Abstract
Cylinder seals usually were used on clay objects, especially tablets, as a symbol of individual’s identity and administrative centers of the ancient East. While, rare potteries sealed by cylinder seal are a new case for archaeologists. Based on the small number of sealed pottery fragments found, archaeologists are dealing with several main questions: Why cylinder seals used on pot-tery? What is the usage of sealed pottery? And whether it is possible to provide an exact chro-nology for these potteries? A sealed pottery fragment from the site of Qal’eh Asrār in South Khorāsān is an example which is also our subject matter in this present study. The area of Qal’eh Asrār is located 1800 meters southeast of Barandood village and 800 meters northwest of Zarbarandood village of Ghohestān section of Darmiān city. This area is currently located on top of a natural hill at a height of about 200 meters above ground level. Analysis of potteries found on the surface of site shows that the occupation of it belongs to Late Iron Age and Achaemenid period, although there are also small numbers of pottery belonging to the late Is-lamic centuries. In this paper we try to study a fragment of a sealed pottery found from surface of site. Firstly, we deal with the issue of sealed pottery with regard to the context and the prob-lems and challenges of its study, then we try to analyze sample pottery of the Qal’eh Asrār in terms of typology, style and its legend. This study shows that the sealed pottery of Qal’eh Asrār is locally produced and its legend is a local style with the common motifs of first half of the first millennium BC. As this site is probably a garrison, this container could be used for bearing commodities to the construction.
Keywords: Qal’eh Asrār, Sealed Pottery, Iron Age, Achaemenid period, Local Style.

Introduction
In ancient near East, the stamp and cylinder seals have been used on diverse clay objects such as bullae and tablets to sealed administrative documents, but use of seals on pottery is rare. Since 3rd millennium B.C Fragments of sealed pottery have been found in sites from north Iraq and Syria (Collon, 1987: 13; Oates, 2001), Levant (Amiet, 1975: 425-426), west and south western of Iran (Caldwell, 1976), Shahr-e Sukhta in south east of Iran (Baghestani, 1997: 34- 43; Hakemi & Sajjadi, 1989: 145) and central Asia (Sariandi, 1986; Heibert, 1994a). Several fragments back to the Iron Age I and II were found from Bahrain in Persian Gulf (Olijdam, 2008) and Central Plateau of Iran in Tepe Sialk (Malekshahmirzadi 1381: 25) and Gholi Dar-vish in Qom (Sarlak 1386: 193- 194). Most of these sealed potteries are small fragments that have been found mainly as single fragment on the surface of sites. A small number, such as the Gonur Depe fragment in Turkmenistan (Sariandi, 1986: fig.123) or the Tell Brak in Syria (Oates, 1985: 257), have been found from archaeological excavation. 
In archaeological survey of Qal’eh Asrār in South Khorasan, Iran, one fragment of sealed pot-tery with a cylinder seal impression was found in archaeological survey. There are several questions raised here. Is it possible to provide an accurate chronology for the sealed pottery of Qal’eh Asrār? Why the pottery sealed, specifically with cylinder seal? Are these sealed pottery have an administrative function and were used as a kind of administrative-economic object or tool? Or here seals just used as decoration? In this paper, which is a descriptive-comparative and analytical approach, firstly we examine the challenges related to chronology and recogniz-ing the function of sealed potteries in archaeological studies, then we focus on study Qal’eh Asrār fragment and its seal impression.

Chronology and Usage of Sealed Pottery
Archaeologists have two different approaches for chronology of sealed potteries. If these frag-ments are found from excavation, they propose site stratigraphy to date it. But, most of the sealed pottery has been found on surface of sites, so dating will be complicated. In fact, archae-ologists use two methods to date sealed potteries, such as Qal’eh Asrār case; they propose the chronology based on typology of pottery or the style and image of seal impression. 
Function of sealed pottery is under debate too; there is no consensus on why sealed potteries are made and how it has been used. In general, the proposed suggestions can be divided into three groups, although, there are many doubts about each of these three views. 
1- The image of seal on pottery was for decoration.
2- The seals are the sign or signature of the potters who identifies the ownership and identity of his handicrafts.
3- Sealed pottery has an administrative function and has been used for storing or moving com-modities.
The style and image of the cylinder seal impression of Qal’eh Asrār sealed pottery
The image of Qal’eh Asrār seal does not show a unified theme and its upper part is broken. In part of the image a human is standing, bending one hand from the elbow and holding a cane, his other hand is not clear, it had stretched body with broad shoulders and arms, the proportion be-tween the upper body and the legs is not observed and the upper body is taller than the legs. It seems he have a dagger in his waist. On both sides of the human image are two birds. On the left side is design of the quadruped (donkey?) and in front of it is a horse, both are upside down. Of course, the horse’s head is broken. Between the two images are a small bird at the top and probably a sitting human at the bottom. The style of Qal’eh Asrār seal is a local style which focusing on the outer lines, not paying attention to the details. 

