Ziwiye, as one of the key sites for Iran’s North West Iron Age (Median kingdom), has many masterpieces kept in different museums and a long list of publications. The main part of this list consists of monographs that are written based on one or more limited objects from an out of context collection. There are few articles that comprehensively include the findings “attributed Ziwiye” and “came from excavation”. However, many articles have been published about Zavieh’s findings, but parts of this collection still remain unknown and do not receive enough attention. The corpus of bone arrowheads is one of them, some of which were found during archaeological excavations while others came to museums from antiquities dealers. These include: the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, Musée du Louvre in Paris, the National Museum of Iran in Tehran, and the Sanandaj Archaeological Museum. This article aims to introduce and categorize 51 bone arrowheads. Some of these were registered as ivories, but our research concluded that all of these were made of bone. In few instances, the production manner prevented the proper identification of bone versus ivory. Another examined point in this research is whether such arrowheads were produced for actual warfare or for prestige and symbolic use in ceremonial events considering their bone material. The examined samples from other sites show that bone can be hard enough to penetrate game and human body even with light protection such as archery. Bone for making arrowheads was used for hunting big games and some tribes still use them.

Iran holds great significance for the question of the eastward expansion of the Acheulean hominins, as it is situated between the Arabian Peninsula and the Indian subcontinent, both of which have long and rich records of the Acheulean techno complex. Despite its strategic location, Iran has produced little evidence of the Acheulean techno complex. The only notable examples have been found in the western and northwestern regions of the country. The absence of Acheulean sites in southern Iran cannot be justified. Because this region, located in the northern parts of the Persian Gulf, was one of the main dispersal routes for Acheulean hominins towards the east. Here, we present a report on the discovery of a Lower Paleolithic locality near Dehtal, located in the northern region of the Persian Gulf. Additionally, we discuss the techno-typological characteristics of the lithics found in the area. Dehtal yielded a small, but characteristic lithic assemblage, which included a handaxe, a massive scraper, a large flake, and a flake core. The raw materials used are sandstone and fossiliferous limestone rock, which can be found as cobbles and boulders in secondary contexts on the northern slopes of Par-e Lavar. In addition to these findings, two boulder cores with large removal scars were also documented in the area, indicating large flake production in this locality. The site offers a unique opportunity to study a lithic assemblage in a relatively unknown area within the distribution range of the Acheulean technocomplex.

This paper will compare the characteristics of four ancient Iranian, copper alloy weapons. These weapons are from private collections in the USA at the time of examination. The first two weapons fall into the category of dirks (or daggers). This characterization is based on the overall length of the weapons in question. For comparative purposes, a dagger reaches 30 cm, a dirk is a classification for weapons with overall lengths of 30-50 cm, while a sword would have an overall length of over 50 cm. Because precise archaeological data is absent for these pieces, we examined short-term provenance and microscopic analysis, together with stylistic components to verify the authenticity and general cultural origin of each specimen. The hilt of each weapon is bordered by a ridge, or flange, on both sides that would have allowed for an organic or stone inlay to make the grip more comfortable and functional, as well as adding to the aesthetics of the piece.  The pommels of these weapons all have a similar, crescent shape. Weapon 2, has not only a crescent-shaped pommel but also a more pronounced, crescent-shaped guard. Both of the dirks (weapons 1 and 2) have roughly triangular blades. However, the blade of weapon 1 becomes narrower near the guard while the blade of weapon 2 does the opposite and flares out near the guard. Microscopic examination of the patinas confirms the ancient origin of each piece, however, subtle differences in the patinas suggest that the alloys and/or the burial conditions of each were potentially different. This would be an area where further study would be warranted. 

The article reviews chivalry traditions, developed in ancient Iran, and their transition and transformation to the country’s post-Islamic history. The author analyses the cultural mechanisms, which provided this movement, and argues that its roots and prerequisites should have taken place in Great Khorāsān at the very turn of the ‘Abbāsid revolt in the middle of the century CE. This was a period when an external call activated forces and facilities, preserved in the stratum of Iranian knights, to become the basis for the later military evolution within the new circumstances. The cultural importance of Khorāsān for the Iranian state and rule at the turn of the Muslim era is reflected in written texts. The early muslim period in Great Khorāsān was a special time as Iranian predominance mingled with multicultural traditions in the boundary region. The topic is presented in a wide context including Irasnian literary, artistic, and artisanal sources, helping to visualize the historical backdround of Iran. This is based on philosophical doctrines for Iranian cultural developement proposed by contemporary scholars.

Sasanian Empire was one of the most powerful periods in ancient Iran. Archaeological evidence and traces, and Sasanian and Post-Sasanian texts show cultural and artistic relations of the Sasanian Empire from the East to the West. However, official Sasanian methods of warfare are one of the most important legacies of the period that have been less studied. These offensive and defensive arms and armor can be analyzed by looking at remaining evidence left by kings and officials within the national borders to the lands abroad. Sasanian swords are depicted on rock reliefs, silver dishes, and coins (drachmas and dinars). Although studies have been done on the classification of Sasanian swords shown on rock reliefs, no systematic study on the depiction of Sasanian swords on Sasanian drachms has been done so far. The following paper tries to restudy the subject by comparing the swords depicted on Sasanian coins and compare them to the swords shown on rock reliefs and dishes. Sasanian swords are depicted on different Sasanian royal arts such as Sasanian coins, Sasanian silver dishes, and Sasanian rock reliefs. Different elements will be taken into consideration such as the shape of swords in general and their method of hanging from the belt in particular. A closer look shows that Sasanian drachmas and dinars show two major types of hanging Sasanian swords via a scabbard slide system: A. hanging the sword in front of the body. B. hanging the sword on the left or the right hip. Additionally, the following paper will compare them to some extant examples of Sasanian swords that are kept in museums and private collections. 

This article addresses and re-examines Marc-Anthony Karantabias’ analysis of factors that contributed to the defeat of the Sasanian Spāh by Heraclius by 627-628 CE. Karantabias’ analysis may be categorized into four (military) misconceptions with respect to the Spāh: (1) the notion that the late Sasanian Spāh lacked stirrups for the Savaran cavalry (2) the alleged refusal or lack of knowledge of the Mongolian draw which is proposed to have been of greater efficacy than the Sasanian (3-finger) bowshot (3) the notion of “Persian conservatism” leading to the Spāh’s refusal to adopt new military technologies and (4) the alleged supremacy of Steep/Central Asian and/or Hun-Turkic cavalry warfare over the Sasanians. These four misconceptions fail to be supported by a close examination of archaeological sites (e.g., Taghe Bostan) and artifacts (e.g., Sasanian stirrups, metal works, etc.), primary sources and pertinent research studies. A fifth misconception pertains to the lack of consideration of the shortcomings of the Sasanian four-Spadbed system which Heraclius was able to successfully exploit against the Sasanian empire. In conclusion, Heraclius’ successes are attributed to his exploitation of the weaknesses of the four-Spāhbed system as well as the Byzantine willingness to adopt Steppe/Central Asian technology (e.g., compound bow, iron stirrup).  

A study of the arrow guide or nāvak in Iran. It covers the technical aspects of arrow guides and how they may have entered Iran. In Persian, arrow guides are called nāvak and their projectiles are called tīr-e nāvak. However, sometimes nāvak is used for the arrow as well, and even the bow. It also covers how outside cultures viewed Iran as a source of innovation in the further development of these devices. In Arabic they are called majrā and this is the term most familiar in the west due to two important translations of Arabic archery manuals into English, Arab Archery and Saracen Archery, but they were mentioned earlier as nāvak in an English translation of part of the Hidāyat ar-Rāmī, where they were mistakenly described as crossbows. Essentially, an arrow guide is a partially closed tube used with a bow to shoot a short arrow drawn much farther than its length would normally allow. This produces a projectile that has increased velocity and less friction through the air than a regular arrow. The arrow guide has had a long history in Iran, probably entering in the last years of the Sasanian Dynasty, surviving the Arab conquest and persisting until the gradual takeover by firearms. It was fertile ground for invention with many variations being spread across the Islamic world. The persistent association with Iran in Arabic archery manuals reflects the perception that much of its development was tied to Persian users. Here, Persian and Arabic sources are examined. Reference is made to original artefacts and reconstructions.

This paper utilizes an approach that combines studies of Samanid period artifacts and textual accounts with modern genetic studies to explore the identity of the people who were involved in long distance trade from the far eastern regions of the Central Asia into Northern Europe. Although this study does not analyze the Samanid works, it reiterates and illustrates how important Iran/Persia was in the history of Europe as well as Central Asia. The information contained in the artifacts and texts gives us the evidence needed to understand the vast trade network and the people who were responsible for the movement of these goods, people and ideas.  This study reconfirmed recent genetic studies that the people, collectively termed Rus or Vikings, were a mixture primarily of Scandinavians, Slavs, and Turks, with additional admixing with local populations. The importance of the Persian and Arabic sources addressing contact between the Rus and Eastern people has been thoroughly discussed by Thorir Jonsson Hraundal. In these texts, the Rus were referred to by different names including Majus, Northmanni, Urduman, Warank as well as by other names. One of his many observations is the unmistakable influence of Turkic culture on that of the Rus. This complex ancestry is supported by recent genetic studies and will be discussed in more detail below in light of archaeological evidence. Thus, the term Rus refers to a way of life rather than a homogenous ethnic or cultural group. However, this study refined the identity of the people responsible by observing a correlation between the distribution of the genetic haplogroup R1a sub-clade and the long-distance trade routes across Central Asia to Northern Europe, with the central focus in Eastern Europe.  Despite the vast distance, the evidence indicates that there were cultural contacts between people with linked ancestry. The study is important because it begins to reveal the unexpected influence of Eastern cultures on those of Northern Europe. 

