Abstract
The present paper is about the result of two seasons of archaeological exploration in the southwest of Kaleibar Township in the Arasbaran Area of the East Azerbaijan Province. The first season of archaeological exploration was conducted in 2014 and the second season was conducted in 2016. The purpose of the first season of exploration was salvage exploration to identify ancient sites in the area within the Peiqam- Chay Dam. Regarding the Tumulus that were discovered in the area of this dam, and considering their incomparability in the northwest of Iran, the second season of the exploration was carried out and in 2016, the area was re-examined. In this survey, the role of geographical factors such as altitude, distance and proximity to the river and the springs, the percentage of slope and access to pastures in the creation of ancient rural settlements were analyzed. concerning the distance and proximity to the river, it was found out that almost 95% of the ancient settlements were located 500 meters or less far from the rivers and most of them were located at altitudes of 1400 to 1500 meters, considered a suitable altitude for residence. In terms of slope, the settlements were created at a slope of less than 10%. With the Geo-Reference of the map, the nowadays nomadic roads were estimated on the map of the study area, which the sites identified on that, the human has used the path to migrate three thousand years ago, as today’s tribes also traverse. Therefore, it can be proven that the migration pattern has continued here for three thousand years, and the chosen human model has been a nomadic or semi-permanent life style. 
Keywords: Kaleibar, The Analysis of Settlement Patterns, Spatial Distribution, Peiqamchay River.

Introduction
In archeology, reconstructing the natural environment is trivial in order to understand how ancient settlements taking advantage of geography science, since the influence of human and environment throughout the life of the planet has been unequivocal.
In this study, the factors affecting the formation and distribution of human settlements and the spatial distribution were considered. A total of 72 ancient sites were identified in two seasons with two types of settlement patterns, permanent settlement and pastoral nomadic settlements. The method of exploration in this study was pedestrian survey and stepwise scrolling. The whole study area of 306 square kilometers was surveyed and scrolled. The relationship between the identified sites with the river and its distance, height from the sea level, the proper slope of the land for settlement and its overall environmental status were carefully analyzed. 
The exploration was carried out based on maps of 1.25000, site visits and surface sampling. Finally, the findings were analyzed in the Global Mapper program. The study area was morphologically taken intoconsideration from the past, by the livestock communities due to its high mountains, deep valleys and mid-mountain plains and its placement in the nomadic tract. Because of its proximity to the valley of the Aras River, the small Caucasus Mountains (South) and the Qara Baq of Azerbaijan, as well as the Kaleibar Chay River, and suitable annual rainfall, it has a humid climate, the existence of the Arasbaran forests was its most important feature. All of these factors have made the climate suitable for a settlement of at least 3,000 years ago for the communities in which it resides. 

Field Work
The method of this study was field survey and almost all the study area was surveyed. the majority of the sited restricted into the historic Kurgans and sites of the first millennium BC which were obtained in the southern regions. The study of sea level elevation indicated that almost all of ancient settlements were formed at altitudes of 1400 and 1500 meters above sea level. Slope percentages showed 5 Kurgans (first millennium BC) less than 5% slope, 18 slope effects between 5 to 10% slope, 20 slope effects between 10 to 20% slope effect, and slope between 20 and 30 slope effects. And 1 effect on the slope between 40 and 50%. There is a direct correlation between the river and the number of sites. As we move away from the riverbank, the number of yards’ decreases, and the closer we get to the river, the greater the number of yards. But in the southwestern part of the region the volume of sediments is higher and probably part of the buried archeological findings. The item of Resilient lands indicates that the topography of the river bank in the southern part due to the mahogany collision was not necessary for settlement.
The adaptation of the modern nomadic tribes showed with the map of the identified ancient sites. The route of the ancient nomadic nomads is somewhat in line with the present-day route, and of course there is some change in direction.

