Abstract
Tapeh Giyan in Western Iran, which is well known to the archaeological academia, is one of the most important prehistoric mounds in Central Zagros which has always been noticed by both Iranian and foreign archaeologists. The last season of field works at Tapeh Giyan was done under Ali Khaksar in the spring and summer of 2012 in order to determine its boundaries. For this purpose, 27 test pits were dug all over the mound, and in trench no. 12, a distinctive burial was discovered. Since none of the 122 graves excavated by the French expedition over the years 1931 and 1932 were documented, the excavation continued on this newfound grave; it was entitled no. 123. Its burial’s corpse’s position is a combination of bent and supine position, and its mouth is abnormally wide open; also, there are 19 funerary objects buried with it. In the present study, we are going to discuss the very unique burial position of this grave together with its historic and comparative aspects.
Keywords: Iran, Central Zagros, Tapeh Giyan, Burial, Bronze Age.

Introduction
Tapeh Giyan is a well-known archaeological site located 12 km from the west of Nahavand and 70 km from the south of Hamadan city, in the marginal parts of a small town with the same name. As it was mentioned above Tapeh Giyan is situated in the Northern peripheral parts of the town, and it meets residential units in the south. This mound is 350 m long and 150 m wide, and it is also 17 m higher than the surface of the adjacent lands. Lastly, the average height of the mound is 1600 m above the sea level. This archaeological site was excavated by French archaeologists (Contenau and Ghirshman) over the years 1931-1932 and its results were published in 1935. Giyan became less important till it was once again excavated in 27 test pits in 2012 in a research program for delimitating the mound and determining its boundaries. In the course of conducting this research program, the true area of the mound was determined. The mound spreads towards the south, east and also southeast, and it continues to the beds beneath streets and houses; this was confirmed by an in-situ burial located in the outer parts of mound’s boundaries dating back to the middle Bronze Age. The burial was to excavated and studied owing to the fact that the other 122 burials were not completely/fully documented by the French expedition. 

Discussion 
Tapeh Giyan is one of the most prominent archaeological sites in Central Zagros from which artifacts from 5th to 1st millennia have been reported in the course of archaeological excavations. This mound’s excavations could undoubtedly bridge the gap between non-scientific/unsystematic and scientific/systematic archaeological excavations in Iran. At that time, the system of stratigraphy (was not interpreted in the same way) it does now, and what was regarded really important during excavation was finding the origin of a particular pottery from the region of Giyan as well as the bronze artifacts of Lurestan. Considering the fact that most information about Tapeh Giyan has been yielded from its burials, it cannot be reliable enough from the stratigraphic point of view; however, it’s been about 50 years that the chronology covering mid-3rd millennium to 2nd millennium B.C.E. in western Iran has been established based on Tapeh Giyan’s excavations. 
Overall, 122 graves have been excavated in scattered spots of Tapeh Giyan at different depths during the previous excavations at Giyan. 119 graves in the depth of 9.5 m. from the mound’s surface, and 3 graves in depths of 11.5, 13 and 14; one in each, have been dug. These graves are in form of simple elliptical pits in the ground. The children’s skeletons have been buried in almost large jars. The corpse body and skeleton have been bent and it seems that this position pattern had not been obligatory. In the course of this season’s excavation, an accompanied burial was found in test pit number 12 in the depth of 200 cm from the mound surface. In this grave, 19 objects have also been found together with the skeleton; this assemblage of objects includes: 6 ceramic pots, 4 bronze pots, 1 bronze spear, 1 bone object, 2 bronze earrings, 2 bronze rings which were joint to the jaws, 1 metal ore-like blade, and 2 bronze rings on elbow bones. These objects which are considered funerary objects and grave gifts were mostly put above skeleton’s head and at the same level with the skeleton. As we know, the funerary objects represent both functional and ritual importance in burying traditions, and the funerary objects in this newfound grave constitute majorly potsherds. 
The notable point about this burial is the skeleton’s position pattern; this skeleton’s upper part along with its pelvis is both in a complete supine position, and its mouth is unnaturally open. Considering the existence of two bronze rings at the joint of the upper and the lower jaws (mandible and maxilla), we could conclude that some changes have been exerted on the primary status of the burial. The jaw bone and the teeth are completely sound except for the premolars which have traces of wearing on them; all this makes us presume that this person would do an activity with them when he had been alive. His legs are tucked in toward his stomach on the right side of his pelvis. The toes and ankles of his both legs were below the right side of pelvis, and the pelvis itself had been dislocated after burial due to external pressures. The bone of left leg’s femur was located on the pelvis, and the femur’s head had been situated on the right hand’s elbow as well. 