In recent years there has been a growing interest among historians, historical martial artists, reenactors, and those who are interested in Eastern culture as well as in Persian offensive and defensive weapons to have a more detailed study of armor. The change in the paradigm of defensive weapons throughout Western Asia (the last quarter of the 15th to the first quarter of the 16th century) has not yet been fully investigated. Reconstruction of mail-and-plate armor from a period between 1540-1650 CE is quite challenging as most museums or major private collections do not have a complete set. Based on a detailed study of existing sets of joshan armor and several technical assumptions related to the design of this type of armor, the present study tries to reconstruct a fully protective complex of a joshan armor that was worn by a noble Persian warrior. The purpose of the following article is to reproduce a Persian mail-and-plate armor from a period between 1540-1650 CE in its original size and design with its inherent properties and qualities. Different existing sets of this type of armor from museums are studied and compared to different miniatures and literary sources. Based on the collected information gained from theoretical and practical research, the article presents a historical armor design and provides advice on the practical reconstruction and production of such a set of armor. Armor masters were looking for the best combinations and ratio of plates and mail armor in one set. They were experimenting with the shapes and sizes of plates, the number of holes, diameters, geometry, and method of ring interconnections. Characteristic of the armor of this period is rather large plates and a small number of their rows (3-5 rows on the chest/back), a small overlap of the plates in a row, basically only the same standard plates are used, large mail rings (inner diameter about 10 mm).

Fakhr al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Manṣūr Mubarākshāh al-Qurashī was born around 1150 CE, probably in Ghazna, and eventually joined the court of Quṭb al-Dīn Aybak, the first Turkish Mamlūk or “Slave King” of northern India. He died around 1224 CE. His Ādāb al Ḥarb wa’l Shujācah (“Rules of War and Bravery”) was a treatise on statecraft in the Persian tradition of “Mirrors for Princes”. A substantial, if idealised discussion of warfare, it includes sections on tactics, troop organisation, various weapons, sieges and many military-historical anecdotes. Nevertheless, these chapters also include more recent, more localised Indian and Turkish elements, plus otherwise lost aspects of military practice or theory. For example, the essentially traditional Islamic or ʿAbbāsid sections include Chapter 12 which describes “How to arrange an army firmly and to maintain that (arrangement)”. The first part of Chapter 13 describes “How to bring the army to a halt and the (best) place to do this”. Some specifically military chapters of theĀdāb al Ḥarb wa’l Shujācah are clearly based upon ʿAbbāsid military theory as developed during the 8th to 10th centuries CE; notably sections such as “How to arrange an army firmly and to maintain that (arrangement)”, and “How to bring the army to a halt and the place to do this”. Other sections reflect more recent Indo-Islamic, Indian and Turkish military ideas, as well as otherwise lost aspects of earlier military practice, plus plans of military arrays, idealised encampments and exercises in the tradition of Islamic furusīyah military training manuals. Chapter 11, which is interpreted here, concerned the characteristic features, advantage and usage of a wide array of weapons. Chapter 19, which is also interpreted here, focussed on various aspects and variations in the array and deployment of an army for battle.

Tappeh Bazgir is one of the most important archaeological sites of the Late Bronze Age in northeastern Iran. At this site, a hoard of 759 Bronze Age copper-alloy objects with an approximate weight of more than two tons was excavated. This find is unique in terms of volume and the extraordinary finds it contained. This archaeological hoard was discovered by chance in 2001, and in 2010 a rescue excavation was carried out at the findspot. This hoard had been buried in the virgin soil and deliberately concealed under a residential floor in the Late Bronze Age. The objects recovered served different purposes; they include agricultural and household implements, tools, ceremonial objects and a variety of weapons. The artifacts were all located next to each other in a pit and had been arranged in a regular manner. There were also three shields among these objects. They had been placed next to each other under basins with gutter-shaped pipes and on top of daggers, hatchets, axes, two-pronged forks, and stone rods. These weapons had evidently been positioned at close to the domestic objects. The shields are of strikingly similar shapes, but they differ slightly in the number of openings and bars. Up to now, no similar shields have been found at any other archaeological site. These shields seem to be the oldest shields excavated in Iran. XRD and XRF analyses revealed that one of the shields and other objects of the hoard were made of cast copper-alloy, and they were subjected to cold forging/hammering later.

Abstract
Tomb buildings are one of the most important types of Islamic architecture. Studying such a building in a geographical context gives us a meaningful understanding of these works. The vast region of Tabas, despite having a rich capacity of magnificent historical and cultural monuments, has been neglected by officials and archaeologists due to its desolation and difficult geographical conditions. In the archaeological study of the Jokhah section of Tabas, which was carried out in 2015, several buildings were identified, including a single tomb. So far, this building has not been the subject of detailed and methodical research on how the structure of architecture and dating is based on comparison with other mausoleum buildings, so the need for this research was provided. In this research, the construction method of the building has been considered according to the dome, the execution of the dome and the type of materials and the type of decorations used. The present research is based on a descriptive-analytical purpose and its nature is based on historical approaches. The methodology of accumulations is based on field studies and citation of library resources. This article tries to analyze the identity and date of construction of the tomb of Jokhah Tabas, based on archaeological findings, comparative studies and also citing written sources of the Islamic period. The results of studies show that the construction pattern of this tomb is derived from the square design of tomb buildings in Greater Khorasan in the early centuries of the Islamic period. However, by comparing material culture data and building elements with other similar works, the date of its construction can be attributed to the late sixth-early seventh century AH.
Keywords: Tomb, Architecture, Historical Identity, Middle Islamic Period, Jokhah Tabas.

Introduction
The tomb as a type of ritual-cultural architecture is the result of two-way interaction between man and nature throughout history. Hence, the study of these religious buildings in the geographical context, provides us with a meaningful understanding and recognition of them. In Islamic period of Iran, tomb buildings are considered one of the most important and numerous types of architecture after mosques. »The scope of construction of tombs with the emergence of different local governments in the early centuries of Hijri, simultaneously with the weakening of the Abbasid caliphate, became popular in the east and north of Iran« and it developed with a significant speed in all of Iran and found an important role in the social atmosphere of cities and villages. In such a way that it was considered the most important pillar of every city and village after the comprehensive mosques. Therefore, “cemeteries and their construction methods are very important from the point of view of architecture and the use of arched structures” and they require careful investigation and research in various fields. There are several individual tombs in Tabas, which according to historical sources belong to chieftains or clerics, after the domination of the eastern regions of Iran in the early centuries AH. As; Mohammad Jafar Tayar’s tomb in Azmighan, Tabas, Mir Omar’s tomb in Korit Tabas. One of these tombs, which is known in Islamic sources as the tomb of one of the Arab generals, is a tomb located in the historical site of Jokhah village. So far, this building has not been the subject of a detailed and methodical research regarding the architectural structure and dating based on comparison with other tomb buildings, hence the necessity of conducting this research. The brief research activities that have been carried out have mostly described the architecture of this tomb. In this research, the architectural style, decorations and functional materials of this building have been compared with the tombs of the middle Islamic period in the geographical area of Khorasan, which is more related in terms of time and place. Since the building does not have a building inscription, the name of the founder or the owner of the tomb, it is not possible to propose its date with certainty. Therefore, one of the goals of this research is the proposed dating of Jokhah tomb using comparative studies of other tomb buildings and referring to Islamic sources and texts.

Discussion
Jokhah village is located 24 km from Tabas city. A tomb building is located 500 meters southwest of Jokhah village, between the agricultural land and the village cemetery. The name of Jokhah was applied to this village in the contemporary period, and before that it was known as Chardeh. The name of this building goes back to the name of Jokhah village and before that it was known as the Tomb of Sephesalar or two commanders.
Jokhah Tomb is a type of domed square buildings. According to the remains of the building, the outer space consists of three parts, the body platform and the dome. The geometry of the plan and the form of Jokhah tomb reflects the design of Sassanid fire temples. The geometry of the building is square. The current height is about 23 feet and its foundation has been done on a platform. The materials used in the foundations of Jokhah tomb are made of clay, mud and plaster. Bricks are used only for cornering and doming of the building. The three doors of this building are in the front porch and have the same dimensions. This repetition on three fronts has given the building a special rhythm. There are three holes on the three sides of the building above each door. Due to the distinct shape of the entrance space, this building consists of four parts: the platform, the body, the entrance porch and the domed room.
The cover of the brick dome of Jokhah tomb has collapsed. This is comparable to the domes of the Twelve Imams of Yazd (5th century AH) and the tomb of Khosroabad Tabas (5th century AH). Based on the available visual sources, there are evidences of plastering in the throat of the dome and the formalization of the arches, which are considered as design ornaments in the Jokhah building. Two fine strips under the throat of the dome in the shape of the letter (kک/) are painted continuously and chainwise in black on a white chalk background. Another decoration includes a plaster strip in the shape of a seven-eighth or a congress in relief, and these two are among the most important arrays of this building. From around the building, unglazed pottery pieces with a simple linear and comb pattern, pottery types with turquoise and gilt underglaze were obtained (12-6 AH/12-18 M).

Conclusion 
The tomb is located as a single building outside the old rural context of Jokhah. The architectural features of this tomb, in terms of design and plan form, are in the group of tombs without towers, quadrangle with domes, and functionally, it is included in the category of non-religious tombs. The architectural structure of this building is very similar to the tombs of Amir Arslan Jazeb and Chalaqd in the 5th and 6th century AH. On the other hand, it has some features, especially the doming style, with the 7th AH buildings such as the Haruniyeh building and some 8th century AH buildings such as the Jame Mosque in Varamin and Jabaliyeh in Kerman. Through field investigations and analysis of the building map, it is possible to understand that the main design of the building is taken from the map of the domed square tombs of the Seljuk period, and the additional space outside the main door of the building belongs to later periods. The design of the Jokhah tomb built by Chalaqd was more impressive than the buildings of the Seljuk period in Khorasan. Also, the common features of the building such as functional elements and its materials with the Seljuk period and plaster painting decorations have shown more compatibility with the Ilkhanid period. Referring to Islamic sources and texts also does not provide accurate information about the construction time of this building. As mentioned earlier, 5th century AH, Tabas and its surrounding areas were the refuge of Ismaili claimants, and relative peace reigned in this region. In the middle of the 6th century Hijri, most of the buildings in this area and around it were destroyed by the attack of the Seljuks. Therefore, it seems that the tomb of Jokhah was formed after the aforementioned attacks. On the other hand, due to the absence of an inscription in the Jokhah building, the identity of the owner of the tomb, based on the generalization of reliable written sources of the Islamic period, goes back to a person named Malik, one of the Arab generals in the first century of Hijri. Since this building has not been scientifically explored and excavated so far, the dating of the building has been done by studying the organs, elements and comparing other tomb buildings. Therefore, the chronology of the Jokhah tomb is suggested to the end of the 6th century to the beginning of the 7th century AH.

