, we do not have reliable metric core data and other lithic artefacts from other MP sites of the Zagros in order to support our results. In order to better understand the effects of elevation on size and weight as well as its effect on the quality and quantity of MP toolkits, we need to measure metric values of lithic assemblages from other sites/locales within the Zagros Mountains at different elevations from a ‘landscape-oriented’ or ‘siteless’ approach.
The overall composition of the Miankouh lithic assemblage from a techno-typological point of view includes relatively short flakes. Retouched pieces on flake are other features of this collection. A glance at all cores from Miankouh reveal that in LAZ usually larger stone cobbles have been used as cores in comparison with HAZ. The mean weight of those from LAZ is 56.66 grams while in HAZ it is 41.98. In the case of core reduction strategies, the high frequency of cortical flakes, unretouched flakes, irregular retouched flakes, and typical tools suggest that the knapping processes were accomplished at some of localities of LAZ. It seems that the production of tools on cortical flakes (for example notch/denticulates) has been a common tool making tradition in the study area. The presence of short flakes in the Miankouh lithic assemblage may reflect the fact that the use of short flakes had been a common tradition at the MP sites in high-altitude environments. It can be raised that some Mousterian debitage strategies for the production of flakes and tools were commonly presented in Miankouh where stone raw material in the form of river pebbles and chert nodules of limestone outcrops were available in this mountainous region.

Abstract
Art works and objects in museums are valuable cultural and civilizational treasures that are usually less prone to research and have been neglected by researchers to spawn new approaches to scientific study and introduction to the audience. Accordingly, the collection of works of art and particularly the rugs available in the Textile Treasury of the Cultural Complex (Museum) of the Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation are valuable examples of magnificent museum works and an exquisite treasure of the carpets of the Qajar period with great capacity and capabilities for research and introduction. These rugs have been collected from different weaving centers of Iran with various designs and patterns. A total of 51 rugs are stored in this museum, 8 ones of which have been woven in Farahan-Sarouk region, one of the major centers of carpet production for global export during the Qajar period. With this in mind, the current study sought to analyze and introduce these rugs from technical and artistic perspectives. The research question is, “What are the technical, aesthetic aspects (design, pattern and color) and, if any, the semantic concepts of the texture of Farahan-Sarouk rugs?” The findings of the study include the following: the designs and patterns of these rugs include Corner-Medallion, Vase-like Altar-shaped, Overall Flower with Corner, and Paisley with Medallion in various forms and colors. Additionally, the background color of these samples includes lacquer, ivory, copper, blue and navy blue, and the background color of the margins, except for two lacquer cases, is all navy blue - a feature that is a mostly fixed characteristic of Sarouk and Farahan’s rugs. This is a qualitative developmental study conducted using the descriptive-analytical research method with data collected through the desk-based method.
Keywords: Museum, Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation, Farahan, Sarouk, Carpet, Design, Color.

Introduction
The Cultural Complex of the Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation, including various complexes, museums and treasures of artistic, historical and archaeological works and objects, is one of the richest Iranian museums extending and developing its cultural and museum subsidiaries over the past years and decades to such an extent that it currently has various museums such as anthropology and museum gardens in many cities of Iran. In fact, this foundation initiated its cultural activities by setting up and operating museums under the title of “The General Administration of the Foundation’s Museums” from 1995 with a specialized and scientific approach to museum management and with the aim of collecting, preserving and documenting museum objects and works and making exhibitive, research and educational uses of them in order to improve the general and specialized knowledge and attract more audiences, enhance the scientific and cultural potential of the society by providing museum services, and familiarize the future generations with the cultural, civilizational, historical and national identity by using the facilities, works and economic and cultural resources available in the Foundation.
As a part of art and national identity, hand-knotted carpets are among the most precious and valuable works in the Islamic Art Museums and Textile Treasury, which makes this cultural complex more attractive. Particularly, Farahan and Sarouk carpets, as part of Iran’s weaving system and the art of carpet weaving available with 8 antique carpets, are among the outstanding hand-woven carpets in this country. The vast area of Farahan in Markazi Province, with more than two hundred villages including Sarouk and Jirya, as one of the most prominent high-quality weaving centers of Iran, could introduce itself to the world community in the mid-19th century during the Qajar era and the era of the revival of all kinds of local and national arts by producing various kinds of unique carpets and rugs, especially carpets that were produced and exported under the auspices of a foreign company such as Ziegler. Some of the exquisite carpets surviving from Farahan, Sarouk and Soltanabad are currently kept in many world-famous complexes and museums, such as the famous Claremont Complex and the Carpet Museum of Iran (as the most specialized carpet museum in the world). This study aimed to review, analyze and introduce the Farahan-Sarouk rugs in the Textile Treasury of the Museum of Islamic Arts affiliated to the Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation. Therefore, the research question is, “What are the aesthetic aspects (design, pattern and color) and technical aspects (linage, knotting, dyeing), and if any, the semantic concepts of the texture of Farahan-Sarouk carpets?” 
This is a qualitative-developmental study carried out using the descriptive-analytical research method with the data collected through the desk-based method. 

