New Excavations at Tappeh Asiab, Kermanshah Province, Iran

antiquity 2018 Ltd, Publications Antiquity © motn oei hpn u nesadn fteEryNoihci hsrgo (Nashli region this in Neolithic Early the an of played understanding has Matthews it & our published, shaping comprehensively in never role were site important the at under excavations the 1960 Howe although in & early (Braidwood Howe excavated 1983 Bruce briefly of was direction and the Project, Prehistory’ ‘Iranian Braidwood’s aphAibi nEryNoihcst iutdo h usit fKrasa,in Kermanshah, of outskirts the ( on Iran situated of site Mountains, Neolithic Zagros Early central an the is Asiab Tappeh in Neolithic Early excavations, the renewed of of knowledge limited findings currently first the our region. of the improving this some substantially discussing challenge of by from authors hope site known the the the Here, sites in excavations. about Neolithic early the Early made its project, of assumptions of Prehistory’ handful initial publication ‘Iranian a limited Braidwood’s only seen Robert has of during site one Discovered is Mountains. Iran Zagros in the Asiab Tappeh of site The Darabi Hojjat Iran Province, Kermanshah Asiab, Tappeh at excavations New ∗ 2 1 e st ntaenwecvtosa sa n21,a ato h Takn utrland Cultural ‘Tracking the of part River Seimarreh as the 2016, in years, Neolithic in Early 50 Asiab and Epipalaeolithic last at Late the excavations the Change: in new Environmental initiate made to methods us fieldwork led archaeological in advances methodological unanswered. chronology, site the the concerning of questions economy leaving and function excavations, site his of description detailed (Howe later most dates, or radiocarbon BC and 8000 around artefacts brief at Howe’s stone Asiab chipped at occupation the the of placed Howe techno-typology the on Based 115). 115; ugse euepto osbymnmd eisberna tutr”(Howe structure” semi-subterranean man-made possibly that soil or virgin pit into excavation refuse oval a shallow-basined large suggested a of vestige “the discovered Howe n s,a ela ueosdbi-le is,cvrn nae f2 000m 20 of area fire an of covering traces pits”, debris-filled and numerous rocks as debris, well artefactual as other ash, and and flintworking coprolites, shells, clam 130m h ako ulse nomto bu sa,a ela h considerable the as well as Asiab, about information published of lack The oedsrbdtedpst tAiba acatcjml faia oe,freshwater bones, animal of jumble chaotic “a as Asiab at deposits the described Howe etrfrteSuyo al giutrlSceis nvriyo oehgn ulig1,KrnBiesPlads Blixens Karen 10, Building Copenhagen, of University Denmark Societies, Copenhagen-S, Agricultural 2300 Early 8, of Study of the Republic for Islamic Center Kermanshah, Bostan, Taq-e Avenue, University Iran University, Razi Archaeology, of Department uhrfrcrepnec (Email: correspondence for Author iue2 Figure .Aibwsoeo h rtEryNoihcstsecvtdi h eta ars and Zagros, central the in excavated sites Neolithic Early first the of one was Asiab ). 2 a xaae (Howe excavated was 231 2(08:1–6 (2018): e2 361, 92 2013 .Tobraswr on utaoeti tutr ntedbi (Howe debris the in structure this above just found were burials Two ). 1983 1 Darabi ; oisRichter Tobias , ril,wihlcsast lno copnigpoorps sthe is photographs, accompanying or plan site a lacks which article, 2015 [email protected]) 1983 ). 1) ttebto ftemi xaainarea, excavation main the of bottom the At 115). : 2, ∗ iue1 Figure ee Mortensen Peder & 1 .Test a on uigRobert during found was site The ). 1960 Braidwood ; https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.3 2 tal. et 1983 1) Sadly, 115). : 1961 2 fwhich of , ;Howe 1983 1983 : :

Project Gallery Hojjat Darabi et al.

Figure 1. Location of key Early Neolithic sites in south-west Asia, including Asiab.