Acknowledgment
Mr. Dr. Bahram Anani is grateful for providing information on the area of Montaziereh, Tabas.

Observation Contribution
In this article, the first author contributed 100% and the second and third authors contributed 90% and 80%.

Conflict of Interest
In writing this article, the authors are committed to scientific and research ethics and there is no conflict of interest between them.

Abstract
One of the shortcomings of this field is the study of architectural remains individually and without considering the text layers and textural changes affecting it. This study described intertextuality connections of architectural and urbanization collections of Tabriz during the Il-khanate period in two levels: micro (Tabriz city) and macro (regional and international) through discourse analysis and using historical and archaeological data in order to reveal the evolutions and implicit semantics of text layers (architectural and urbanization collections). It is question that how intertextuality connections of the mentioned remains from point of view layer semiology have been and how have manifested semiotic systems. In this study in order to understand data is used qualitative method in the form of descriptive-analytical. Findings show that the use of intertextuality reading of layered semiology leads to the understanding of hidden layers of meaning in architectural remains and involves the effect of broader paradigms in study. In the intertextuality connections of different layers of architecture and urban planning of Tabriz in the Il-khanate era at micro and macro levels, codes such as the main elements of government, including political power, cultural-religious power and economic power, the layers (temporal, spatial, cultural-social) are entered into a syntagmatic and paradigmatic connections and have become a semiotics.
Keywords: Il-Khanate Period, Tabriz, Layered Semiology, Intertextuality Connections, Codes.

Introduction
Although fundamental research on semiology in general and architectural semiology, in particular, are rather abundant, it has been neglected as an approach for many artistic instances in a monographic and independent manner. Therefore, the current study seeks to determine the intertextuality relations and interpretation process between architectural and urban collections in Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era, such as Shanb Ghazan, Rab’-e Rashidi, and Citadel of Alishah, using semiology studies and especially, post-structuralism and its layered approach to identify the evolution and different semantic layers within the architecture and urban development of the city during that period. Although various scholars investigated the architecture and urban development of the Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era in different books and papers, no study took a semiotics and semantic approach to examine the semantic meanings. The applications of semiology in Iran were mainly limited to linguistics and literary or religious texts. Many researchers neglected the architectural perception (including historic architecture) and its different structures as a kind of language having all required semiotics systems, or they were influenced by common methods of reviewing the history of art, including traditionalism (especially mystical and historic approaches). This study sought to answer the following questions: (1) what were the semantic evolutions of Tabriz architectural works caused by contextual changes (i.e., time, location, society-culture, and intertextuality relations) on a macro (i.e., Iran and the region) and micro (i.e., Tabriz city) level? (2) What are the intertextuality relations between prominent architectural works in Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era based on the semiology approach, and (3) how are different semiotics systems manifested in different layers of texts (architecture)? The research is a fundamental qualitative study using a descriptive-analytic approach and the interpretative post-structural semiology method, aiming to represent the hidden meanings of prominent architectural works of Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era in the form of “text”, “context”, and “codes.” The main goal was to investigate the process and how the meaning changed in the architecture and urban development collections of Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era, along with its contextual variations.

Discussion
Many architecture and urban development collections were constructed in Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era, especially during Ghazan Khan’s reign. There is not enough archaeological information about the plan and structure of architecture and urban development collections of that era, except for the Citadel of Alishah. However, the main architectural structures of the collections can be determined, and their different meanings and aspects might be analyzed using major historical sources of the era and the remnants of the collections. For Shanb Ghazan, buildings such as congregational mosque, Shafi’i and Hanafi religious schools, Beyt al-Ghanoon (House of Law), etc., as symbolic systems and the location of the Sultan tomb in the centre as the most important system are instances of the bond between political power and religion. Ghazan Khan was thoughtfully seeking to monopolize political power and religion for his government and himself. In fact, when the caliphate collapsed, and a kind of void was felt by the people, Ghazan Khan manifested the political power-religion bond in his buildings based on the theories of Khawaja Rashiduddin, which can be found in Shanb Ghazan. Roshidyeh Town was the utopia of Rashiduddin, who tried to build the town based on his national and Islamic school of thought regarding political philosophy. The economy of Rashidi depended on surrounding villages and gardens. So, unlike Shanb Ghazan, the city was economically independent. Citadel of Alishah was built by Tajuddin Alishah, the vizier of Öljaitü and Abu Sa’id Bahadur Khan, between 1316 and 1324. In fact, Tajuddin Alishah concentrated and associated symbolic elements of religious power (i.e., mosque and Khanqah), political power (i.e., governmental buildings and palaces), and economic power (i.e., bazaars) in Citadel of Alishah to lessen the importance of Rashiduddin’s brilliant works and gain legitimacy with people and Sultan. His actions remained incomplete by his death. If political, religious, and economic powers are considered the three pillars of governance, Rab’-e Rashidi is the true example of establishing a bond between politics and religion and a symbol of religion. However, all power elements (i.e., political, religious, and economic) accompany each other in Citadel of Alishah, reflecting the general power structure and network at that time.

Conclusion
The results showed that the meanings of Ilkhanid architectural collections of Tabriz became a trend, manifesting through architectural works of other cities and creating a series of particular relations, which are completely affected by contextual changes on a micro and macro level. The prominent architectural works of Tabriz during the Ilkhanid era represent a system of codes composed of different layers, such as Shanb Ghazan, Rab’-e Rashidi, and Citadel of Alishah. On the macro level, Tabriz had intertextuality relations with cities such as Maragheh, Soltanieh, Baghdad, and Karakoram/Beijing and meaning was constantly flowing and communicated between these cities. As intertextuality relations were interpreted, it was established that different layers of Tabriz city, including Shanb Ghazan, Rab’-e Rashidi, and Citadel of Alishah, on the micro level, and Maragheh, Soltanieh, Baghdad, and Karakoram/Beijing on the macro level are the representation and external instances of the relations between codes of political, religious-cultural, and economic powers with various sub-codes as the main pillars of governance. These cities became a semiosis for each pillar in a certain period due to the meanings exchanged during the Ilkhanid dynasty.
On the micro level, Shanb Ghazan is an example of the bond between politics and religion accompanied by sub-codes, such as Persian approaches to town management and supporting Shafi’i, Hanafi, mystical, etc. religions or building religious schools near Ghazan tomb. With Gonbadkhaneh (Dome Room) in the center (the tomb of Rashiduddin), Rab’-e Rashidi outshines Shanb Ghazan as a religious and scientific semiotics. In the layered semiology perspective, Rab’-e Rashidi encompasses a company and then a substitution relation between religion and science. The gathering of main government codes, including political power (i.e., governmental buildings and palaces), religious power (i.e., mosque and Khanqah), and economic power (i.e., bazar and downtown) in a structural system was achieved for the first time in Citadel of Alishah during Öljaitü reign. However, when he died and was replaced by Abu Sa’id, the Citadel of Alishah lost its statute to Soltanieh Dome due to the different viewpoint of the new Sultan toward religion. In the next eras and especially when Safavids came to power, the Citadel of Alishah was considered a virtual representation of military power against Ottoman invasions because the capital was changed to Ghazvin and Isfahan and the locational context was changed.

Acknowledgment
The Authors of the article consider it necessary to appreciate the anonymous referees of the journal who accepted the effort and added to the richness of the text of the article with their constructive suggestions.

Observation Contribution
The Authors declare that according to the extraction of the article from the doctoral thesis, the writing was done by the first Author with the guidance and supervision of the second Author and the consultation of the third Author.

Conflict of Interest
The Authors, while observing the publishing ethics, declare the absence of conflict of interest and material and administrative support from the Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor of Mohaghegh Ardabili University.

Abstract
City of Karaj Abu-Dolaf is one of the important cities in Islamic period which formed in early Islamic period then got prosperity in middle centuries. Knowledge about this city was limited to written resources till three decades ago. At present, we have more information about its location and remains through enough archaeological surveys as well as study of texts. One of the most important remains of it are Khanqahs. Khanqahs were constituted as centers for teaching the bases of religious learning and the principles of the Sufi orders from the fourth century in Islamic lands. Besides the city of Karaj Abu-Dolaf had several Khanqahs, so the aim of this research is to investigate those through archaeological survey then documents and texts. This research has three questions as following: 1. what time is supposed to formation and development of Khanqahs based on written documents and historical evidence? 2. What role documents and archaeological evidence has in coincidence of Karaj place with Astaneh city? 3. What were the location of Khanqahs in spatial structure of Karaj city? The approach of this article is historical-descriptive-analytical and information was obtained via documentary and field researches. Till now, no research has done about Karaj Khanghahs and based on documents and archaeological surveies, in addition to coincidence of current location of Astaneh city with old city of Karaj Abu-Dolaf, we can state Khanghahs of Karaj city were parts of spatial structure of city and sustained its functional relations with the architectural structures and remains after city’s decline.
Keywords: Khanqahs,Zawiah, Karaj Abu-Dolaf, Astaneh, Sufism.