Conclusion
Studies on sealed potteries in diverse sites, despite different time and cultural periods, shows the following common features can be observed:
1- All fragments of sealed pottery are locally produced.
2- The seals that are used on these potteries also have a local and indigenous style, and this in-dicates the locality of their production.
3- Sealed pottery fragments indicate they should mainly belong to medium and large jars.
 4- In most of fragments seal was mainly used at the area between the neck and body of the ware. 
Given the common features mentioned, it can be argued that these potteries had an administra-tive aspect. However, they used locally which both the pottery type and the seal originate from the local culture of the same region, and there are no examples that show their displacements or dispersion in a wider cultural context.
A comparative study of Qal’eh Asrār sealed pottery shows that this pottery is locally produced and cylinder seal used on it also has local style of the 1st millennium B.C. Due to pottery type and the presence of architectural remains, this area is suggested to be a garrison to protect the road in the late Iron Age - early Achaemenid period, and the style and image of the seal on the pottery also confirms the proposed chronology. 

Abstract
Prior to L. Afshari’s fieldwork in Ramhormoz, the known Achaemenid sites from the plain only amounted to 17 in number. Yet, given factors such as favorable climate and fertile soil for agriculture, existence of important rivers such as Kupal and Sandali, proximity to such trade routes as the Susa-Persepolis royal road as well as to the two major Achaemenid capitals of Susa and Persepolis, we deemed the figure to be rather underrated, believing that there must be much more concomitant settlements in this plain. During our investigation, the sites recorded by the previous team were re-visited and new coeval sites were also identified. The survey of 2020, directed by one of the authors (L. Afshari), did not encompass the entire Ramhormoz plain. Covering only its middle part straddling the Ala River with a total area of about 53000 hectares (530 sq. k), the survey recorded 36 Achaemenid settlements. Identification of the relevant sites was based on Khuzestan’s local pottery of the Achaemenid period reported from Tape Daroughe. In this study, the impact of geographical factors such as the presence of large rivers and fertile lands on the genesis and prosperity of settlements was evaluated. The surface architectural finds are suggestive of interactions between rural and nomadic communities. Results of the surveys indicated the proximity to ancient royal roads and access to water sources and pastures to be the determining factors in the distribution pattern of Achaemenid settlements over the Ramhormoz plain. This survey program aimed to identify and locate the Achaemenid sites in the Ramhormoz plain, to examine their interrelations, to record their characteristics through sampling and observing pottery pieces, to establish a relative chronology for them based on the typology of surface pottery collections, and final to draw cross-regional typological comparisons with major sites in other parts of Iran, South Mesopotamia, and East Anatolia.
Keywords: Southwest Iran, Khuzestan, Ramhormoz Plain, Settlements, Achaemenid Period.

Introduction
The vast region of Ramhormoz stretches up to the mountain belt of Khuzestan to the north. Sitting in the eastern Khuzestan plain at an elevation above sea level of 120 m, the plain of Ramhormoz encompasses a total area of 620 sq. km. All across southwestern Iran, Ramhormoz is the region with the least archaeological investigation. Despite this paucity of work, recent studies have demonstrated the regional settlements (in both mountains and plains) to be integral to any understanding of the culture of the Achaemenid period. Geographic location of the region, the nature of settlements in the transition zone between plains and mountains, and their continuity and cultural ties with each other also furnish a pattern for grasping the Achaemenid world’s settlement policy. In addition, given its strategic location during the concerned period, the plain assumed a central role in the interactions between Iran, Mesopotamia and Anatolia. It is of great importance also because of its location on the Royal Road from Susa to Persepolis.
The southwestern region of Iran played an important role in establishing cultural, economic, and political interactions with surrounding areas such as Mesopotamia and Anatolia throughout the 1st millennium BC. The number of archaeological studies conducted in the Ramhormoz area has been quite limited. Despite the lack of archaeological information, the studies carried out in recent years have shown the significant role the cultures in the region (both the mountain and plain settlers) played in understanding the Achaemenid Culture.
The significance of the region was further revealed with the surface surveys carried out by Donald Mc Cown in the region and the excavations he conducted at Tol-e Geser (McCown, 1949, 1954). Surveys conducted by Wright and Carter in 1969 also pointed to connections between the region’s lowland and mountainous parts of southwestern Iran (Wright and Carter, 2003). Although the dimensions are different, it has been observed that the settlements share some common features with the mountainous parts of Persian geography. As a result of contemporary archaeological resources and the survey conducted under my supervision, the characteristics of the Achaemenid settlements in the Ramhormoz plain in Southwest Iran were reanalyzed. The influence of geographical factors such as the presence of large rivers and fertile lands on the formation and prosperity of the settlements and the relations between sedentary, rural, and nomadic communities were studied. Also, the transformations in the settlement system, distribution, and population differences during the Achaemenid period were revealed and subsequently / mapped.