Valley’ (TCEC) project (www.tcec.ku.dk). Our excavations aimed to relocate and record Howe’s main excavation area in order to determine the character of the shallow- basined oval feature that he reported, to record a detailed stratigraphic sequence for the site and to obtain samples of sediment and other finds from stratified deposits to facilitate the reconstruction of the environ- Figure 2. Photograph of Bruce Howe’s main excavation ment, economy and chronology of Asiab. area in early 1960, showing part of the large shallow- Asiab is situated on a Pleistocene alluvial basined oval excavation into virgin soil (courtesy of Frank terrace of the Kara Su River, to the east Hole) of Kermanshah and south of the modern village of Bijaneh (Figure 3). A lithic scatter extends approximately 0.36ha across the top of the terrace. Our first step was to locate Howe’s 1960 excavation area, and in particular, the large, deep trench visible in site photographs, which measured approximately 6 × 8m with a depth of approximately 2.5–3m. In 2016 we therefore opened three new excavation areas at Asiab (areas I–III). After removing the topsoil across a considerable area, Howe’s old main excavation area was located in area III (Figure 4). Our excavations then focused on re-excavating Howe’s main trench, as well as excavating a new 5 × 5m area adjacent to it in order to obtain stratified samples of finds and deposits. © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2018

2 iue3 iia lvto oe fteAibtraesoigte21 xaainareas. excavation 2016 the showing terrace Asiab the of model elevation Digital 3. Figure e xaain tTpe sa,Krasa rvne Iran Province, Kermanshah Asiab, Tappeh at excavations New 3 niut ulctosLd 2018 Ltd, Publications Antiquity ©

Project Gallery Hojjat Darabi et al.

Figure 4. 3D photogrammetry of the 2016 Asiab excavations showing Bruce Howe’s 1960 area on the right, as well as the new TCEC excavation area on the left.

Figure 5. Animal burrows visible in the east section of Howe’s excavation area (photograph by the excavation team; copyright University of Copenhagen and Razi University).

The re-excavation of Howe’s area exposed two rectangular cuts measuring 2 × 1m in the north-west and south-west corners. These appear to be sondages dug by Howe to determine the presence of anthropogenic deposits. The sondage in the north-west corner truncated archaeological deposits, and hence Howe appears to have expanded his main trench out from these two sondages. Removal of the backfill revealed the shallow-basined oval feature described by Howe (Figure 4). Inside this feature we found several post- and stake-holes. Their precise stratigraphic relationship with the circular cut is unknown, as Howe excavated almost the entire area down to the underlying natural sediment. A long, shallow, oval- profiled pit, apparently unnoticed or left unexcavated by Howe, was found to contain a cache of wild boar crania, which were tightly packed and neatly arranged in an east–west alignment. The stratigraphic sections in Howe’s old excavation confirmed his observation of two main layers, the upper of which was grey, while the lower one was tan in colour (Howe 1983: 115). Inspection also revealed disturbance related to vertical funnels, resulting from collapsed entryways to animal burrows visible at the base of the sequence (Figure 5). While © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2018