Introduction
Khanqahs are one of the important architectural space related to sufism and its thoughts. One of the cities that these sort of spaces was prominent is Karaj city.  This city was formed in entrance of Islam then in middle century was one the important cities of Jebal or Iraq ajam (Banakati, 2007: 458; Ibn-Batuteh, 1997: V. 1: 281). Written sources have mentioned the location, political and social status of Karaj thus these traces let investigators to purpose suggestions about coincidences of Astaneh city with Karaj. Fortunately,through recent decade a lot of archaeological evidence were recognized in Astaneh city. One of the most important evidence was the inscription of instruction of a Khanqah and other works related to this structure that was found in water infrastructure digging in 2017. This discovery provides conditions to understand the function of Khanqahs at Karaj city. Following discovery, through study of local resources, spaces with function of Khanqah and Zawiah was recognized. According to local traditions those spaces were used by some of the sufi elders whose names and lands which were dedicated to their Khanqahs were mentioned by some endowments documents. Documents provide backgrounds to understand the relative location of these Khanqahs then usage of aerial photos and field survey helped to determine two Khanqahs location like Zawiah of Sheihk najm-odin Mahmud. Also Authors’ discussed the status of two elders named Pir Ismail and Pir Agha then tried to clarify the role of them as local elders. 
Questions & Hypothesis: 1. What time is supposed to formation and development of Khanqahs based on written documents and historical evidence? 2. What role documents and archaeological evidence has in coincidence of Karaj place with Astaneh city? 3. What were the location of Khanqahas in spatial structure of Karaj city?
The hypotheses are: 1. Karaj Khanqahs were constructed in middle Islamic period. 2. Available documents, confirm the status of Karaj Abu-Dolaf with current situation of Astaneh city. 3. Some evidence like inscription of Khanqah instruction, Khanqah Sheikh Mahmud Karaji and grave of local elderly shows status dedication in name of Khanqah or Zawiah in special structure of Karaj city.

Identified Traces 
Astaneh town located in 8 Km of Shazand city. Resources, confirm the status of this city with historical Karaj city. What causes the study of Karaj Khanqahs are classified in two group: 1. Archaeological and architectural evidence 2. Historical documents. Archaeological evidence includes “inscription of Khanghah structure” and ruins of architectural spaces in Astaneh city in name of Khanqah and grave of Sheikh Najm-odin Mahmud, Kamal-odin Ismail Khanqah and grave of Pir Ismail as well as Pir Agha.
Inscription of Khanqah instruction, is a turquoise square tile with 5 cm diameter and dimension of 42 cm that letters of inscription are carved in kufic scripts on its bed. The inscription is as following: 

انشاء بناء هذا الخانقاه/ [بید] الفقیر المحتاج/
الـ[ـی رحمـ]ـۀ ربه الخبیر،/بخـ[ـتیا]ر بن ابی‌بکر الدّما
نخـ[ـی]ر، لیکون محض رجال /المتصوّفه المختارین

Khanqah Sheikh Mahmud Karaji in Sheikh District of Astaneh city is known as “Sheikh Grave” the palace he was buried. Three historical documents from Timurid, Safavid and Qajar period are available related to Sheikh Grave that introduce the trustee of endowment as well as dedication of farms. In two older documents the name of Karaj are mentioned. In these three documents there is a list of farms dedicated to these elders’ mausoleums. A general overview of these documents shows that titles of some of these farms are repeated in these documents. These titles are as follows: Savanj (Savaj, Savanj); Seven; Ahangaran; Balman; Azna; Dow Khawharan; Aghran and Sheikh. The location of some of these farms suchas Ahangaran, Balman, Dow Khawaharan; Aghran and Sheikh could be identified at the town of Astanah and its vicinities. There is a safavid documentfor the Kamal-odin Ismail Khanqah that listed the endowment of it but its building had been destroyed. The monument of two local elders (Pir Agha and Pir Ismail) had been destroyed but there is a little evidence related to the monument of Pir Ismail. 

Conclusion
The goal of this research based on three question, time of Khanqah formation, documents and available evidence in locating the Karaj city into today Astaneh town and status of Khanqahs in Karaj city spatial structure. Base on tiles inscription type, form and type of stone grave inscription, we could suggest that Karaj Khanqahs at least were active in 6 to 8 centuries in middle Islamic period. Besides, the Zawiah of Sheikh Najmol-din Mahmud is the most important Khanqah that should to be dated which it need to excavate the Sheikh grave located in Sheihk district square. Documents that have studied gives a considerable information to locating Karaj with the current city of Astaneh. These documents in addition to state the function of Khanqahs and depicting the importance of trustees and maintaining the endowments for the elder’s monuments, mention the name of Karaj as well as other places that their location could be traced in vicinity of Astaneh and Shazand cities. Khanqahas and graves of elders in Astaneh city, were in relation with other spatial structure of this city in its prosperity. 

Acknowledgment
We are grateful to Ali Jiryaei Sharahi, Hassan Khanabadi Bozchaloei and Abbas Bavarsaei for their sincere cooperation in preparing the maps and plans.

Observation Contribution
The participation of the first author was 60% and the second author was 40%. In this article, the collection of library information and documents was done by the first author and field investigations by the second author. The writing of the article has been done in a combined way and with the consensus of two authors.

Conflict of Interest
The authors of the article have not received any money from a third party (government, commercial, foundation, etc.) for any part of the article, there is no ongoing publication, refereed or registered, related to this work And they have not used any interdisciplinary tests
 

Abstract
Terminology is a group of specialized words and respective implications in a specific field, additionally, the consideration of such terms and their utilization. Terminology is one of the most essential aspects of any field of study. This gives an understanding of the concepts and contextual information to how you will be using those concepts. In archaeology, like all other sciences, we need to create and revise some concepts. This article proposes to establish a universal definition of the phenomenon of Domestication. Domestication is the adaptation of a plant or animal from a wild or natural state to life in close association with humans. In this research, the etymology and definitions of the phenomenon of Domestication are considered, followed by its evolution across the literature. This article defines some specialized terms of the Neolithic process in domestication, which is the driving force behind the dynamics of archaeological patterns and the transition from historical-cultural archeology to processual archaeology following the change from threshold to process and long-term formations. However, Iranian archeology has not yet kept pace with this dynamic. The picture provided for the users of archeology is a static image of science, and it is implied that science is a fixed and unchanging reality. This essay aims to demonstrate the difficulties and flaws in archaeological information transmission when scientific language is not prepared. The need to disseminate new knowledge and technology is one motivation for solving this problem. Archaeological research in Iran is now undergoing a crucial shift from traditional to processual methods. Studies of the Neolithic process are only starting in many locations, and terminology-related issues must be addressed. The result of this research is the ascertainment that adopting a universal definition of the phenomenon of Domestication is absolutely paramount in order to progress on all animal and plant-related matters.
Keywords: Terminology, Neolithic, Domestication, Evolutionary, Process.

Introduction
Terminology is the foundation of science; the words we use to describe the world around us substantially impact how we conceptualize study issues.
Neolithic and, subsequently, domestication is one of the most contentious among prehistorians. The term Neolithic, according to researchers, is insufficient. They now attempt to argue that Neolithic technology and economic growth are social constructs and that what matters more than what was created during the Neolithic era is how and in what method it was produced (Çilingiroğlu, 2005: 1). Terms like the Neolithic Package and Neolithization were created to comprehend the challenges during the Neolithic era. Neolithization refers to the process rather than the cultural phenomenon’s cross-sectional character. 
The Neolithic was a process of transition from a nomadic lifestyle of hunter-gatherer communities to one of agriculture and pastoralism. The crucial factor which contributed to the advent of the Neolithic process was the invention of domestication.
This process takes place between the two poles designated by ‘wild’ and ‘domestic’. Consequently, one can talk about various stages or levels of domestication. These factors can have either a rapid or a gradual impact on living organisms. Domestication consists of a number of clearly discernible intermediate stages.
 As a result, we now know that terminology like agriculture, farming, and cultivation originated behind the dynamics of archaeological patterns and the shift from historical-cultural archeology with a threshold perspective to process archeology with a processual perspective. In other words, the agricultural event has assumed numerous forms throughout several thousand years, for which we have a name, or in the domestication of animals, we have the terms Husbandry, Pastoralism, Taming, and Herding Domestic, signifying changes in time and development in a phenomenon. This is a long-lasting trend.
The historical-cultural threshold approach is still present in Iranian archeology, and we continue to refer to all kinds of agriculture, animal husbandry, and settlement patterns as agricultural or animal husbandry for thousands of years.
The article aims to define the language of many forms of agriculture and animal husbandry that have particular identities and have evolved into full-fledged agriculture and animal husbandry via an evolutionary process.
In the published literature on early agriculture, there is a tendency for the word agriculture and many of its subsidiary terms to be used vaguely without precise definitions, and sometimes their connotations overlap, for example, proto/incipient and shifting/extensive. There is a need to clarify much agricultural terminology to avoid confusion.

Discussion
As a result of various ponders, researchers have displayed a number of terms with the see of clarifying the root of agriculture. At the initial, ‘wild’ stage of domestication, a given population of organisms generally has no experience of any direct or indirect impact on the part of man. Domestication ends at the ‘domestic’ arrangement when a given populace is completely subordinate to people with respect to such issues as survival, reproduction, and nutrition. The most famous terms among those include the following: 

Domestication of Plant
There is an evolutionary process of terminology on the way of plant domestication.
Management: Management is the control of wild species (plants or animals) without cultivation or morphological alterations (Price & Yosef, 2011: 165).
Cultivation: Cultivation is the deliberate preparation of the land, planting, reaping, and storing seeds or other plant components.
Farming: Farming is the practice of using plants and domestic animals as food or other resources (Price & Yosef, 2011: 165).
Agriculture: The phrase is occasionally confined to crop cultıvation and excludes livestock farming; however, it is often used to refer to both (Harris, 2007: 22).