Conclusion
In general, this paper seeks to examine the role of environmental factors on shaping the human ecological spaces of the first millennium in the city of Kaleibar, and finally, the ecological factors have been survived three thousand years ago in the life of the modern nomad tribed, are being analyzed.
Referring to the types of landscape, it should be noted that those areas which are located closest to the Peiqamchay River and its main valley, due to their location on agricultural land, are within the average height of 1500 m. suitable climate, proximity to the river, easy access to exchange routes, the richness of alluvial soils, forest cover and the rich rangelands of its peripheral parts make it possible to establish permanent habitats. The best example of these areas is in the southern half of the Peiqamchay Valley. The type of landscapes in the northern part of the city can be very difficult to identify, but given the high altitude of this part of the city and its cool climate for half a year, the existence of mounds, river avoidance and proximity to many springs, the rich rangelands, along with the slight scattering and excessive corrosion of the pottery, may be attributed to the settlers in this area. The relative results in both the north and south sections of the study area of the valley indicate the dominance of the nomadic or semi-permanent settlement patterns.

Abstract
The city of Ghorveh is located in the south east of Kurdistan province and in the east of central Zagros. This city is a part of the Qezal Owzan River Basin. This region has an archaic history from prehistoric periods to the Islamic ones due to favorable geographical conditions. According to the surveys, in the Ghorveh City, 35 sites dating to the Parthian period have been identified. This paper studies the Settlement Pattern of Parthian sites and their relationship to the geographical environment. The settlement pattern initially divided into four clusters based on the area of the premises and then five factors were considered based on the maps drawn from the GIS. These factors include: Altitude from sea level, The distance from the river, The slope, steep direction and Land use. In addition, taking advantage of Spss software, the settlement clusters have been statistically studied and their correlation and relevance using factors were discussed. Based on the results, there is a significant relationship between clusters and some factors. In general, most of the sites are located in clusters one and two that are less than two hectares. In terms of settlement pattern, some of these sites were temporary settlements that were grazing and a number of others are not known exactly, but probably there were fixed settlements that were small villages of agriculture and livestock. But clusters three and four were all permanent settlements that were engaged in agriculture, horticulture, and animal husbandry. In general, two types of temporary and permanent settlement patterns observed in the Parthian period in the city Qorveh.     
Keywords: Ghorveh, Parthian, Settlement Patterns, GIS Software, SPSS.

Introduction
The Parthian dynasty is one of the most important Iranian historical kingdom who entered the arena in extremely difficult political and social conditions and revived some of the ancient Iranian features (Mohammadi, 2010: 4). This dynasty ruled Iran for nearly five centuries from 248 BC to 224 AD (Mohammadi, 1391: 13) they were able to establish cities and government centers (Kiani, 1374: 240). And their territory expands from the eastern parts of Iran to the Tigris and Euphrates. During this period, in addition to Sedentary and urban settlements, there are nomadic settlements. Examples of this type of nomadic settlement during this period can be found in the Central Zagros (Niknami & Mohammadi, 1394; Mohamadifar & Niknami, 2013; Niknami et al., 2013).
In Qorveh city 35 sites have been identified related to Parthian period (Behnia, 2008). Most sites of this city are small settlements (Mafi et al., 2009. 85). Parthian pottery is simple, glazed, imprinted, and clinched in Qorveh. But the most prominent Parthian pottery is in western Iran as well as in the Qorveh city of Klineik pottery. The pottery has been scattered from Kermanshah to the northern parts of Zanjan in terms of its geographical extension. Also from Chamchamal plain (Mohammadifar, 2007). Kangavar Plain (Young, 1975) and in historic sites of Bistoon, Jogar Malayer Tape, Noshijan, Ray, Shush, West Islamabad and Boroujerd have also been reported (Hernik, 1997: 117). 
In this area, there have been Sedentary and nomadic settlements since the pre-historic time. It is necessary to study the continuity of these settlements in historical periods. It is necessary to study the continuity of these settlements and types of Sedentary and nomadic settlements in historical periods. This research is based on data obtained from the field survey. In this research is used a descriptive-analytical method, and for accurate analysis of Parthian period settlement pattern in Qorveh city has been used the Gis software and Spss statistical software. Based on the available data, 6 factors are considered. Including: 1. Altitude above sea level 2. Distance from river 3. Distance from road 4. Slope 5. Slope direction 6. Land use. To analyze the settlement patterns, it is divided into four clusters based on size of the sites. Then, to analyze these clusters using factors and according to data type and purpose of research were used one-dimensional, regression and R-pearson tests of Spss software.