Textile Treasury
The Textile Treasury, affiliated to the Islamic Art Museums, has 1,187 coded and labeled museum works, including various objects related to the antique textiles woven in Iran. These works include carpets and rugs, historical clothes (coats, vests, Turkmen scarves, veils, hats, military uniforms and their accessories), military insignia, machine-made carpets, Termeh, needlework textiles, Termeh frocks, needlework Termeh tablecloths. Sermeh embroidery, Termeh cushion, arch-shaped shawl, prayer mat, velvet, carpet tableau, embroidery tableau, fardel, exquisite pates, Indian sari, wicker, Kalamkari (a type of hand-painted cotton textile), tapestry, fabric tent in the form of Naser al-Din Shah’s tent, Kaaba curtain, Qashqai horse belt, Turkmen back, Jabbeh (a hand-woven pile rug of coarse quality and medium size), Paravan (room divider), wardrobe, sofa and chair with tapestry cover, prayer rug, double-waft shroud fabrics, saddlebag, wicker fan, pen-case, Quran holder, coin holder, hand-woven Giveh (light cotton summer shoes),Jajim (coarse and loosely-woven woolen cloth) and Kilim (a flat tapestry-woven carpet or rug). The oldest and most prominent work of this treasury is the double-waft collection of the Buyid dynasty period, known as Buyid dynasty shrouds.

Rugs and their technical and aesthetic aspects
All the carpets available in the Textile Treasury (former Dafineh Museum) are of the rug type and are considered among the most exquisite rugs in this treasury. Dating back to sixty years to two centuries ago, they are the most unique Persian carpets produced with beautiful, original, harmonious vegetable-based colors with a variety of designs, colors and patterns. These rugs have been woven in important weaving areas and centers of Iran, including Kashan, Farahan and Sarouk, Kerman and Ravar, Isfahan, Bidabad (a neighborhood of Isfahan), Najaf-Abad, Tabriz, Haris, Shiraz (Qashqai -Kashkuli), Arab tribes of Fars, Ghonghori tribe of Fars, Bakhtiari, Malayer, Sanandaj, Bijar, Yazd and Tehran. In general, as many as 51 rugs are kept in this treasury, which date back to the Qajar or early Pahlavi periods (based on the approximate dates mentioned by the museum). The designs and patterns of the rugs include Prayer-nichee, Corner-Medallion, Paisley, Fish, Hunting, Overall Flower, Rhombus Frame and Nazem pattern. All the designs are listed in Table 3. It is important to note that the design of the Vase Prayer-nichee and Corner-Medallion designs are among the most frequently used designs. Among these rugs, 8 rugs belong to Farahan (Sarouk) region in Markazi Province. Figure 2 shows samples of the carpets available in the Textile Treasury.
 
Conclusion
This article was an attempt to study, review and analyze the carpets of Farahan and Sarouk region while introducing the cultural collection and museums of the Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation and its carpet treasury. The vast area of Farahan, with a wide range of carpet weaving areas and centers such as the famous village of Sarouk, has been one of the oldest carpet-weaving areas of high-quality and exported carpet production in Iran since the Qajar era and the mid-19th century. Eight rugs woven in Farahan-Sarouk are kept in the Textile Treasury, a subsidiary of the Oppressed and War Veterans Foundation. These rugs are 113 to 130 cm wide and 190 to 203 cm long. Additionally, the background colors of the rugs includes lacquer, ivory, copper, blue and navy blue, and the background color of the margins, except for one lacquer (red) case, is all navy blue. The knot used in these rugs and other rugs of Farahan and Arak regions is (Persian) asymmetrical. The type of dyeing and colors used in these samples are natural and vegetable-based. One of the other characteristic features of these samples, which is rarely seen in the past and even contemporary carpets, is their linage. The linage in these carpets is 40, 50 and 60, which makes it a unique rug of that era. Furthermore, the raw materials used in the rugs are mostly wool, and to a lesser extent, cotton and silk. The designs and patterns used in the rugs include the common designs of Corner-Medallion and Tree-shaped and Vase-shaped Prayer-niche designs in different types as well as Paisley design. Among the rugs, Rug No. 4 is a unique product displaying symbolic concepts in the background texture of which elements and concepts specifically related to Mithraism, such as the (Holy) Life Tree, Birds, Cypress Tree, Animal’s Combat and Crow motifs have been designed and patterned. Although these antique rugs are considered part of the artistic identity, they can be modeled, redesigned, represented, modified and rewoven in the Persian carpet design system.