Conclusion
According to the paleoanthropological studies, this skeleton belongs to a hefty man aging 35- 40 years old. This skeleton, despite being almost well-preserved, bears some evidence which indicates a number of changes applied in the primary burial including lack of some hand and foot phalanges as well as the existence of the rings put on the two papillae on the lower jaw joint. It is highly likely that these rings have caused the mouth to remain open, which could imply sort of burial tradition. According to Ghrishman’s excavations in 1933 and 1934 in the Tapeh Giyan, the earrings have been among the funerary objects of men. In addition, the rings couldn’t be earrings in that in addition to the rings, there are two earrings in the grave. Because of the abundant muscles and vessels existed between upper and lower jaws, the rings could not be placed there in a living human. Therefore, the rings must have been placed in these places after death intentionally. Furthermore, the symmetrical position of the rings in the two papillae on the lower jaw joint, the impossibility of putting and removing the rings easily in this place and also having no evidence of the natural post- depositional processes, in other cases such as earrings, and the object place on the collar bone, are the reason for rejecting the natural post-depositional processes and accidental disturbance. Ceramic wares constitute the majority of the gifts. These wares are all morphologically typified as Giyan (IV, III) and Godin types which all date back to mid-third millennium through late- second millennium B.C.E. Existence of metal objects in this grave and studying the type of bronze alloy utilized in these objects’ structures shows that the method and technique used in producing these dishes and pots has been lost wax method, and beside that hammering has been applied in making the other metal objects. Finally, on the basis of the historic-comparative studies, and also with considering the chronology of prehistoric cultures at Tapeh Giyan, we can infer that this burial belongs to (middle) Bronze Age and dates back to a period of time from 2500 to 2000 B.C.E.

Abstract
The troglodytic architecture complex in Arzanfoud (Arzanpoul) is located 30 km southeast of Hamadan, 2 km south of Arzanfoud village. The complex accidentally recovered following mining activities at 2010. There have been four seasons of archaeological activities including excavations, documentation, earthworks, and identifications. According archaeological activities, more than 70 troglodytic spaces revealed that dated to historic and Islamic periods relying on pottery findings. There are questions on variations, forms, techniques, and decorations including 1) what dates are pottery types of troglodytic spaces? 2) What are common techniques and decorations of potteries? Considering descriptive-analytic method, findings, collected of fieldworks and bibliographic studies, qualitatively analyzed. Conclusions indicate that pottery findings date to historic period, Parthian and Sassanid, and middle and late Islamic periods (Seljuq, Ilkhanid, Timurid, and Safavid). Among the most important historic potteries are Clinky wares, grooved rims, and hump-like rims; while the most significant Islamic potteries are stamped wares, painting underglaze, lusterwares, Sgraphiato, enamled wares, and blue and white. Regional soils studies, and nearby Mica and Quartz mines indicate that potteries with Mica and Quartz in temper are, probably, local productions, while the others are probably exotic.
Keywords: Hamadan, Arzanfoud (Arzanpoul), Handmade Troglodytic Architecture, pottery, Historical, Islamic.

Introduction
One of the goals of archaeological research is the study of cultural changes, and in this regard, examining and analyzing the material culture of the past is of particular importance. In the term of archaeologists, these remains are called data. In order to achieve the general goal of archeology - the reconstruction of the past life of mankind, these data must be examined in a specific and logical framework and turned into evidence. In general, pottery is one of the most abundant archaeological data, which is of particular importance in any archaeological analysis. Due to its abundant and continuous production, pottery has always adopted various transformations and innovations in its shape and role, some of which have arisen due to the development and internal growth of cultures over time. Another part of these changes emerges due to cultural and economic links with far and near societies. In fact, pottery is considered the best cultural indicator in order to know societies and it is very important for communication between different units of a regional culture on the one hand and trans-regional cultures on the other hand. Now, according to the above-mentioned materials and referring to the importance of pottery in the process of examining and studying the pottery of different periods in various areas, it is necessary to carefully analyze the typology of pottery and the decorations used in the pottery according to the methods of pottery making and analysis to provide a logical answer to the following questions: 1) what dates are pottery types of troglodytic spaces? 2) What are common techniques and decorations of potteries? Considering descriptive-analytic method, findings, collected of fieldworks and bibliographic studies, qualitatively analyzed.