Identified Traces
In order to analyze the settlement patterns, the sites are divided into four clusters based on by size. According to the type of data which are nominal and scaled and the purpose of the research were used One-Dimensional, Regression and Rpirson tests of the Spss software. This analysis consists of two descriptive and inferential stages.  
The cluster one is the largest in the series. sites of this cluster are less than 1 hectare. According to the data, %57/1 of the sites belongs into this cluster. Cluster two consists of sites between 1 and 2 hectares. The third cluster is sites ranging from 2 to 3 hectares and the fourth cluster consist of sites of more than 5 hectares.
The size of the sites was considered as an independent variable and the six factors mentioned as dependent variable. According to the results of multivariate regression test, there is a significant relationship between the size of the sites factor with other factors. This relationship was strongly inverse between The size of the sites and the distance from the river was Relatively Severe Reverse.  Briefly, Larger sites are closer to the river and as the sites are smaller, they appear farther from the river. But there is no relationship between the size of the sites with the factors of altitude and slope. In addition, to understand the test results, the Cluster diagrams need to be studied. By studying the cluster diagram it can be seen that clusters one and two are in all factor categories. For this reason, there is no correlation between all factors. 

Conclusion
Based on the results of the analysis on four clusters. Cluster One is the largest cluster, There are two types of settlements. The first type of settlements is far from the river so they are located at higher altitudes. The second type located on the lower elevations and slopes near to the river. In the second cluster, the settlements are closer to the river. these sites are located at higher altitudes and different slopes. In the third cluster, the sites are closer to the river. These sites are located at low slope and low altitude. The fourth cluster settlements approach the water source. But in terms of slope and altitude are at different altitudes. In clusters one and two, there is Sedentary and nomadic settlement, But clusters three and four are Sedentary settlement that constituted a small percentage.
In general, the settlements of Qorveh city in Parthian period are in two forms: Sedentary and nomadic. Sedentary settlements have agricultural and Husbandry economies due to their geographical Charactristics, But seasonal settlements used to grazing. In fact, most of the sites include seasonal settlements. This type of settlement in this region have been prehistoric times of chalcolithic and Bronze Ages (Kura-Araxes) and in this period we also see the continuation of this type of settlements.

Abstract
This paper presents a summary of a recently conducted geoarchaeological survey in the Susiana plains in southwest Iran. Here, the question of subsequent interaction of human settlements and their riverine landscape of the Greater Susiana region (roughly equivalent to modern Khuzestan) in the Later Village and the Early-historical periods (~ fifth to second millennium BCE) has been chosen as a case study. This study challenges the idea of the cultural expansion from South-Mesopotamia and its direct socio-political involvement in the spatial evolution patterns in Susiana in this timespan. It also offers an alternative interpretation: the riverine landscape and its spatial interaction with the settlement system. It has been suggested that the Later village settlements of Susiana were greatly influenced by the physical changes of the riverine landscape in their spatial development. This paper examines this hypothesis via geoarchaeological methods from the macro-level such as remote sensing to micro-level such as laboratory analysis of sediment logs to address this issue. The results of this study confirm three main points: (i) the westward migration of active watercourses in the mentioned time span; (ii) the direct correlation of this event with the spatial evolution of the studied settlements; and (iii) the overall differences between the neighboring plains of Susiana and south Mesopotamia in their geomorphological response to their fluvial evolution. 
Keywords: Geoarchaeology, Greater Susiana, Riverine Landscape, Later Village Period, Early History, Settlement Patterns.