Domestication of Animals
There is an evolutionary process of terminology on the way of animal domestication. It provides a number of clearly discernible intermediate stages.
Domestic: The animal maintained in the home is referred to as domestic. Domesticated animals may be wild, tamed, or feral (Décory, 2019: 47). A domestic animal is kept in captivity by humans, regardless if it is a wild, tame, domesticated, or feral animal.
Taming: The domesticated animal might be a wild animal acquired from the wild, i.e., the first or second generation of wild animals maintained in captivity (Décory, 2019: 47).
Herding: This term should be evaluated from a biological standpoint. The herd/pasture interaction is connected to herding. Herding entails controlling and caring for the animals on the ground. (Paine, 1972: 78).
Breeding: This phrase refers to a technical notion. Animals with predefined traits may be altered through selective breeding (Ingold, 1980: 82).
Husbandry: Owners’ attempts to capitalize and make profits are referred to as husbandry (Paine, 1972: 79). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, husbandry is the “business or occupation “of a husbandman or farmer, tillage or cultivation of the soil (including also the rearing of livestock)’ 
Pastoralism: Pastoralists rely on their livestock herds for most of their income (Ingold, 1980: 82).

Conclusion
The Neolithic was a process of transition from hunter-gatherer communities to one of agriculture and pastoralism. The crucial factor which contributed to the advent of the Neolithic process was the invention of domestication. The domestication of plants and animals marks a major evolutionary transition in human history. The pathways that humans and target species follow from initial management into domestication are shaped by a number of contingencies affecting both partners and can be broadly classified into several types. There is a continuum between these types, although these terms have overlapping elements, they are nonetheless distinct phenomena. Agriculture is used to define many forms of subsistence in this process but they have their own descriptive terms, such as cultivation, domestication, as well as forms of livestock. 
In this article an evolutionary model from foraging to agriculture, in which the transitions to cultivation, domestication, and agriculture are separated and potential archaeological indicators are suggested. And from Taming to husbandry, in which the transitions to, domestication, and husbandry are separated and potential archaeological indicators are suggested. 
The historical-cultural threshold perspective is still present in Iranian archeology, and we still refer to all types of agriculture, animal husbandry, and settlement patterns that occurred throughout thousands of years as agriculture or animal husbandry. To define the distance between pre-domestic, and agriculture, detailed scientific research, including time-consuming and costly experiments, is required by precise chronologies. A practice that is still uncommon in Iranian archeology. In Iranian archeology, only sites containing the latter stage of the Neolithic are excavated, and other kinds of agriculture (e.g., gathering wild plants) or animal husbandry (e.g., taming) are not recognized, or researchers are still looking for spectacular Neolithic evidence from the period’s end. They are now investigating what is being created, not its significance and no label can be developed to describe them. Alternatively, if they are studying the Neolithic transition and, in fact, the Neolithic process, they approach the data using threshold and cultural-historical thinking. At the outset of Neolithic studies, it is necessary to provide the theoretical and terminological groundwork because they are process-oriented and long-term. If this does not occur, the picture formed for the users of archeology is a static image of science, leading to the belief that science is a phenomenon that does not change. As a result, efforts should be undertaken to investigate and clarify words connected to domestication research in an evolutionary framework.

Acknowledgments
I thank Dr. Mozhgan Jayez and Dr. Hojjat Darabi for their helpful comments on this paper.

Conflict of Interest
The Author, while observing the publishing ethics, declares that there is no conflict of interest and no financial support from any government center.

Abstract
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 B.C) to Ashurbanipal (639 B.C.), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah. Over the last two decades, after the attribution of Genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom. The reason of researchers for attribute Genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdon is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi. This study seeks to use the Historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as Genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as Genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic.
Keywords: Pish-Koh, 1st Millennium B.C, Genre of Luristan Ware, Kingdom of Ellipi, Historical Archaeology. 

Introduction
Scholars have been reading Assyrian texts for over a hundred years to locate the toponymys mentioned in the inscriptions. Some of these toponymys are located on the eastern borders of the territory of the new Assyrian empire in western Iran, one of which was the Ellipian kingdom. Inscriptions of the Neo Assyrian Period from Ashurnasirpal II (866 BC) to Ashurbanipal (639 BC), had referring about 250 years to the Ellipian kingdom. Most archaeologists have located the Ellipian kingdom north of Pish-Koh in Luristan and south of Kermanshah (Fig, 1). According to their studies, Kingdom of Ellipi include original range of Pish-koh, which From the north to the Gareen mountains(Harhar), in the northeast to along the Grien and in the East to Oshtoran-Koh (Media), from the south in the basin of Seymareh(Elam),in the West to Kabir-koh and in the North-West to South Harsin(Bit-Hamban)(Mollazah&Goudarzi,2016:89-92).

Genre of Luristan ware (Chronology, Stylistics& Attribution)  
The genre of Luristan ware, which was first emerged in the early first millennium BC, during the Iron Age IIB(950–800BC)& IIIA (800-650BC), was distributed in the settlement and graveyards of Pish-Koh region(Adachi, 2004: 81). The pottery is often called by Roman Ghirshman »Genre Luristan«, that were found from Giyan Tapeh(Contenau&Ghirshman,1935). Although after excavation at Baba Jan tape by Clare Goff, she named them »Baba Jan III painted ware«(Goff, 1978 : 29). Baba Jan III painted wares, decorated with the bow-tie designs, which has called the kite design. 
The appearance for about 300 years of genre of Luristan ware or Baba Jan III painted wares, can be divided into two phases old style and new style. Old style of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III) is mostly handmade or thrown on a slow wheel. But the new style of this pottery (Baba Jan IIB) is made entirely by wheel. In addition to the Pish-Koh area, the new style of genre of luristan ware has been obtained in the south of Hersin (Goudarzi, 2017: 226). This phenomenon is the result of the expansion of cultural relations and has led to the evolution of technology and wheel maker genre of Luristan ware (Fig.2&3).  
Moorey suggested that genre of Luristan ware in the Iron Age Luristan can be generally attributed to invader from outside of this region(Moorey,1974:19). The invaders have been considered to be Kassites, Cimmerians, Median or Elamite people. Goff thinks that the culture of Baba Jan III was mist probably Median (Goff, 1968: 131). Medvedskaya believes that Baba Jan III painted ware belongs to the Ellipian kingdom (Medvedskaya, 1999:59). She says it cannot be Median, because it is quite different from the pottery found at Nush-I Jan tape.

Discussion 
Over the last two decades, after the attribution of genre of Luristan ware (Baba Jan III painted ware) to the kingdom of Ellipi by Louis Levine and later Yana Medvedskaya, Iranian researchers have tried to analyze the different cultural finds such as this type of ware in the context of the kingdom(Shishegar, 2006; Molazadeh&goudarzi,2016؛Garavand, 2014). The reason of researchers for attribute genre of Luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is the concurrence and distribution of this type of ware in the territory considered for kingdom of Ellipi (Fig. 4). This study seeks to use the historical archaeology approach, which relies on interpreting historical textual information in the context of archaeological data to provide an accurate and comprehensive analysis of this issue. 
But the available resources for reconstruction of historical geography of Ellipian kingdom is limited to historical texts and analysis archaeological data. The historical data, on one hand, are limited to Assyrian inscriptions, which often look and more political sententious zoom describes their version of victories. On the other hand, no writing among on the land of the Babylonians and especially Elamite inscriptions about Ellipi that according to evidence have been good relationship with Ellipian achieved. In addition to according to Assyrian texts, three times by Assyrian army, the territory of Ellipian kingdom has been occupied. Bat yet no data had been obtained about the presence of the Assyrians in Pish-Koh. For example, Assyrian data such as seals and decorations found on the tapeh Giyan, not obtained in Pish-Koh of Luristan(Fig. 5).  Also finding a type of pottery in archaeological sites, can be no reason for a special ethnicity. Because the main data that anthropologists emphasize, such as clothing, etymology, language and etc., usually not available to archaeologists. 

Conclusion
In this study tried to answer the question that the attribution of genre luristan ware to Ellipian kingdom is true and meaningful? So with the comprehensive utilization of historical sources and archaeological data in context of the geographical features of the region, provide a logical analysis. This research indicates that attributing the archaeological findings of the early first millennium BC such as genre of Luristan ware, to the kingdom of Ellipi is not valid. This attribution should be considered a hypothesis; basing it on analysis of findings will lead to misguidance and inaccurate results. On the one hand, there is no actual historical evidence for the exact location of the kingdom of Ellipi in the Pish-Koh of Luristan. On the other hand, according to the existence of nomadism in this region, adapting the distribution range of archaeological data such as genre of Luristan ware with the historical information in Assyrian texts is problematic. Therefore, we can offer Pish –Koh area, in the historical geography of 1st millennium B.C, for location of Ellipan kingdom. But attribution of archaeological data and putting it on the basis of analysis will be a hasty and unscientific.  

Acknowledgment
Spatial thanks to Bill Partt (Royal Ontario Museum) for access to the excavation data of Jame- Shoran site. 

Conflict of Interest
This paper is an independent research of the author and has not conflict of interest with any organization.  

Abstract
One of the most important commercial ports of Iran in the Islamic period was the old Hormoz (Hormuoz). This port was part of Jiroft area in the early to middle centuries AH. In the fifth century AH and after the decline of the commercial prosperity of Siraf port, Hromouz was one of the most important and active maritime trade centers of Iran in the northern margin of the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman; And was associated with most of the important economic, commercial, and industrial centers of the ancient World. At the end of the seventh century AH, following the local conflicts and insecurity in the region, the establishment of Hormoz was transferred from the coast to an island in front of it called “Joron”. According to historical texts, after this relocation, the coastal port was called “Old Hormoz” and the island was called “New Hormoz”. The most important period of prosperity was the establishment of old Hormoz from the fifth century to the end of the seventh century AH. The aim of the present study is to identify and locate “old Hormoz” based on archaeological evidence and historical sources, and the research is on the question of where the port of old Hormoz was based on archaeological data and historical sources? For this purpose, basic information has been collected in two ways: field and documentary. Based on historical texts, the location of old Hormoz in the city of Minab can be traced. While there is no ancient city or site called old Hormoz on the coast of this city. Written sources, on the other hand, do not have an organized structure in old Hormoz, and the location of the port and the residence of the merchants are not located in the same place and are far apart. Based on this, it seems that among the 36 sites of the Islamic period that have been identified in the studies of the archaeological city of Minab, the site of “Chakha” next to the estuary (gulf) of Chakha has been the remains of the old port of Hormoz.
Keywords: Old Hormouz, Site of Chakha, Minab City, Archaeological Survey.