Discussion
This survey program aimed to identify and locate the Achaemenid sites in the Ramhormoz plain, to examine their interrelations, to record their characteristics through sampling and observing pottery pieces, to establish a relative chronology for them based on the typology of surface pottery collections, and final to draw cross-regional typological comparisons with major sites in other parts of Iran, South Mesopotamia, and East Anatolia. The realization of the latter aim will have important implications for the Achaemenid archeology of southwestern Iran, altering the existing views. In light of our findings, it is possible to propose a distribution pattern for the settlements in the middle of the Ramhormoz plain as being clustered in two regions, viz. northwest and southeast, on both banks of the Ala River. The finds of primary importance from the settlements of the plain are pottery assemblages. To explore the Achaemenid pottery, they were first classified by shape, which consisted of the five groups of carinated bowls, bowls with a spherical body and a simple rim, necked jars, short-necked jars, and storage jars. This was followed by comparative studies for dating the pottery. Our observations show that the Achaemenid pottery traditions continued well into the subsequent period after the demise of the empire.
Thus, it is notable here that the materials and settlements discussed in this paper can potentially extend in date to as late as a century after the Achaemenid period. In terms of technical characteristics, the pottery splits into five groups: common, light green-slipped, red-slipped, eggshell, and painted wares.
Drawing on historical sources and archeological findings as well as the conducted studies, the villages across the plain tend to be clustered around or be related to the Susa-Persepolis trade route. The rich geography of the plain has informed the dynamics of its settlements over time. Notwithstanding the severe disturbances induced by modern settlements and agricultural and industrial activities, the identified settlement centers reveal direct or indirect link with the commercial or military routes of the Achaemenid times. In other words, their formation along the commercial routes was primarily meant to facilitate intra- and cross-regional contacts. The proximity of settlements to the royal road between Susa and Persepolis evinces the integral role the road played in the cultural interactions of the Achaemenid period. Therefore, archaeological studies directed by Esmail Yaghmai are important in detecting the remains of settlements along the royal road linking Susa to Persepolis as they reveal the characteristics of the settlement policy. 

Conclusion
With the completion of the archaeological investigation in the Ramhormoz plain and the study of the findings and data obtained from this investigation, it seems that a general understanding of the cultural remains related to the Achaemenid period and the distribution of the sites of this period can be achieved to some extent. It was thus revealed that proximity to commercial roads and access to water resources and pasture were the main determinants in the distribution model of Achaemenid settlements. Rich pastures for nomads, the potential for irrigated agriculture for settlers, and access to communication routes provided advantages for both lifestyles. Therefore, the settlement pattern is more associated with roads. When the location of the settlements and their distance to each other are examined, it is seen that the frequency of settlements on the Susa-Persepolis Royal Road is very high. Settlements are located on the road within short distances of each other, which shows that the road is a determining factor on settlements in the region due to its socio-economic advantages.
Ramhormoz plain shows that the Achaemenid settlements in this plain maintained strong intra- and cross-regional cultural and economic ties. In terms of extent, Tol-e Ishan Seyyed Shabib or Tol-e Toupi, Tape Mava, Tape Mehr Alnesa and Tape Kheyr Alnesa appear to be examples of such type of villages. With respect to the location of settlements and their distance from each other, a concentration of settlements is discernible along the Royal Rod—they are clustered along this road at close intervals. This fact indicates that routs played a decisives role in the formation of regional settlements, and that the Royal Road yielded multiple economic and political advantages. In general, it is possible to say that most of the settlements in the Ramhormoz plain lie on the riparian areas or along the Royal Road from Susa to Persepolis, and judging by the pottery collections, there clearly were close interrelations between these settlements and interactions with neighboring regions. On this very basis, one may safely surmise that a local and highly advanced pottery industry prevailed in the plain during the Achaemenid period. Cross-comparisons of the surface pottery assemblages from the Ramhormoz plain with the excavated material from sites in southwestern Iran, southern Mesopotamia and eastern Anatolia indicate the presence of early, mid- and late Achaemenid ceramics, suggesting that the Achaemenid cultural horizon continued uninterruptedly over the plain between 330‒550 BC.