Introduction
Geoarchaeology has established itself as a decisive means to study the human-environment-interaction in recent years. The use of geo-sciences in archaeology has revived the archaeological discourse regarding entanglement and niche construction theory, especially in the Near Eastern Archaeology. Yet, the Iranian archaeology lags behind in this matter. This paper contributes to this issue and aims to demonstrate the huge potential of geoarchaeological investigations in the Iranian archaeology.
The Susiana plains are an archaeologically rich region and suitable to examine the human-environment interaction in pre- and early history. The author has carried out a geoarchaeological survey in 2014 in this region to address this issue. The analyzed results have been published in detail (Rashidian 2020) and are briefly presented here.
Archaeological evidence of this region indicates a spatial change in the settlement patterns in the mentioned periods, including the abandonment of central settlements in the eastern plains and foundation of new settlements in the western plains (Adams 1962; Johnson 1973; Moghaddam 2012a). The common interpretation of this phenomenon related this spatial change to a socio-cultural or even political force from the South-Mesopotamian center, especially during the end of Ubaid and the beginning of the Uruk periods (Algaze 2005; 2008). This hypothesis has been discussed within the framework of the world-systems and criticized for decades, especially due to recent archaeological projects from modern Syria and neighboring regions. By integrating geoarchaeological investigations, these studies have shown that the spatial evolution of the settlements in the so-called periphery regions has been endogenic and not imported from Mesopotamia (McMahon & Crawford 2010; Ur et al. 2007). They have also offered alternative hypotheses for this phenomenon. Yet, for the Susiana region, this has remained the common hypothesis, despite occasional critic and speculation (Alizadeh et al. 2004; Moghaddam 2012a).
This has been the main focus of the present study, which examines two aspects: (i) There are strong indications of a westwards-migration of palaeo-rivers in the Mid-Holocene period, as mentioned by others (Kouchoukos 1999; Lees & Falcon 1952). (ii) In addition to a shift in watercourses and riverbed, such a fluvial change would affect the entire landscape immensely, for example, by changes in the surface slope, sediment freight, and soil characteristics. This probable landscape shift shall be comprehended in focusing on ten archaeologically known settlements (Abu Fanduweh, Abu Chizan, Band-e Qir, Chogha Mish, Dar Khazineh, Dehno, Haft Tappeh, Samirat, Sanjar, Sharafabad) in respect to the watercourses Dez, Karkheh, Karun, and their tributaries. During the here presented  geoarchaeological survey, hundreds of soil profiles, as well as fifty-one subsurface cores, have been documented in the environ of these settlements in the riverine landscape. 

Discussion
The sedimentological laboratory analysis of the documented horizons (surface and sub-surface) confirmed the large-scale migration of the rivers towards the west of the plain, which correlates with the spatial shift in the studied settlements, both in macro- and micro-level (in the region and within the settlements themselves). 
Furthermore, it was shown that not the large rivers, but the smaller rivulets had been the source of water for these settlements, despite prior speculation. Following the westwards fluvial migration, these rivulets have been cut off the hydrologic regime of the region and largely covered by recent sediments in the third and second millennium BCE. A number of them have been revived and integrated into the new canal network in the Early historical and Late Antiquity. Relative and absolute dating, based on material culture in situ and optically stimulated luminescence of sand in bulk samples respectively, have provided a dating framework for the presented geodata.
In general terms, focusing on geomorphological elements of the landscape such as slope, soil characteristics, and sedimentary regime has proved beneficial to examine the spatial evolution of prehistoric settlements. Susiana as a dynamic landscape has changed considerably in response to the fluvial regime change and extensive human impact. This has been attested in the presented geodata in this period. An intensification of the mentioned event is also confirmed for the later period, where the human impact has largely escalated due to centralized and planned developments of well established political entities From the Neo-Elamite to the Sasanian period. 