Discussion
The unique types of this architecture can be set handmade troglodytic underground architectural complex at Arzanfoud in Hamadan noted that was discovered by accident in 2010 as a result of mineral exploration activity. This area is located 30 km South East of Hamadan city (provincial capital) and is situated 2 kilometers south of a village with the same name. The area of the Alvand Mountains, located in the heart of pristine nature and intact. As you explore the collection of handmade troglodytic of Iran was faced with numerous questions, The most important questions were raised about whether this complex of Arzanfoud when created, What time period was used in this series as well as a vast range of different spaces for what purpose and the user was created. According to the first season of archaeological research questions in this category sponsored Ali Khaksar was started in 2010 and the second and third chapters of this research will follow in subsequent years 2011 and 2015. This research programs (identification, documentation, clearing and archeological excavations) in this area were conducted. These results identify more than 70 hand-made underground spaces including rooms and halls with variable depth from 3 to 7 meters. Several hypotheses have been raised in line with spaces this set of user talk ritual, habitat, refuge and exile has been the case so far as the draw of any archaeological activity has been approved. Also according to studies cannot accurately determine the time to create this collection, but this complex be used to set time periods during the middle and late Parthian and Islamic centuries been used on. The underground spaces are connected to the surface via stairs-like entries in the schistose bedrock. This set covers all the spaces are arched, it works well in most areas, this collection strikes a sharp object (possibly pick) clearly observed. It also sets the foundation lamp oil lighting spaces that were in the wall spaces. In some places the walls of adjacent platforms (made from stone-ground or wall stile), water channels and sources are visible. It should be noted that the surface area of architecture can be seen as evidence that more archaeological research is needed to provide comments.
The pottery found in the Arzanfoud area can be divided into two groups of historical periods, including the Parthian and Sasanian periods, as well as the Islamic period. Parthian period pottery includes types: Clinky, Pottery jar with one vertical handle and jar with two vertical handle; Sassanid period pottery includes types; the plate with a simple flat edge turned outwards, the bowl with a Pigeon head rim, Bowls with convex and prominent edges and Pottery with grooved edges (three edges). 
potteries of the Islamic period can be divided into two main types, including unglazed (Decorations removed and added on pottery, bottom image, silver colored mica particles on pottery, Pottery with carvings, . potteries with a pattern of birds in a circle, Stamped pottery from Arzanfoud and comparable samples and Pottery with inlaid decoration) and glazed (Pottery with single-color of lapis lazuli glaze, Potteries with a prominent pattern under monocolor glaze, Sgraffiato pottery, Zarinfam pottery, Pottery with animal motifs, underglaze painting type, Pottery with underglaze painting (Ghalam Meshki), Pottery with underglaze painting and Pottery with blue and white glaze).

Conclusion
The pottery found in the Arzanfoud area can be divided into two groups of historical periods, including the Parthian and Sasanian periods, as well as the Islamic period. Parthian period pottery includes types: Clinky, Pottery jar with one vertical handle and jar with two vertical handle; Sassanid period pottery includes types; the plate with a simple flat edge turned outwards, the bowl with a Pigeon head rim, Bowls with convex and prominent edges and Pottery with grooved edges (three edges). 
The pottery of the Islamic period of this site belongs to the middle and late Islamic centuries (Seljuq, Ilkhanid, Timurid and Safavid), among which the pottery of the Ilkhanid period in Arzanfoud is of considerable importance. According to the archaeological research conducted in Arzanfoud, no evidence of a pottery kiln has been found so far, but surface evidence and findings related to pottery production have been observed in the area. On the other hand, silver and gold mica and quartz particles can be seen in much earthenware, which, due to the location of mica and quartz mines in the area and the vicinity of the area, can probably be the production of some earthenware in the area. One of the interesting points of interest in the historical and Islamic pottery of Arzanfod is the great similarity with the pottery types of other historical and Islamic sites of Hamadan province, including: Hegmataneh Tape, Zainoabad Tape of Bahar, Laodiceh of Nahavand and especially the architecture of the Samen underground handmade troglodytic in Malayer, which has the most similarity with Arzanfod’s pottery findings, which shows extensive cultural connections.