---

There has been more than four decades since Frank Hole and Kent Flannery conducted a field expedition in central Zagros Mountains located in western Iran, in 1963. From then onward, numerous discoveries and field projects have been done in this region. Some of these findings may contradict the report of the original survey. Although the goal of this article by no means, is to criticize the 1967 report, it sounds unavoidable to incorporate the new discoveries in it. For instance, the author of this article believes that the twelve missing sites in the 1963 survey were found later, hence; new discoveries in case of the presence of Levallois technique in the Zagros Mountains could change our understanding regarding the Middle Paleolithic of Zagros.

---

Although the Iranian plateau has witnessed Paleolithic researches since the early twenty century, still little is known about the Paleolithic of Iran. There are several reasons for this situation and lack of scholarly enthusiasm on the part of Iranian archaeologists seems to be the most imperative one. Concerning the history of Paleolithic surveys and excavations conducted in Iran, three distinct phases are recognizable. First, from the beginning of the twenty century to the 1980 when numerous field missions were executed in this region all by western institutes, second phase observes a twenty years gap in the Paleolithic studies hence; only few surveys could be performed in this period, and the third phase starts with the reopening of the Iranian fields to the non-Iranian researchers, which led to the survey and excavation of handful of new Paleolithic sites. This article reviews Paleolithic researches conducted in Iran since the beginning of twenty century to the present time.

---

Although the Zarzian was first identified in the 1920s, it has not been until recently that detailed investigations of it have been undertaken. In contrast to the intensive research on the Epipaleolithic period in the Levant, the Zarzian in the Zagros area is less well known, although it shares some similarities (as well as differences) with the Levantine Epipaleolithic including trajectories of hunter-gatherer subsistence and other behavioral strategies that may have played a role in long-term processes ultimately leading in both regions to the advent of food production economies

---

For some 3 million years, the archaeological record is characterized by stone tools undergoing incremental changes. Then around 40,000 years ago, the monotony of lithics is terminated by a profusion of visual representations, generally considered to be the world’s first objets d’art. This collection include a series of portable objects, especially figurines and, later on, the famous cave paintings from western Europe, as well as lesser-known shell-beads in the Levant and painted slabs in Australia. Despite myriad forms and geographic diversity, the figures of this period consistently exhibit a level of sophistication surprising for humanity’s first alleged dabbling in art.       Scholars argue over the rate at which art truly emerged. Natural objects engraved with simple geometric designs have been purported to be artistic precursors — the beginning of a gradual trajectory from primitive to developed art. Scientific analysis has confirmed that the appearance of some of these artifacts is consistent with an anthropogenic origin. However, even if they are man-made, the meaning of these objects is unclear. Rather than representing artistic antecedents, they may belong to a separate class of human activity, more akin to modern doodling. This suggestion seems rather plausible due to the fact that the archaeological record has crude geometric etchings and masterful realistic creations, but very little in between. If these categories are part of the same trajectory, where is the middle of the curve?

---

Two important points have been the motivations of the writers of this article. The first motivating factor is the importance of the Neolithic Period especially the phase of shifting from Epi-Paleolithic to Neolithic in nowadays archaeological argumentation. The second factor is the importance of Khorramabad valley at the Paleolithic period and the abundance of early Chalcolithic sites and having no knowledge about the valley’s archaeology in Neolithic Period. Exploring two important sites namely Roāhol and Merijelo and finding three sites namely Sarab Kotela, Kohele and Kharmanjā Haft Cheshmeh in this valley, have opened promising horizons for archaeologists to understand the cultural changes of the Neolithic period. Surveying the surface findings and studying on the settlement layers of these sites have provided an opportunity for initial recognition of the existence of social life in Neolithic period in the valley. The general archaeological researches on central Zagros and specific researches on Khorramabad valley and also identifying and preliminary surveying of two under- discussion sites have created a proper opportunity for proposing a new mission to excavate the sites and to conduct systematic compact survey on Khorramabad valley. This article reviews the literature of archaeological studies on central Zagros and Khorramabad valley briefly and propounds the theories of beginning of food production and Neolithisation, proposes key questions and presupposition corresponding to the writers’ suggestive plan.     

---

An insight into the geomorphological characteristics of Holeylan as well as its suitable environment in the Central Zagros convince us that it has a capacity, more than ever shown, in presenting Paleolithic sites. Thus, the necessity of doing an intensive archaeological survey in this valley with the aim to explore the Paleolithic sites became apparent and was achieved only in the autumn of 2015.
The research questions are mainly based on the number of sites, their type and size, geographical variables influencing the site selection patterns among the Paleolithic societies, tool making techniques and identifying raw material sources in Holeylan. 
During the survey, 103 sites, including 24 caves and rock shelters as well as 79 open air sites were identified with utilities such as residential compounds, seasonal camps and hunting ambushes. Among them, only one of the rock shelters was situated in the eastern most part of the valley. The open air sites formed on the natural hill tops with terraces overlooking Seymareh and Jezman Rivers and their tributaries. Climate and tectonic features seem to be the two main reasons that made Holeylan as one of the most important valleys of central Zagros during the Paleolithic era. Moreover, water resources and its elevation above the sea level were the most important components which led settlements access to raw materials. Chert pebbles and cobbles accumulated in the bed by rivers were resources of tool making in Holeylan Valley during the Paleolithic period.