Introduction
Most scholars believe that old Hormuz was located in present-day Minab (le Strange, 2012: 341); But its exact limits are not clear. Various researchers have introduced areas such as Kohestak, Moghistan and Ebrahimi as well as Bandar Tiab as the place of old Hormoz (Vosoughi, 1384: 148; Ebrahimi, 1384: 45). A number of ancient geographers have pointed to something that could solve this problem, and in fact raises another issue: “The residence of merchants is located in the surrounding villages, about two Farsang from Hormuz.” (Istakhri, 2004: 99). Ibn Hawql has also mentioned the existence of merchants’ houses in the surrounding villages and diyats without mentioning the journeys (Ibn Hawql, 1987: 76-78); Moghaddasi (1385: 688) and the Author of Hudood al-Alam (1362: 127) also mentioned the location of the city of Hormuz in one Mil and a half Mile of the sea or the Great Sea, respectively. Considering this, it seems that old Hormoz had two parts: port and residential. As a result, finding the location of old Hormuz depends on finding its port. With this introduction, the main question of the present study is that based on archaeological data and historical sources, where was the port of old Hormoz? The study area has historically been called Hormouz, Hormoz and Minab. There are two views on the spelling of the word Hormuz; One is that it is composed of two parts: “Hour” means “estuary” or bay and “Mouz, Mogh” is the name of Mughestan province. The second view, which is derived from the word “Ourmazd” or “Hormozd” name of the Zoroastrian God (Nowruzi, 1390: 5-6). The date of construction of old Hormoz or Hormoz Barri (Minab) is attributed to Ardeshir Babakan (Saeedi, 1386: 45). Minab city with an area of 5135 square kilometers (statistical yearbook of Hormozgan province, 1396: 50) is located in the southeast of Hormozgan province and from the north with Rudan city and from the northwest with Bandar Abbas city. It is limited to Jask city from the southeast and Kerman province from the northeast.

Discussion
Based on archaeological evidence from 36 sites of the Islamic period in Minab city and analysis of the content of historical geographical sources about Hormoz, it seems that the Chakha or Chakha site in Bandzarak village in the central part of Minab city is more adaptable to the old Hormoz than other sites. Accordingly, first a general description of the Chekha site and then arguments for locating the old Hormoz port based on textual sources and matching them with archaeological evidence will be provided. Chakha site has been identified and introduced by Sarlak in the second season of archaeological studies of Minab plain in winter 1384 and spring 1386 (Sarlak, 1385). In 1390, Nowruzi in this area with the aim of determining frontage, began to excavate (Nowruzi, 1390). Although in his opinion, due to the monthly and daily tides of sea water and flooding of parts of the area, it is not possible to accurately determine the area and privacy of this area, but its approximate area can be estimated at about 40 hectares (Nowruzi, 2011). However, it is difficult to identify archaeological evidence during the day when seawater is low. This area is completely covered with coastal sand soil.
In addition to architectural evidence, artifacts such as bricks, coins, bones, various stones and pottery can be seen on the surface of the Chekha at high tide. The pottery fragments of this site are divided into two groups: unglazed (54 pieces) and glazed (180 pieces). Unglazed pottery samples are divided into two categories: “unadorned” and “decorated”. Unglazed, unadorned pottery in the Chekha area has a clay paste in a buff, red, or gray color range. With the exception of two handmade pieces, all parts in this group are spinning. The unglazed and simple type of pottery with gray paste, which has the largest number in this group of pottery, includes parts belonging to open-mouthed containers, laver, trays and lids. The glazed pottery pieces of the Chekha site also include various types, “ monochrome glazed”, “ monochrome glazed with carved decoration”, “ splash glaze”, “ painted in black under turquoise glaze”, “ blue and white”, “ moulded decoration under monochrome glaze”.

Conclusion
According to historical and geographical information, old Hormoz did not have a cohesive urban structure and consisted of two parts: the port where ships docked and few residential houses and urban facilities, and the other part where it is located. Rest and accommodation of travelers and businessmen who are located in the surrounding villages with different distances from the port from three kilometers to about 12 kilometers. The results of this research using archaeological research and excavations in historical sources and texts on the subject of the location of ancient Hormoz showed that the ancient site of Chekha in the southernmost part of Minab city according to its location, extent and time period were the remains of the old port of Hormoz. Saying that this area is located next to the largest estuary or bay located on the coast of Minab city, its area is estimated at about 40 hectares and based on studies conducted for the activity mentioned in the texts and its time period seems appropriate. Pottery was used from the first century AH to the ninth century AD, but its peak occurred in the Middle Ages. On this basis, we can present an image of old Hormoz, in which the ancient sites located within a radius of 12 km of the Chekha area are the remains of the same villages and hamlets that formed the residential part of the old city of Hormoz.

Acknowledgment
The authors feel obliged to express their gratitude to the anonymous reviewers of the journal who graciously accepted the task and enriched the content of the article with their constructive suggestions.

Observation Contribution
The authors of this paper pledge that this paper is the result of an original research and the results of other peoples researches have been used only citing the source.

Conflict of Interest
This article is a part of the MA dissertation of the first author, and the following authors have actively participated in the writing of this article as a supervisor and consultant.

Abstract
The Bisotun bridge was built across the Dinavar Ab River, flowing on the eastern outskirts of the present-day town of Bisotun. The construction of the bridge’s substructure was initiated in the late Sasanian period, but the program was abruptly terminated, as is the case with other Sasanian projects in Bisotun. Subsequently, the Ḥasanwayhids, a local Kurdish dynasty in western Iran, completed the construction of the bridge. High traffic and natural hazards such as floods and earthquakes have inflicted damage upon the bridge in subsequent periods, i.e., from the Saljuq era to the first Pahlavi period. Consequently, governments made considerable efforts to restore or reconstruct various parts of the bridge. Workshops were established at a short distance northeast of the bridge to provide construction materials for the restoration and reconstruction of the damaged parts. To the northeast of the bridge, there exists a low mound measuring 50 m in length and 40 m in width. The mound was excavated in 2002 under the direction of the present author, revealing four distinct archaeological strata. The earliest layer (I) includes a seasonal settlement from the Qajar period. Layer II contains a cemetery from the same period. Layer III encompasses several brick and lime kilns, dating back to the Ilkhanid and Qajar periods. Layer IV yielded parts of a stone-cutting workshop from the late Sasanian/ Ḥasanwayhid period. This article aims to provide the first comprehensive description of the findings within each archaeological stratum, using historical and descriptive-analytical research methods. We will also propose a chronological framework for the excavated materials based on archaeological evidence and thermoluminescence dating analysis. Furthermore, the article will delve into the production processes of brick and lime produced in the excavated kilns. Moreover, we will provide insights into the process by which the stone blocks were produced in the stone-cutting workshop.
Keywords: Bisotun Bridge, Stone Workshop, Brick, Lime, Kiln, Cemetery.

Introduction
The Bisotun Bridge is located on the eastern outskirts of the present-day town of Bisotun, on the “Great Khorasan” highway to Baghdad, spanning the Dinavar Ab River (Fig. 1). The bridge is 145 m long and consists of six spans. The bridge piers are constructed of well-dressed stone blocks, while the walls, buttresses, and vaults are made of bricks. Archaeological excavations and architectural studies have revealed that the bridge has been constructed, reconstructed, and repaired in eight distinct stages, occurring at different times ranging from the late Sasanian period to the first Pahlavi era.
On the northeast side of the bridge, there was a low-laying mound measuring 50 m in length and 40 m in width (Figs. 2–3). This mound was covered with a considerable amount of kiln slag, fragments of baked bricks in various sizes, and stone blocks. These findings indicated the presence of workshops related to the production of building materials for the initial construction and/or repair of the bridge. In 2002, the mound was partially excavated under the direction of the present author. The archaeological deposits of the mound had an approximate thickness of 3.50 m. The excavation was carried out with two objectives. First, to identify the potential workshops involved in the production of building materials used in the construction of the bridge. Second, to shed light on the processes by which the building materials were produced in these workshops.
This article aims to first provide a detailed description of the findings from each archaeological stratum, employing historical and descriptive-analytical research methods. Subsequently, by utilizing archaeological evidence and thermoluminescence dating analysis, we will determine the dates of the architectural structures under investigation. Furthermore, we will endeavor to explain the processes and techniques employed in the production of brick and lime production based on the layout and architectural characteristics of each kiln. Moreover, we will discuss the process by which finely cut stone blocks were produced in the stone-cutting workshop. We intend to address  the following questions, drawing on historical documents and archaeological evidence:
1. During which period were the excavated workshops actively in operation?
2. What were the production processes of building materials in these workshops?
3. Can we establish a chronological framework for the excavated cemetery?
4. Are the graves associated with one religious group, or do different groups of graves represent diverse religious affiliations?

The site
During the excavation of the mound, a stone-cutting workshop from the late Sasanian or Hasanwayhid period was discovered. In this workshop, stone blocks for the construction of the bridge piers were skillfully dressed (Fig. 4). The workshop suffered damage due to the subsequent construction of brick and lime kilns (Figs. 5, 7, and 17). Nonethless, twelve cut stone blocks of varying sizes and shapes were found in the excavated area. Furthermore, the excavation revealed three kilns (Figs. 5-6) engaged in the production of bricks and lime. 