Conclusion
This study provided a range of results concerning the hypothesis and the relevant settlements. Three main points are summarized here: 
(i) The westward migration of Susiana’s active watercourses during the fifth to second millennium BCE has been confirmed using a combination of remote sensing, sedimentary analysis of cores, laboratory analysis of sediment horizons, and methods of indirect and absolute dating.  
(ii) A correlation in spatial evolution of settlement patterns with this fluvial development has been confirmed, based on available archaeological record of the ten mentioned settlements. This spatial correlation is attested both in macro- and micro-level. In this regard, a general tendency of settlements towards the western parts of the plain can be confirmed for this timespan. Furthermore, this has been attested in the spatial evolution within the settlements and it seems that some were following their migrating watercourses, and others have been abandoned entirely.
(iii) The results of this analysis also show the stark difference between the flat landscape of South-Mesopotamia with its large riverbeds as primary geo-elements in the west, and the softly sloped landscape of Susiana with its numerous rivulets and narrow floodplains surrounded by ridges and anticlines in the east. It is safe to assume that these starkly different landscapes have brought about equally different settlement patterns. Therefore, the settlement evolution of Susiana must be considered endogenic and studied in the framework of its landscape.
A detailed account of the presented study has been recently published (Rashidian 2020). A few case studies are also subject of English papers (Rashidian 2017; 2018; in press). The author hopes that this summary in Persian can contribute to the present discourse and encourage active members of the Iranian Archaeology to integrate geoarchaeological investigations into their projects. This is the only way towards further establishing an internationally acclaimed place for the Iranian archaeology. 

Abstract
The concentration of activities and sites Iron Age excavations carried out in Iran in the quarter-northwest Iran. It covers the west, northwest, north of the center, and the west bank of the Caspian Sea. The important point is that the chronological basis of the Iron Age in Iran is also based on the excavation of several sites in a small part of the northwest and its extension to the whole of Iran. Thus we see the Iron Age archaeological activities at the eastern part of Iran and especially North East is very unknown. Iran has long been the entry point for people without a nomadic component steppes of northeastern North Asia region is the Iranian plateau. According to written sources the oldest nations that have entered the Iranian plateau, known as the Indo-Iranian or Aryan tribes from the steppes of northern Asia to the south and in the land of the Pamir Mountains to Anatolia widely dispersed. Many scholars consider the gradual movement of these tribes to be from the second millennium. A period that is almost synonymous with the Iron Age in the region. But our knowledge of the Iron Age northeastern Iran today virtually all North Khorasan Province and the northern part of Khorasan Razavi province involved is negligible. This paper is based on the latest research picture of the Iron Age northeastern part of the country, with emphasis on the upper basin Atrak be provided. According to the study and identification carried out in this basin, the Iron Age of the upper Atrak basin is part of the Yaz 1 culture.
Keywords: Northeastern Iran, Iron age, Upper Atrak basin, Yaz 1 Culture, Archaic Dehistan, Settlement Patterns.

Introduction
It has been less than a decade that steps have been taken to understand the Iron Age in Northeastern Iran through surface explorations and excavations. Based on this, it seems that some parts of northeastern Iran are in the cultural area of Archaic Dehistan and another part is in the cultural area of Yaz I (Basafa 2017, Dana & Hejebri Nobari 2019, 2021, Vahdati 2016, 2018). The upper Atrak basin is an almost rectangular valley with a length of 90 km and an average width of 20 km. This region is one of the most important regions of northeastern Iran in terms of population movement because it connects the north of Kopet-Dagh to the interior regions of Iran and the center of the Iranian Plateau (Fig.2). Northeastern Iran has long been the place of entry of nomads from the northern steppes to the inner regions of the Iranian plateau. Due to the geological feature, Kopet-Dagh act as a barrier between the Karakum desert in the north and the fertile areas in the south, which cannot be crossed except through a few natural passages. 
More than 500 sites were identified in the archaeological surveys of the upper Atrak basin, among which 23 sites were dated to the Iron Age (Fig.3).

Iron Age Sites in the Upper Atrak Basin
The 23 Early Iron Age sites identified in the upper Atrak basin are listed in Table 1. In the surface survey of these sites, the only available data was pottery. In all Iron Age sites of this basin, the dominant pottery is Yaz 1 hand-made pottery. These pottery are poorly made, rough and in the range of buff and bright red, and the motifs are usually drawn geometrically with ocher and jujube red colors, and most of them are mixed with grog. 9 of the identified sites can generally be attributed to the Iron Age, and traces of Yaz I painted pottery were not found in the surface surveys. The pottery of these 9 sites are similar in form to the pottery of the Archaic Dehistan culture, but unlike them, they are in the buff and red spectrum.