Abstract
The Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods are the important periods of human life. The why and how of the transition process from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic in different regions is considered an important archaeological issue. Therefore, it is important to understand and study the sites related to this period to explain this process. Ghela Zeka Tape is located in Khorramabad, in the central Zagros region. Valuable information about the Neolithisation process, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic periods has been published from this area. Based on the results of the boundary determination, Ghela Zeka has an area of nearly three hectares. In this research, with the aim of introducing and explaining the data, the author has reviewed, studied, and compared the findings obtained from the Ghela Zeka, including stone tools, pottery sherds, and a sample of an animal figurine from the Neolithic and early Chalcolithic period. As a result of this research, was confirmed the possibility of the existence of layers from the Neolithisation period was raised and the presence of evidence from the pre-pottery and pottery Neolithic periods. These results were obtained from examining and comparing chipped stone materials such as various flake, mixed, pyramidal, and bullet-shaped cores, and tools such as notched, retouched blades/bladelets, and sickle blades, as well as pottery samples of the Roahel type. From the Chalcolithic period, evidence of pottery of the Bagh-e No and Giyan V types indicated a continuation of settlement from the Neolithic to the early Chalcolithic period. Based on radio carbon dating of the Bagh-e No culture and comparison with the Sialk I-III cultures on the Central Plateau, the Bagh-e No and Giyan V pottery cultures have been dated to the late 6th to late 5th millennium BC. As a result of this research, questions about the periods of the site and its role in the studies of this period are answered. The importance of this research is that by analyzing the materials of these important periods in Central Lorestan, it highlights the importance of future excavations to study the transition from Neolithic to Chalcolithic.
Keywords: Lorestan, Khorramabad, Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Qela Zeka.

Introduction
The beginning of agriculture and domestication, the creation of architecture and building houses with simple and primitive materials, and the increase in population are some of the prominent features of the Neolithic period. Referring to these changes and developments, Bar-yosef refers to it as the most vital human revolution after 2.5 million years of cultural growth and evolution (Bar-Yosef, 2001: 117). The first studies on the Neolithic in western Iran were carried out by Robert Braidwood in Kermanshah (Braidwood et al., 1961). After a hiatus of about 30 years, research on this period resumed with the excavation of the Chogha Golan (Zeidi & Conard, 2013), Sheikhi Abad (Matthews et al., 2013), and Eastern Chia Sbez (Darabi et al., 2011), which continues to the present (Darabi et al., 2024). During this period, the formation and expansion of early villages took place, which reflects a multifaceted development in the societies of the region in various economic, social, and ritual fields, which is divided into the following sub-periods: Transitional Neolithic (9700-8000 BC), Pre-Pottery Neolithic (8000-7000 BC), and Pottery Neolithic (7000-6000 BC) (Darabi, 2024: 8). The Central Zagros Chalcolithic period covers a period of two thousand years from 5500 to 3300 (Henrickson, 1991: 278). Until the 1970s, the Central Zagros Chalcolithic period chronology of western Iran was based on the Giyan sequence, which both McCan and Dyson published based on the typology of Giyan V pottery (Henrickson, 1985: 63). This period has been divided by Elizabeth Henrickson into three phases: Lower, Middle, and Upper (Henrickson, 1985:66). This period in Lorestan had its own unique characteristics, so that its Lower period was different from other areas of the Central Zagros and had its own culture with local characteristics, which is known as the “Bagh-e No culture”. After the Bagh-e No, it was replaced by a pottery culture known as the Se-Gabi (SGP) and the Giyan Vc, which was related to the Ubaid culture in Mesopotamia and which Hole called the “Daurai phase” in the Khorram Abad valley (Hole, 2007:72). The Upper Chalcolithic, like the previous period, had its own characteristics, which were more closely related to and more strongly influenced by the growing Uruk culture in Mesopotamia and Susa II in the Suziana Plain, which in the Central Zagros is comparable and recognizable with the Godin VI period (Young, 1969). 
Since the Ghela Zeka Tape, with an area of nearly 3 hectares, has reliable and strong evidence of Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods in Khorram Abad, analyzing its cultural findings with the aim of introducing and explaining the importance of this work is an undeniable necessity. The evidence studied in this research shows that Ghela Zeka can have a prominent position as one of the key Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in the Central Zagros. Given the extensive settlement and diversity of material finds, questions about the periods of settlement of the Tape, cultural interactions with surrounding areas, and its importance in studies of the Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic arise, which are addressed in this study. It seems that Ghela Zeka had settlements from different stages of the Neolithic period, which played an important role in the transition to the Early Chalcolithic and the Bagh-e No in Central Lorestan.