4 tAib(htgahb h xaainta;copyright team; University). excavation ochre- Razi the and shallow, Copenhagen by of University a building (photograph circular in large Asiab the placed of at floor the core on depression horn painted Cattle 7. Figure team; have excavation would the floors by These (photograph area. building excavation a Howe’s fact of in section was University). Razi this east and that the Copenhagen indicating in of feature, floors University oval copyright successive Howe’s two of the interior the of covered view Close-up 6. Figure imn.Actl oncr a lcdi h ersin( higher red depression much with the painted in stood and placed probably depression was shallow wall core a mud horn into cattle This shaped A was cut, visible. pigment. floor the became the of of edge wall area the pisé One Along originally. layer. a floor of trampled remnants a exposed the we feature the Inside excavation. oepeiiaycnlsos h rfs i rpsil a-aesemi-subterranean man-made possibly or ( pit Howe “refuse in that floor structure” The the conclusions. of preliminary part some another on lying second trench. the the and of wall, part pisé northern the the inside one found: were n tcmltl eoe h or h nhooei eiet tAibaeextremely are went Asiab wall, at apparently pisé sediments the anthropogenic structure and The this floor. cut the construction of removed the completely Much truncated it excavation floors. and His well-defined Howe. by and unrecognised post-holes wall, pisé nlsso h eoee nsadsmlsi non,btw r led bet draw to able already are we but ongoing, is samples and finds recovered the of Analysis e xaain tTpe sa,Krasa rvne Iran Province, Kermanshah Asiab, Tappeh at excavations New 1983 1)epsdwside uligwt rbbeexterior probable a with building a indeed was exposed 115) : 5 fteuprpr ftefauedrn his during feature the of part most upper removed the Howe of that suggests 0.35m, of which be depth a to the from appeared upwards into cut truncated this cut trench, Howe’s was In and ploughzone. the below 1.6m to immediately subsoil deposits of midden depth by a The filled area. was excavation the feature 1960 at the exposed of feature bottom circular the continua- of the tion exposed we trench, Howe’s midden. 1.5m-thick wasthenfilledinbyanapproximately ntenrhr n atr alsof baulks eastern ( and area northern Howe’s layers the floor visible two in clay, natural record the above to immediately able were was we Asiab Nevertheless, animals. at by disturbed heavily sequence stratigraphic the some ntenw5 new the In nsitu in iue7 Figure niut ulctosLd 2018 Ltd, Publications Antiquity © eoisrmie,ms of most remained, deposits iue6 Figure × .Tocce fantlers of caches Two ). mae daetto adjacent area 5m .Tecrua cut circular The ).

Project Gallery Hojjat Darabi et al. disturbed by animal burrows, and their full extent was not recognised during the original excavations. In light of this, much of the previous data obtained from Asiab must therefore be considered problematic in terms of provenance. The deep construction cut, the remains of the building set within it and the midden filling of the pit appear to be the only remnants of Neolithic settlement at Asiab. While the remaining building was subterranean, the majority of the Neolithic settlement was located on the Neolithic land surface, which has since eroded away. Although a surface scatter of lithic artefacts extends around 0.38ha across the terrace, this is displaced residual material that does not reflect the original size of the settlement. In any case, there is no evidence to suggest that the site originally measured 2ha in size as Howe originally suggested (Howe 1983). Revisiting Asiab has shed important new light on one of the few known Early Neolithic sites in the central Zagros. Our work has already suggested that the site is quite different to its original characterisation. Future analyses of the finds and samples from the excavations will further illuminate the true nature of this Early Neolithic settlement.

Acknowledgements Excavations at Asiab were carried out by the TCEC project. TCEC is a collaboration between the Research Institute for Cultural Heritage, the Iranian Centre of Archaeological Research, the Department of Archaeology at Razi University and the Center for the Study of Early Agricultural Societies at the University of Copenhagen. The project is generously funded by a grant from the C.L. David Collection and Foundation. We are grateful to the representatives of the Kermanshah office of the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organisation for their support and assistance during the fieldwork, as well as to all the members of the Asiab fieldwork team.

References Howe, B. 1983. Karim Shahir, in L.S. Braidwood, R.J. Braidwood, B. Howe, C.A. Reed & Braidwood, R.J. & B. Howe. 1960. Prehistoric P. J . Wa t s o n ( e d . ) Prehistoric archaeology along the investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan.Chicago(IL): Zagros ﬂanks: 23–154. Chicago (IL): The Oriental University of Chicago Press. Institute of the University of Chicago. Braidwood, R.J., B. Howe & C.A. Reed. 1961. The Nashli, H.F. & R. Matthews. 2013. The Iranian prehistoric project: new problems arise as Neolithisation of Iran: patterns of change and more is learned of the ﬁrst attempts at food continuity, in R. Matthews & H.F. Nashli (ed.) The production and settled village life. Science 133: Neolithisation of Iran: 1–13. Oxford: Oxbow. 2008–2010. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.133.3469.2008 Darabi, H. 2015. An introduction to the Neolithic revolution of the central Zagros, Iran.Oxford: Archaeopress.