Location based on ٍlevation Factor
The Iron Age sites of the region are located at an altitude between 1007 and 1718 meters above sea level. The size of the smallest site is 0.01 and the largest is 10 hectares. Examining the Pearson correlation coefficient regarding the area of the enclosures with the height factor shows -/299 (Table 2), which indicates a negative but moderate correlation. This means that as the height above sea level increases, it is expected that the size of the enclosures will decrease due to the limitations of natural factors.

Water Resource Factor
The distance of the Iron Age sites in the region from permanent water sources, including rivers and other running water sources, ranges from 0 to 6395 meters, and their average distance is 1441 meters. Pearson correlation coefficient/313. (Table 2) states that this figure shows the relationship between the direct and average level of significance between the size of the sites of the region with the factor of distance from permanent water sources. 

Land Use Factor
Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the size of the sites of the region with the soil type factor of the location of the sites shows -.054 (Table 2). This figure is weak and small. It is expected that there are large sites in the sedimentary plains and smaller sites on the edge of the plains and mountain slopes, and this is not the case in this area.

Slope Factor
Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the sizes of the sites of the region with the slope factor of the location of the areas is 0.72. (Table 2). The figure shows a very weak relationship between the size of the sites and the degree of slope of their location. 

Slope Direction Factor
Pearson’s correlation coefficient between the size of the sites of the area with the slope direction factor of the location of the areas shows -240 (Table 2). This phenomenon shows that some of these sites have not been used for a long time or that the different slope directions were not so important for the residents of this site in different seasons.

Communication Routes Factor
The sites of the region are located at a distance between 0 and 15355 meters from the main communication routes today. The Pearson correlation coefficient shows -114 (Table 2), this figure shows a very weak and small and inverse relationship. In other words, as we move away from the main communication routes, we should expect the size of the enclosures to decrease and become smaller.

Distribution of Iron Age sites in the Upper Atrak Basin
In this research, in order to obtain the distribution pattern of settlements in the region and to better analyze and understand the distribution of archaeological sites in the region and to find a pattern that fits environmental variables, the statistical method of cluster analysis has been used. Based on statistical analysis and their clustering, three patterns were obtained (Table 3, Chart 1).
Settlement distribution pattern 1: Settlement distribution pattern 1 includes 6 enclosures (Chart 1, Table 3). Due to the location of these types of sites in the landscape of the region and according to the distribution of these settlements on the level of the plain and the highlands, their small size, which is less than half a hectare, the economic method of these habitats can be assumed as temporary and seasonal settlements.
Settlement distribution pattern 2: There are 14 enclosures in this pattern (Chart 1). Due to the location of these types of sites in the landscape of the region and according to the distribution of these settlements on the level of the plains and the highlands, their small size, which is less than two hectares, the economic method of these habitats can be assumed as agricultural and livestock settlements.
Settlement distribution pattern 3: There is only one site in this group, and the reason for their placement in a cluster or separate pattern is its very large area compared to other sites. The size of this site is 2.2 hectares. The characteristics of this site, especially being located at a high altitude and a long distance from water sources and communication routes, and other characteristics show that it is similar to model 1, and only because of the difference in the size of this site, it is placed in a separate group.