Identified Traces
Ghela Zeka is located in Dehpir district of the Khorram Abad county, 10 km northeast of Khorramabad city. This monument has a geographical location of 48° 46’ 67”, 33° 55’ 15” and 1475 masl (Fig. 1). The most important material findings from the Tape included chipped stones, pottery, and a clay figurine resembling boars. 
The stone tools belonging to the Neolithic period were obtained from the excavated layers of the boundary determination pits, which included; various amorphous cores, pyramidal blades and blade lets and bullet cores, various types of simple and retouched blades, blade lets, chisels, scrapers, ridges and sickle blades (Figs. 3,4). The Ghela Zeka community mainly used chart in different colors and sometimes flint and obsidian to make and produce tools. The conglomerate outcrop 7 km west and southwest could have been the main source of this stone, which is distributed up to 3 km from the Tape (Fig. 2). Small fragments of obsidian in the layers of Ghela Zeka are an indication of trans-regional relations of the people of the site. Based on experimental studies in various sites in western Iran, this stone was probably supplied from the sources of Nimrud Dagh in southeastern Anatolia (Renfrew, 1969: 430; Darabi & Glascock, 2013; Pullar, 1990: 12).
A total of 16 source samples were obtained from the exploration of boreholes located in the field, including 5 blade and blade let, 7 amorphous cores, and 5 mixed cores. During the excavation, 32 stone tool samples were obtained. The Neolithic pottery of Lorestan is known as the Roahol phase (Bahrami & Fazeli Nashli, 2016: 32). This pottery was first identified from the Neolithic Roahol site in the Khorramabad valley (Bahrami et al., 2012), which can be compared with the pottery of Mohammad Jafar in the Alikosh of Dehloran (Bahrami & Mohammadian, 2025: 61). Several pottery sherds similar to Roahol pottery were found from the Ghela Zeka, two of which were painted (Figs. 5-6: No: 5,6). Also, a clay figurine resembling a boar was found in the Neolithic layers of borehole number 10, measuring about 5 cm in length and 4 cm in height (Fig. 7).
As mentioned earlier, the Early Chalcolithic in Lorestan is known as the Bagh-e No culture. Most of the pottery from this period was found from the surface survey (Fig. 6), and only 3 samples were obtained from the determine the boundary (Fig. 8). The pottery of this period has straight and elongated edges and due to insufficient and incomplete firing has a gray paste and a mixture of straw. Their outer surface coating is buff or orange, decorated mainly with geometric and rarely human and possibly plant decorations in black and red (Figs. 5,6, Table. 1). Young has classified the pottery of this period into two groups IA and IB. Young’s type IA pottery is a type of pottery with a mixture of straw and buff, which usually has thick walls, which Young has introduced as early pottery with a mixture of straw, and group IB he considers with the same characteristics but of the embossed type (Young, 1966:230). Goff has mentioned these potteries as early pottery (Goff, 1971:134). This type of pottery has also been reported in Chia Siah and Chia Zargaran of Tarhan (Schmidt et al., 1989; Goff, 1971), the upper layers of Abdul Hussein Tepe (Pullar 1990), and many sites in different cities of Lorestan.

Conclusion
Based on what has been said above, Ghela Zeka Tape encompasses a long settlement from the pre-pottery Neolithic period before the 7th millennium BC to the end of the 5th millennium BC. The presence of amorphous, pyramidal and mixed cores in this complex, along with ridges and dentils, indicates the possibility of settlement in the transitional Neolithic period before the 8th millennium BC. The presence and abundance of tools made on blades and blade lets, including sickle blades and bullet cores, reflects the existence of a possible agricultural community at Ghela Zeka in the 8th millennium BC. Ghela Zeka, like many Neolithic sites in western Iran, entered into trans-regional interactions during this period and received and produced obsidian chipped stones Given the area of the site, which is more than 3 hectares, this agricultural community was probably a settlement. No settlement of this period has been identified in Lorestan so far, and Ghela Zeka may be considered one of the most extensive Neolithic sites in western Iran. The discovery of an animal figurine could be a sign of a society with ritual and symbolic dimensions. Another important feature of Ghela Zeka is the presence of the Pre-pottery Neolithic following the Pottery Neolithic, which could help explain the transition between these two periods in the 7th millennium BC in the region and the differences in tool industries and livelihoods of its people. The continuity of settlement from the Neolithic to the Lower Chalcolithic is important, as reliable pottery evidence from the Bagh-e No and possibly Giyan V has been found. Perhaps one of the most important questions in the archaeology of Lorestan and western Iran, namely when, why and how the transition from the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic and its biological aspects, can be answered in scientific excavations. Based on available data, Ghela Zeka was inhabited until the late 5th millennium BC and then abandoned. Ultimately, an accurate understanding of the time and various aspects of life at Ghela Zeka requires scientific exploration and providing an absolute dating of it.