Kiln 1 
This kiln is oriented in a north-south direction, and only its furnace has survived. The furnace represents three construction phases. In Phase I, it had a rectangular plan with external dimensions of 7.50 m in length and 4.80 m in width (Figs. 7–8). The relatively modest size of the furnace indicates that it was likely not intended for extensive brick production but rather for the supply of bricks for the reconstruction and repair of the bridge during the Ilkhanid period. In Phase II, the furnace’s plan turned to a circular shape, with a diameter of 3.30 m and a height of 2.10 m (Figs. 7 and 16). In Phase III, another air flue was built upon the one from Phase II. During Phases II and III, this kiln was used for lime production. Originally functioned as a brick-manufacturing kiln during the Ilkhanid period, it was transformed into a lime kiln in the Qajar period.

Kiln 2
This kiln has an approximately circular plan (Figs. 17–18). The inner diameter of the kiln ranges from 2.50 to 2.60 m, while the remaining height of its walls stands at 3.30 m (Figs. 19–21). Within the kiln, there is a channel oriented in a north-south direction, allowing the inflow of air for the combustion of fire inside the kiln. The presence of substantial quantities of lime inside the kiln strongly suggests its use in the production of lime for the repair of bridge piers.

Kiln 3
This kiln has a circular plan with a varying inner diameter. The kiln’s dimensions include a diameter of 1.80 m from the floor up to a height of 55 cm, a diameter of 2.40 m from there to a height of 1.20 m, and a diameter of 2.70 m from that point to the highest part of the wall (Figs. 24–27). The channel on the floor of the kiln is designed to facilitate air circulation. Three additional channels, sharing similar characteristics, have been built on top of this primary channel. Similar to kiln 2, the presence of substantial quantities of lime inside the kiln indicates that it was used to produce lime for the repair of bridge piers.

Conclusion
The excavation of the mound has yielded four distinct archaeological strata. Layer I represents a seasonal nomadic settlement dating back to the Qajar period. Layer II consists of a graveyard from the Qajar period. Layer III contains three kilns used for brickmaking and lime production, which can be dated back to the Ilkhanid and Qajar periods. Layer IV reveals a stone-cutting workshop, likely dating back to the Sasanian or Ḥasanwayhid period. The proximity of these kilns and the stone-cutting workshop to the bridge indicates that these workshops were established nearby to facilitate the construction process and ensure a readily available supply of building materials.
The brick-manufacturing kiln discovered in the excavation is an extensive open kiln with fixed bricks and a stationary fire. It appears to lack an upper chamber or enclosed walls. In this kiln, the brick-making process involved stacking mud bricks on top of the kiln’s furnace to form cylindrical, square, or polygonal brick towers. These bricks were arranged with gaps between them to allow for the circulation of air, hot gases, and flames. Openings in the lower rows connected to the kiln’s fire vents, facilitating heat transfer. After the initial firing, the baked bricks were removed, and fresh bricks were placed for the next firing. The design and operation of this kiln closely resemble those from the Sasanian period, suggesting little change in brick production technology over time.
The lime kilns are of the pit type with a circular layout. These kilns relied on limestone and a fixed fire, resulting in uneven temperature distribution and variable lime quality. Often, stones remained either uncalcined or partially burned. Lime production involved two methods: arranging limestone around the kiln’s circumference, with heat generated in the central empty space, or stacking alternating layers of charcoal and limestone inside the kiln. The top of the kiln was sealed with mud mortar. These kilns were used during the Qajar period to produce lime for bridge pier repairs.
Within the stone-cutting workshop, stone blocks were meticulously shaped for use in constructing bridge piers. Initially, stone cutters extracted stones from the quarry and cut them into geometric shapes and approximate sizes. Subsequently, the blocks were transported to the workshop, where they underwent further cutting, shaping, and surface polishing. One block bears a stone-cutting mark on its smooth surface, indicating that these stone-cutting marks were made in the workshop.

Acknowledgments
I am indebted to the Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research (ICAR) for generously granting the excavation permits, and to the Bisotun World Heritage Base for its financial support, unfailing administrative cooperation, and logistical assistance.
I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the following individuals for their invaluable contributions. Zeinab Valizadeh for proofreading the text; Hamed Rezae for producing the architectural plans and cross sections; Sara Mahbobi for redrawing and revising the plans and cross sections; Dariush Afkari for supplying the countor map of the site; and Elham Afkari for her photography of the coin and seal. 

Conflict of Interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the Author(s).

Abstract
In the present research, the gravestones of the Islamic period in the Borkhar region, located in the north of Isfahan have been studied with the aim of identifying and classifying the types of species, in order to answer the following questions, in a descriptive-analytical way and with a typological approach.1- From a morphological point of view, which types of carved and inscribed tombstones existed in Borkhar? 2- What are the structural and temporal characteristics of these species in comparison with each other and in comparison with common species in other regions? 3- What is the quantity and distribution of types of gravestones in the settlements of the region and what information does it contain? Based on the results of this research, 404 tombstones were identified in the settlements and ancient sites of Borkhar. This tombstone belongs to the Safavid to Qajar periods and includes 5 species, 7 main subspecies and 29 subspecies. Although the placement in this typology has been considered; Despite this, the shape structure is the most important criterion for this division, and in the next levels, criteria such as the methods of composing the arrays, the type and the manner of the dimensions and volumes have been considered. The main species include Varaghei, Sandoghi, Ketabi (including 4 main subspecies), horizontal Mehrabi (including 3 main subspecies) and Motbagh and correspond to samples obtained from other regions of Iran. The most common species are the Balindar, the Ketabi-e Bozorg, the Mehrabi-e Jonaghi and the Sandoghi, respectively, and the two types of Mehrabi-e Helali and Motbagh have the least use. The Sandoghi species was the most common species in the Safavid period and the the Balindar species and the Ketabi-e Bozorg was the most common species in the Qajar period. According to the results obtained between the identified species and the temporal, geographical and spatial conditions of the settlements in the region, close relationships can be seen. Vertical types are more prevalent in mountainous areas and horizontal types are prevalent in low and flat areas of the region.
Keywords: Tombstone, Typology, Masonry, Borkhar, Isfahan.

Introduction
Geographically, Borkhar includes a vast plain with foothills in the north and west of it, and from the point of view of old administrative divisions, it was one of the Rastaqs of Isfahan. The word Rastaq or the Persian equivalent of that village corresponds to the modern part, and according to ancient texts, it was a place that had a lot of land and fields. According to the investigations, the history of settlement in this area reaches at least the Parthian period and from the Sassanid period to the end of the Qajar period, it has been considered as one of the rastaqs of Isfahan (Ahmadi, 2019). Old Borkhar, which corresponds to Borkhar city and the central part of Shahinshahr and Mimeh cities, from the northeast to Ardestan city, from the north to Natanz city, from the northwest to Mimeh, from the west and southwest with Alavijah and Dehgh cities, Najaf Abad. , Khomeinishahr, is limited to the city of Isfahan from the south and to the foothills of Isfahan from the east. Due to the rich cultural-historical background, there are many historical monuments left in this region, among which the prominent examples are the tombstones of the old cemeteries of some cities and villages in the region. Today, as a result of the expansion of urban and rural spaces, renovation of cemeteries, changes in traditions and cultural assimilation, many of these tombstones have been forgotten and destroyed; Based on this, in the upcoming research, Borkhar tombstones have been identified, introduced and studied for the first time as works whose destruction and destruction are felt more than ever. These tombstones belong to the Safavid to Qajar periods and are found in the old cemeteries of the villages and towns of the region such as Soh, Bideshak, Dehlor, Kalhorud, Bagh Miran, Morche khort, Gaz, Sin, Azarmanabad, Shapurabad, Habibabad, Narmi. And the ancient sites of Sefidab and Jalalabad have been identified. Although the basis of the upcoming research is the introduction of Borkhar tombstones and its importance to researchers and guardians; Nevertheless, the main goal was the typology and classification of identified tombstones based on their form and appearance characteristics in line with the goals and questions of this research; It is obvious that investigating the various aspects of the inscriptions on these tombstones requires independent research and was not the focus of this research. Based on this, the most important questions of this research are these: 1- From a morphological point of view, which types of carved and inscribed tombstones existed in Borkhar? 2- What are the structural and temporal characteristics of these species in comparison with each other and in comparison with common species in other regions? 3- What is the quantity and distribution of types of gravestones in the settlements of the region and what information does it contain?

Discussion
The present research has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method and with a typological approach, and the acquisition of data has been achieved in two stages of field surveys and library studies. In the typology of tombstones, aspects that are more inclusive and comprehensive than other features have been emphasized and have the ability to include other partial features. Due to the fact that the subject of the research was based only on the typology of engraved and engraved stone graves, the shape structure, surface design method, type of inscriptions and motifs were taken into consideration. In some cases, besides the mentioned cases, the criterion of gender has also been taken into consideration. Because in such cases, the difference in the type of stone has led to differences in other cases, such as the way of designing and combining decorations and inscriptions. Varaghei tombstones are generally irregular polygonal shapes. In the meantime, more skill has been spent in carving a few of them and they have been carved into shapes such as square, rectangle, triangle, altar and pseudo-rhombus; However, the accuracy that is used in the cutting of other types of tombstones in the region is not seen in this type. Sandoghi tombstones are in the shape of a rectangular cube, and in addition to the top surface, its other four sides are also carved. Patterns and inscriptions are used in most of the samples on three and in some cases on four surfaces of the stone. Mehrabi type According to the shape of the upper part, is divided into three main subspecies. Ketabi tombstones can be divided into four main sub-types, including a Ketabi-e Bozorg, a Ketabi-e Marmary, a Ketabi-e Kochak, and a Ketabi-e Balindar, according to the differences in appearance, dimensions, and type of tombstone. The tombstones of the Motbagh type all belong to the Qajar period and have been identified in only two cemeteries. In this type, the tombstone has a lower rectangular surface, a smaller rectangular surface on it and finally a platform or appendage on the upper part of the second surface.