Conclusion
The largest sites in the upper Atrak basin (except the IUA03 site) are located almost in a vertical line and very close to each other, Tappe Yam with 10 hectares, Tappe Ja’far Abad with 2.8 hectares and Sofalgaran-e Zadak site with 3 hectares, for a total of about 16 hectares from the total 33 hectares, half of the size of the Iron Age sites cover this basin. Today, these sites are located around the city of Faruj and almost in the middle of the plain. This area can be considered as the crossroads center of important roads in the region.
The important point in the reconstruction of the roads is the mountainous conditions of the region, which does not allow passage anywhere. With these conditions, there is only one possible way in the south, and that is today’s Binalud-Shah Jahan road, which goes from Quchan to Sabzevar. Near this road, there is Tappe Golshan Abad, which is actually located in the entrance area of this mountain pass. 
However, it is a little difficult to determine the northern route to pass Kopet Dagh and go to its north due to the number of valleys and the connection of some valleys with each other. By carefully examining the existing routes in the area and their connection with the Iron Age sites, a route is suggested that includes the sites of Tappe Yam, Dalan Tappe Kukach, Dalan Tappe Bozorg and Unnamed Tappe of Milanlu.
The western road along Atrak River connects the upper basin to the middle Atrak basin.
The eastern road also continues to the Kashaf River basin and the Mashhad plain without any natural obstacles.
Today almost all researchers agree that the people had Yaz I culture, nomads. Since Yaz I remains in a wide area of Greater Khorasan and the southern parts of Transoxiana, the route of population migration will inevitably pass-through Greater Khorasan through the north-south routes that connect the steppe regions of North Asia to its inner regions in the Iranian plateau. In this view, the upper Atrak basin is located in the area of Yaz I pottery culture, and due to its strategic location, it plays a very important role in the arrival of people with Yaz I culture to the inner parts of the Iranian plateau.

Abstract
Urmia lake basin is one of the most important cultural basins known in the archeology of Iran and has had a significant contribution in the historical and cultural evolution of northwestern Iran. Urmia plain and its surrounding heights have a special place among them. Due to the favorable environmental conditions in the Iron Age, important settlements were formed in the Urmia Plain. So far, forty-seven sites related to the Iron Age III (850 to 550 BC) have been identified in this plain that classified in the two parts of the settlement sites of the plain (39 settlement sites) and the defensive castles around it (8 castles). Among the forty-seven sites of Iron Age III (850 to 550 BC), thirty-two sites were formed on previous settlements and fifteen sites were formed for the first time. Among the thirty-nine settlement sites belonging to the Iron Age III of Urmia Plain, thirty-one sites with an area between half and five hectares are small villages and settlements. Three Sites are between five and ten hectares and three Sites are between ten and fifteen hectares. The two site of Goy tepe and Dizaj-Takieh, with an area between fifteen and twenty-four hectares, are considered among the large sites of Iron Age III of Urmia Plain. The distribution of ancient sites in the studied area is not the same, and among the thirty-nine settlement sites that have Iron Age III layers, a limited number are located in the higher areas of the western, southern and northern belt, and the absolute majority of the settlements are located in the flat plain of Urmia. Most of the settlement sites (about 76%) are less than a thousand meters away from water sources and rivers, and this shows that the water factor is the most important factor in the location selection of settlements in this era. During most of this period, Urmia region was considered one of the Urartian states. The results obtained from the analysis of GIS maps show that despite the pattern of Urartian settlements, which tends to settle and administrative management in mountainous and higher areas, the main and residential settlements of this era were formed in the lowland and their management was only in Military forts were located in higher peripheral areas.
Keywords: Urmia Plain, Iron Age III, Settlement Patterns, Urartu, Mana.

Introduction
Urmia plain is one of the fertile areas in the northwest of Iran, and therefore it has been the focus of human societies from the past until now, and the evidence left behind, such as numerous historical hills, testify to the establishment and exploitation of this plain in different prehistoric times. And it is historical. Even though the archeology teams have investigated the Urmia plain in the past and identified important sites, but most of them only identified and registered the sites And they have not provided chronological and analytical information related to the trajectory of the formation and expansion of Iron Age III sites And this issue has caused the failure to present a detailed map of the pattern of settlements and the state of the sites in this period. Therefore, studying the state of settlements, their formation and expansion can be effective in understanding the cultures and settlement patterns of this period in this great plain. The archeological survey of Urmia Plain was conducted with the aim of identifying and investigating the ancient sites of the Iron Age III and also studying settlement patterns in two seasons in the fall of 2019 and the spring and summer of 2020. The present article, by examining the sites of Iron Age III in the Urmia plain, studied the formation and expansion of the sites according to variables such as height above sea level, water sources, distance and proximity to rivers and vegetation And based on their size, they are ranked and finally, it analyzes and reconstructs the regional landscape of Urmia plain in the Iron Age3 and the environmental patterns of the settlements of this period.