Conclusion
According to what happened among the 404 tombstones examined in this research, 5 species and 7 main subspecies were identified and classified. Each of these twelve main and minor types is identified based on the appearance of gravestones, and then by criteria such as surface design methods, patterns and inscriptions placement methods, and their composition. were divided into 29 subspecies based on stone surfaces, type, type of inscriptions and motifs. Among these, the greatest degree of homogeneity in Sandoghi types, Ketabi-e Bozorg and Motbagh is seen. Some species have lower degrees of homogeneity. Among the species identified, some were single-period and some had continuity of use during the Safavid to Qajar periods. Although similar to these species can be seen in other regions of Iran; However, their vertical or horizontal placement could be different.
Examining the samples of each species in different regions of Iran shows that Varaghei, Sandoghi, matching and the main subspecies of Ketabi-e Kochak were common in different regions from the 4th and 5th centuries of Hijri until the Qajar period, and the horizontal subspecies of Mehrabi-e Helali, like the examples of this type in Borkhar, was common only in the Qajar style. Examining the quantity of types, taking into account the ratio between types and the number of cemeteries with that type, shows that in the Safavid to Qajar periods, types such as Balindar, Ketabi-e Bozorg, Varaghei, and Mehrabi-e Jonaghi and a Sandoghi are common types of the region, and matching types, a Sandoghi and Mehrabi-e Helali and a Ketabi-e Marmary, are among the less used types of the region. The high quantity of some species or the diversity of species in some settlements of the region has been influenced by the geographical, social, economic, cultural and indigenous conditions of those places. In the study of the ratio of type and time period, it was found that the box type was the most common type used in the Safavid period, and the pillowed and large book types were the most used types in the Qajar period.

Acknowledgment
The author considers it necessary to express her gratitude to the anonymous reviewers of the journal who worked hard and added to the richness of the text of the article with their constructive suggestions.

Conflict of Interest
This article is the result of a research work that was prepared and written by me. The sources and sources used are all correct and no material has been used without mentioning the title. The author undertakes responsibility for the correctness of all published materials.

Abstract
While the Qajar era was in a recent past, little independent research has been done concerning the architecture and urban engineering of the first half of this era (1795 – 1847). The main reason behind such negligence might be that this period of Iranian architecture occurs between the golden age of architecture in Safavid Iran and the modern period in which Western architectural models infiltrated Iranian architecture and urban construction. In the present research, the aim is to identify the process of constructing architectural works and urban renovation in the first half of the Qajar period by drawing on historical evidence, written sources, and on top of that, archeological evidence. To do so, it is necessary to identify the factors that contributed to strategic policies of Qajar rulers vis-à-vis urban developments and renovations. Given that details of many civil constructions of the Qajar period are not available, this paper rests upon the assumption that archeological studies might be effectively drawn on to know the national strategy of these rulers in the development of cities. The research finds that factors, such as giving legitimacy to the Qajar government, attracting and seeking support of clergy and religious scholars, as well as attempts to achieve economic and civil development of the country for purposes of promoting the political power, played major parts in civil constructions by the Qajar dynasty. Other factors include military and defense policies, the question of succession and rivalries among senior Qajar princes, archaism of Qajar rulers, and their religious beliefs.
Keywords: Iran, Qajar Period, Srchitecture, Urban Construction, Civil Strategies.

Introduction
Urban construction and architecture of the first period of the Qajar era (1795 – 1847) is less studied as compared to other post-Islamic periods of Iranian architecture. Indeed, many researchers have rested content with Safavid and Zand periods. On the other hand, since the second period of the Qajar era marked watershed events such as advent of modernism in Iranian architecture, particularly during the reign of Naser al-Din Shah, a great number of studies have been devoted to developments of Iranian architecture in this period. This has resulted in a disproportion in studies of Qajar-era architecture and urban construction. Another significant point in a study of Qajar-era architecture and urban construction is its dependent, imitative character, as stressed by the majority of researchers. In their view, Safavid-era School of Isfahan left such a great impact on Iranian architecture and urban construction that no new element was contributed to that style, and the main tenets of the School of Isfahan were preserved throughout the Qajar period. This assessment is, however, based on the fact that there is no complete inventory of religious, governmental, and non-governmental buildings of the Qajar period and their architectural features, and indeed, all architectural works of the period have not yet been independently studied. As a matter of fact, one might say that the glory of Safavid architecture overshadowed the Qajar architecture in ways that many features of the latter have been overlooked. Regardless of the extent to which Qajar-era art and architecture was affected by Safavid art and architecture, because of the short temporal distance between the two periods, there is an assumption of full-fledged awareness of art and architecture in this period. In other words, since the Qajar period is close to our period, features and characteristics of its art, architecture, and urban construction tend to be overlooked in ways that other historical periods of Iranian architecture do not.
The research, the results of which are reported here, sought to fill the above gap through a study of elements of civil constructions of Qajar rulers in the first half of their reign (1795 – 1847) by drawing on a historical-analytic method. To do so, a picture of characteristics and quantities of civil constructions in this period is provided with a focus on archeological data and Qajar-era historical texts. Finally, all collected data are used in the analysis and assessment of the research hypothesis. The main question of this research pertains to the quantity and quality as well as the domain of civil enterprises of the first half of the Qajar period: Overall, could we talk about a coherent governmental strategy or project in executing civil policies of the period? It is assumed that, with the aid of archeological studies and architectural evidence, the national strategy of the rulers of this period concerning the development of cities and their civil constructions can effectively be studied and its characteristics can be accounted for. Moreover, while it goes beyond the scope of this paper to give an inventory of all architectural works and enterprises associated with the development of Iranian cities in the period, we have tried to consider the activities of rulers in the first half of the Qajar period in Dār al-Khilāfa (Caliphal Center) of Tehran and other major centers of Iranian provinces of the time. In this way, an outline of the comprehensive governmental plan can be provided and its features can be delineated. That is, we focus on enterprises that seem to have been carried out in harmonious, inclusive, and comprehensive ways as an all-embracing governmental plan in the majority of cities and centers of provinces.

Conclusion
In reply to the main question of this research concerning the factors relevant to the national strategy of Qajar rulers in urban renovations and developments of civil constructions from 1795 to 1847, three such factors might be highlighted: attempts to give legitimacy to and establish the Qajar government, winning the support of the clergy and religious scholars, and economic and civil development of the country in line with the promotion of the political power. Furthermore, during the reign of Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar, and given the political circumstances and military struggles of his period, as well as the need for the establishment of the sovereignty of the Qajar government, buildings began to be built with defense and military functions, including Agha Mohammad Khani Castle in Bagh-e Takht in Shiraz (Eslami 1350, 68) and construction of fortifications in Sari (Malkonov 1363, 151). In addition, upon his enthronement, Agha Mohammad Khan commanded the restoration of paintings in Chehel Sotoun pavilion, including the paintings of the Battle of Chaldiran and the Battle of Karnal, which suggests his special concern for the establishment of national sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Iran. A consideration of sources and architectural works constructed in the first half of the Qajar period reveals that the majority of civil constructions was done in big cities such as Tehran, Isfahan, Qom, Tabriz, Qazvin, Shiraz, and Kashan, as well as smaller capital cities of provinces, such as Kerman, Sanandaj, and Yazd. Nevertheless, because of unfortunate economic circumstances, lack of liquidities, and huge expenses of constant battles with the neighboring countries, most of buildings in smaller cities were built by people, businessmen, and clergies, without much interventions by the government in their development and civil construction. Notwithstanding this, there seems to have been a vast governmental enterprise, like that of the Safavid era, in the first half of the Qajar period, although the general construction of Iranian cities did not undergo a dramatic change in that period, and just like its preceding period, cities were developed around mosques and bazaars. Although the project fell short of the Safavid project in its principles of architecture and artistic character, it still resembled the Safavid enterprise in its vastness and distribution. Moreover, it had its own artistic qualities and peculiarities, which make for its distinction from other periods. In fact, the buildings of this period have a particularly Qajar mark on them. On this account, while Qajar-era architecture and urban construction should be deemed continuous with Safavid architectural developments and urban construction, and in general, with the Safavid-era Isfahan School, it does involve modifications and novelties in virtue of which it might be distinguished from Safavid architecture. In view of the relative political stability of Iran in this period, after decades of wars and conflicts, many architectural works and public buildings were repaired and restored. It would not be an overstatement if we called this a period of building restorations. Aside from numerous cases of restoration of religious buildings, many public buildings such as caravanserais, bathhouses, cisterns (ab anbars), and bazaars were restored and renovated in this period. Constructions of all sorts of mosques and schools in this period, which came to be called “Sultani” (monarchial or affiliated with the sultanate) schools or mosques, are somewhat reminiscent of civil constructions of the Seljuk period, in which Khwāja Niẓām al-Mulk built Niẓāmiyya schools, only that instead of reinforcing the Shāfiʿī branch of Sunni Islam, this time the Uṣūlī branch of Shiite jurisprudence was intended to be reinforced through these mosques and schools. Uṣūlī (as opposed to Akhbārī) scholars were honored and treasured by Qajar rulers. A case in point is the construction of mausoleums for this group of Shiite scholars. The close tie between the monarchial court and religious groups was more evident in religiously sanctified cities such as Qom and Shiraz, where elaborate civil constructions were carried out for purposes of attracting the support of religious scholars. As a result of trying to imitate the structure of the Caliphal Center (i.e. Tehran) and the attempts by those affiliated with the Qajar court in smaller provincial capitals, a general pattern of some sort was visible throughout the country. All this made for a pattern that can be characterized as an architectural and urban-planning school of the first half of the Qajar period.

Acknowledgment
The authors feel obliged to express their gratitude to the anonymous reviewers of the journal who graciously accepted the task and enriched the content of the article with their constructive suggestions.

Observation Contribution
The authors declare that, considering the article is extracted from a doctoral dissertation, the manuscript was written by the first author under the guidance and supervision of the second author and the consultation of the third author.

Conflict of Interest
The authors, while adhering to publication ethics, declare the absence of any conflicts of interest.