The text of the article and the main discussion
The beginning of the Iron Age III in the important settlement areas of northwestern Iran, including Hasanlu, has been determined following the massive fires that occurred at the end of the Iron Age 2 and led to the destruction of the settlements of this period. Chronologically, this era coincides with the emergence of a new pottery phenomenon, which Young (Young 1965:70) called the new Buff Ware horizon, that appeared in many sites in western Iran. Based on this, in the northwest of Iran, especially in the Urmia lake basin, the Iron 3 period has been introduced at the same time as Hasanlu layer 3. Urmia Plain, as the largest plain on the western shore of Lake Urmia, witnessed extensive changes in the first millennium BC. The importance of the Urmia plain, and its location at an important crossing in the first half of the first millennium BC, has caused the attention of the governments of Urartu, Assyria and even Manna. Urmia Plain in the Iron Age III due to these favorable environmental conditions, especially the flow of permanent and abundant rivers, numerous springs, suitable and fertile land, rich pastures and abundant hunting, has received more and more attention and received a significant population. A population that relies on agricultural livelihood more than anything else, and the location of settlements has been done near stable water sources and main rivers And these places have been chosen according to the topography, slope and type of soil so that water supply to the land can be done easily and also have fertile soil. Among the forty-seven sites of Iron Age III (850 to 550 BC), thirty-two sites were formed on previous settlements and fifteen sites were formed for the first time in this settlement period. Among the thirty-nine settlement sites, thirty-one sites have an average area between half and five hectares, six areas have an area of between five and fifteen hectares, and two areas have an area between fifteen and twenty-four hectares. Among the four major settlement and non-settlement sites of this region, namely Goy tepe, Bari, Ismail-Agha Castle and Dizaj-takiyeh, two sites of Ismail-Agha Castle and Bari Castle are located in the mountainous areas overlooking the Urmia Plain And as fortresses and defensive fortifications, and two settlement sites, Goy tepe and Dizaj-takiyeh, have served as the central places of the plain. By looking at the distribution map of the settlements of this era and paying attention to geographical variables such as distance and proximity to water sources, agricultural lands and the size of the areas, the pattern of settlements in the region can be determined. Most of the sites are formed in the plain. Considering that water has always played an important role in the formation of these establishments and is considered an important indicator for their analysis, It is obvious that the flat areas and near permanent springs and rivers have been given more attention by these tribes. The higher areas of Urmia region have fewer settlements. These settlements can be considered as seasonal settlements, because they were forced to leave the place immediately when the amount of water decreased. Therefore, it seems that the permanent settlements are mainly formed along the permanent rivers. Other geographical variables such as distance and proximity to fertile and suitable agricultural lands and altitude above sea level are effective in this increase in population and settlements.

Conclusion
Among the 187 hills and historical sites identified in Urmia Plain, forty-seven sites from the Iron Age have been identified. Two pottery traditions have been identified, including the Urartian pottery tradition and the local pottery tradition with simple Buff Ware with the influence of late Manna pottery. In addition, suitable environmental conditions have made the Urmia plain one of the main agricultural areas of Azerbaijan, so that this area is considered one of the key areas in the development and population increase in the northwestern plateau of Iran (Biscone 2003:167). Settlement patterns in the Urmia Plain, including residential settlements in the bottom of valleys and low plains and close to fertile lands and water sources, especially permanent and abundant rivers in the region and the creation of fortresses and defense fortifications in the higher parts and on top of the rocks. The establishment of residential centers in the Urmia plain was done during the dominance of the Urartu in the alluvial lands of the plain And the main military centers have been built in the form of strong fortresses in the surrounding heights of this plain and The small sites in Urmia plain, which are less than nineteen sites and their size is less than three hectares, are residential units and small villages that were engaged in agriculture And other settlements of this era in the Urmia plain, which number up to eighteen settlements, are between three and fifteen hectares in size. And they are managed by two large and central sites, Goy tepe and Dizaj- Takiye. Therefore, according to Chrystaller’s model, Goy tepe, as the largest settlement site in the Urmia plain, controlled the central and northern sites of the plain, and Dizaj- Takiye, in the second place in size, controlled the southern sites of the Urmia plain.